Queensland Inc k eeping families together The backdrop 3 rd February 2016 Recapping on the road to reform so far Next 1 st July 2012 Queensland Child Protection Commission of Inquiry led by Commissioner Tim ID: 556720
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "PeakCare" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
PeakCare
Queensland Inc.
k
eeping
families together
The backdrop
3
rd
February 2016Slide2
Re-capping on the road to reform so far
Next
1
st
July 2012:
Queensland
Child Protection Commission of Inquiry led by Commissioner Tim
Carmody
SC was
established
1
st
July 2013:
Presentation of the Commission’s final report ‘Taking Responsibility: A Road Map for Queensland Child Protection’ to the Queensland Government
16
th
Dec
2013:
Queensland Government response to the Child Protection Commission of Inquiry final report, indicating acceptance of all 121 recommendations (115 in full and 6 in-principle)Slide3
Three tracks in the roadmap
Reduce the number of children and young people in the child protection system
Next
Revitalise child protection frontline services and family support, breaking the intergenerational cycle of abuse and neglect
Refocus oversight on learning, improving and taking responsibility
1
2
3Slide4
Three tracks in the roadmap
Reduce the number of children and young people in the child protection system
Next
1
Divert children and young people from the statutory system
Increase access to family and individual support services Slide5
Three tracks in the roadmap
Next
Revitalise child protection frontline services and family support, breaking the intergenerational cycle of abuse and neglect
2
Improve child protection practice
Work collaboratively across sectors and disciplines
Develop a skilled professional workforce and carers
Increase access to support children and young people in care
Build the options for out of home care settings
Increase stability for children and young people in careSlide6
Three tracks in the roadmap
Next
Refocus oversight on learning, improving and taking responsibility
3
Define strategic direction, departmental responsibility and governance of
reform
Involve
external stakeholders at every level of governance
Redefine
systemic and individual advocacy
Improve
child protection court and tribunal proceedings
Reduce
duplication
eg
. complaints, child death
reviews
Reduce
red tape, streamline processes
eg
. screening, outsourcing foster and kinship care, service delivery
costingsSlide7Slide8
Micah Projects
Micah Projects is a community organisation with an unswerving commitment to social justice. We believe that every child and adult has the right to a home, an income, healthcare, education, safety, dignity and connection with their community of choice.
Micah Projects provides a range of support and advocacy services to individuals and families.Slide9
Housing and Child Protection
Meeting the needs of families and managing the risks/concerns
Slide10
Why we are interested in the links between child protection and housing/homelessness
Families with housing instability are often also families being referred to child protection
Both the child protection and homelessness/housing systems are working with the same children and families, at the same time or in sequence
Our
learnings
from the 2005 Demonstration Project
Slide11
Families in the systems.
Child safety
Homelessness
41% of notifications children under 4yo;
4% were prior to birth (Carmody)
Children 0-5 accompanying parents is fastest growing
group presenting to homeless services (AIHW)
Risk factors (
Carmody
)
Younger parents (teenage 6%)
Indigenous (21%)
Single parents
Drug & alcohol (47%)
DV (35%)
Mental illness (19%)
Intergenerational abuse (25%)
Criminal history (21%)
500 Lives 500 H0mes Registry Week 2014 Snapshot
(267 families with 537 children).
24% families had contact with Child Safety in previous 6 months
30% families (81) were young parents (<25yo)
Indigenous (24%)
Single parents (73%), 93% women
HoH
Substance abuse (36%)
DV – 29 in DV shelters at survey
Mental illness (40%)
Dual diagnosis (22%),
Trimorbid
(12%)
20% of parents had been in care themselves
Prison (11%)
45% children were 0-5 years old Slide12
Yet…
The services available separately in each system do not match the needs (type and duration) and are not able to
realise
sustainable outcomes re homelessness, housing instability or family dysfunction.
Housing stability is not sufficiently recognized in either system as a fundamental component of an effective family support response
Affordability and supply issues are a barrier in both systems to access to stable, long-term, affordable housing for familiesSlide13
Exp
erience of families in homelessness
and child protection
Re cycling through time-limited services and housing instability
Statutory intervention due to poverty and homelessness, as well as personal issues (unintentional neglect rather than intentional abuse)
Family support offered after statutory intervention is time-limited
Case management goals of parents unattainable due to structural issues such as lack of supply of affordable housing and demand for housing
No investment into family support services to meet demand of families and accompanying children to specialist homelessness services Slide14
Challenges
Interest in responding to family needs better through a more balanced approach to child protection issues
How do we increase the supply of affordable and safe housing?
How do we have the duration of family support /case management service to families with both family homelessness and child protection and include housing stability?
How do we get social housing connected to support so that it can support solutionsSlide15
Systems change:
Housing and child protection
Housing and Homelessness
Family Support and Child Safety
Increase Supply : development of new
social housing
Incentives for investors not looking at social housing and lowest income individuals
and families
Expand the options for connecting families with affordable housing through a subsidy for private rentals
Coordinated entry into current social housing system
Capital investment in well-designed housing for dedicated family supportive housing (to scale over 10 years)
Stop children/families entering child protection because of housing instability or homelessness
Get children out of Out of Home Care protection more quickly where housing instability or homelessness is the barrier to reunification
Redesign to meet the needs of families and children for safety and developmental needs of children (stable and affordable housing is often a presenting need)
Respond to the needs of families by having flexible funding to provide a combination of rental assistance and retain connection to services over longer timeframes
Dual reporting pathway
For a cohort of families, we can work together to establish housing
stability as a foundation AND provide support to improve family functioning.Slide16
Support Us
How you can help
Join us as a corporate partner
Fundraise for us through your school or community group
Become a volunteer
Leave a gift in your Will (Bequests)
Give to a project that needs support
For more information about ways to support Micah Projects, please contact us.Slide17
www.micahprojects.org.au
Breaking Social Isolation, building community.Slide18Slide19
Housing Solutions for
Families Involved with Child Welfare
Ruth White
,
Executive Director
Center
for Housing and Child
Welfare, Washington, DC, USASlide20Slide21Slide22Slide23
NCHCW
National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016
NCHCW links housing resources to child welfare agencies to improve family functioning, prevent family homelessness, safely reduce the need for out-of-home placement, and ensure that each young person who ages out foster care is able to access safe, decent, permanent housing.Slide24
Poverty and Child Welfare
Poverty is the best indicator of whether or not a child will enter out of home care. (
Pelton, 2008;
Sedlak, Mettenburg, Basena, Petta, McPherson, & Greene, 2010)
Housing is a tangible manifestation of poverty that provides a unique challenge to child welfare workers (Shdaimah, 2009).
National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016Slide25
Housing Matters
Housing affects families at each decision point in the child welfare continuum. Children from families with housing problems are:
More likely to be investigated by CPS (
Culhane et al, 2004)More likely to be placed in out-of-home care (Courtney et al, 2004)Longer stayers in foster care (Jones, 1998)Thirty percent of children in foster care are there because of housing problems (Doerre &
Mihaly, 1996; Hagedorn, 1995; Thoma, 1998).
National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016Slide26
Housing and Overrepresentation of Minorities in foster care
Disproportionality
2007 GAO report on the African American Children in foster care identified housing as a major contributor to the overrepresentation of minorities in foster care.
A 2004 service matching in child welfare study found that housing was the least well-matched service and alarmingly, when it was matched to need, race was the best predictor of whether or not a family would get the service.
National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016Slide27
Family Options Study
Federally-funded randomized control trial which compares
the impacts of:
Short term housing subsidies (18 mo max)transitional housingpermanent housing subsidies
emergency shelter systemSlide28
Substantiated cases of maltreatment by type of Abuse and Neglect (USDHHS, 2012Slide29
2010 Child Welfare Funding
Source: ChildTrends, 2012Slide30Slide31
Housing versus Cash Assistance
Sustained economic investments make the difference – in cases of great financial stress, a small handout or purchase of equipment may not tangibly improve the plight of families. (
Littell
and Schuerman, 2002).Families who received permanent housing assistance improved their functioning, while families who received cash assistance continued to have problems. Why might this be the case? National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016Slide32
Housing is Cost-Effective
A $15 million investment in FUP means that more than 9,000 children can return home. This will result in a savings of $101 million in foster care expenditures. (
Harburger
and White, 2004). (or $56,892 per family)It costs approximately $53,500 to serve a homeless young person on the street or in residential treatment but supportive housing for one young person costs only $5,300. (Van Leeuwen, 2004).
National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016Slide33
NCHCW 2015 cost analysis
National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016
Estimated National Annual Average Savings for Two Bedroom and Three Bedroom FMR
Per child annual savings in a two bedroom: $12,021Per family annual savings in a two bedroom: $32,458Per child annual savings in a three bedroom: $9,954Per family annual savings in a three bedroom: $26,878Slide34
NCHCW 2015 cost analysis
National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016
Estimated National Annual
NATIONAL Average Savings for Two Bedroom and Three Bedroom FMRNational savings if housing plus services intervention applied to all Title IV-E eligible families who need it: $822,992,330 (two bedroom)National savings if housing plus services intervention applied to all Title IV-E eligible families who need it: $681,494,639 (three bedroom)Slide35
Department of Children and Families (child welfare)
Supportive Housing
US Dept of Housing and Urban Devt. (HUD)
Local Public Housing Authority (PHA)
Family
Landlord
Funding and referrals
MOU
Housing assistance and case management
Funding for
Sec. 8 vouchers
Pays rent on time
Issues voucher to
family
Pays rent on time
Info and cooperation
The US Partnership Model
Landlord recruitment, housing placementSlide36
Caveats, final thoughts, discussion
National Center for Housing and Child Welfare November 2016
Of course, emergency homeless services dollars for families, but we recommend that families be assisted to avoid the homeless system whenever possible.
Conversely, we recommend that homeless
families are assisted in ways that do not unnecessarily involve them in child protection Collaborations are the fastest, most efficient way to create a range of housing options.
Consider the reduction in homelessness that could result from child safety workers who had knowledge and access to housing resources. Slide37
Let’s Talk
In your work / contact with vulnerable families:
What would support better outcomes for the children, the families and the community?
What is missing? How often does that occur?
If we were to do it better, what would it look like
? Slide38Slide39
Let’s Talk
In your work / contact with vulnerable families:
What would support better outcomes for the children, the families and the community?
What is missing? How often does that occur? Slide40
Let’s Talk
If we were to do it better, what would it look like?
Slide41