DCF, like child welfare agencies across the country, faces widely recognized management challenges. A recent U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) report on state and local child protection agencies found they are plagued by systemic weaknesses that undermine effective management. [1]   These weaknesses include difficulties in:  

·       maintaining a skilled workforce;

·       consistently following key policies and procedures designed to protect children;

·       developing useful case data and recordkeeping systems such as automated case management; and

·       establishing good working relationships with the courts.

The management weaknesses outlined in the GAO report clearly have been issues for Connecticut's consolidated children's agency.  These and other management problems led to the 1989 law suit and resulting consent decree.  Lack of planning, inadequate information systems, weak accountability, and ambiguous management structures are repeatedly cited as deficiencies in reports produced by outside consultants and the program review committee over the past 20 years.  (Findings and recommendations from prior reports on DCF are summarized in Appendix C.)  Information on the current status of several key management functions is highlighted below.

Planning  

A primary management duty of the Department of Children and Families, by statute, is to plan and evaluate a comprehensive and integrated statewide program of services for children and youth.  The agency is required by state and federal law to produce a number of planning documents, including a five-year master plan to be submitted to the General Assembly biennially.  The state mandated master plan must incorporate a comprehensive mental health plan for children and adolescents, a comprehensive plan developed in conjunction with the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services for substance abusers, and a written plan for the prevention of child abuse and neglect.   

Current planning documents.  DCF has not produced the statutorily required master plan since 1986.  Mental health and child welfare plans are prepared each year as part of state grant applications for federal funding in these areas.  In addition, the department, as a member of the Connecticut Alcohol and Drug Policy Council (CADPC), participated in developing the first statewide interagency substance abuse plan, which was submitted to the governor and General Assembly in January 1999.  Other than the recent report on the site selection for a new Long Lane School, no planning document has been prepared by DCF concerning juvenile justice matters.  

A variety of special plans have been prepared in recent years, both in response to consent decree requirements and agency initiatives.  For example, a plan for DCF facilities was issued in February 1999,  a draft statewide training plan for 1998-1999 was prepared by the DCF training academy, and a draft plan for quality assurance was developed in March 1999 by the agency's quality management office.  In compliance with consent decree provisions, the department just completed its Program Assessment and Resource Allocation (PARA) Plan for 1999.  The PARA plan documents how resources will be allocated among various service categories based on the agency's annual assessment of services used  by children and families during the previous year.   

            Strategic plan.  None of the documents currently produced by DCF fulfill the purpose of the agency master plan, which by law should contain:  

·       the department's long range goals and current level of attainment;

·       a detailed description of the types and amounts of services provided;

·       a detailed forecast of the service needs of current and projected target populations;

·       detailed cost projections of alternative means for meeting projected needs;

·       funding priorities for each of the five years included in the plan and specific plans indicating how the funds are to be used; and

·       an overall assessment of adequacy of children's services.

At the direction of the commissioner, the department's planning division recently  produced a strategic planning document for the agency that set specific goals and identifies actions required to implement them for major functional areas (e.g., administration and finances, child welfare bureau, human resources, education services, juvenile justice, mental health division, etc.) and institutions. According to agency management, the strategic action plan is  intended to serve as the rolling master plan called for by state statute.  However, it does not include any systematic needs assessments by target population, comprehensive cost projections for needed services, or an evaluation of the status of current services provided to children and families.   

            Planning and research functions.  Statewide planning is the responsibility of the small strategic planning division, comprised of seven professionals and two support staff, in the central office. Central office planning staff actually spends about half its time working on annual federal grant applications and related state plans and the rest on consent decree implementation issues and strategic planning.  A new function the staff intends to undertake in the upcoming year is resource development -- finding new public and private funding sources to support agency activities.  

Planner positions are also assigned to the regional offices. In general, the regional planners spend most of their time on contract administration and provider relations, not assessing client needs and developing programs.  Through their contract management functions, however, needs for new or expanded services can be identified and forwarded to the central office for consideration.  

At present, no staff in DCF are devoted to analyzing trends, reviewing research, and compiling and coordinating the vast amount of data generated throughout the agency.  However, the current PARA plan proposes formation of a planning and research unit.   The only part of the agency regularly conducting research now is the new quality assurance unit that oversees analysis of data collected through the performance-based contract and administrative case review processes.     

Advisory groups.  Two statutory entities central to department planning efforts are the State Advisory Council (SAC) and the agency's five Regional Advisory Councils (RACs).  The State Advisory Council consists by law of 15 gubernatorial appointees including a child psychiatrist, an attorney, three persons between ages 15 and 22, child care professionals, five child care professionals and representatives of young persons, parents, and others interested in the delivery of services to children and youth.  The SAC is responsible for recommending service improvements to the commissioner, annually reviewing and advising on the agency's proposed budget,  issuing reports it deems necessary, and interpreting the department's policies, duties, and programs to the community.  In recent years, the council has been primarily reactive; it has provided comments on agency budgets and plans but has not produced any independent reports or policy initiatives.  

The council's role and influence has varied with each agency commissioner.  At present,  the DCF commissioner usually attends the council's monthly meetings and has asked the council's assistance in developing the latest strategic plan.  In addition, a mental health subcommittee of council has been designated to serve as the state's citizen advisory council for children's mental health planning as required by federal law.   

            The statutes require the DCF commissioner to create regional advisory councils of not more than 21 persons to provide advise on the development and delivery of services in each DCF region and to facilitate coordination of services for children, youth, and their families in the region.  The majority of members of each RAC must earn less than 50 percent of their salaries from providing services to children and families with the balance made up of representatives of private human service providers in the region.  Each DCF regional office assigns a worker to staff its RAC.  The relationship of the regional councils to the department has varied over time and among regional advisory councils, ranging from critic to partner.  Under the current administration, the RACs have participated in the development of  the agency's routine planning documents as well as the PARA plan.  

            Another important advisory group with a special purpose is the critical response team established under P.A. 99-26, the legislation mandating a new juvenile training school to replace Long Lane.  The nine-member team, which is comprised of representatives of state agencies, the governor's office, a private residential treatment facility, and the judicial branch, is responsible for making recommendations on the operation of the new training school and on DCF's oversight of delinquent children in its custody.  The team submitted its recommendations, which primarily focused on the internal operations of the Connecticut Juvenile Training School (CJTS), to the governor and General Assembly on January 1, 2000.   

Information Systems  

   A major management deficiency continually cited in studies of DCF is the lack of an effective automated information system.  At present, the department’s main computer support for its daily operations is known as LINK.  The multi-million dollar system, which became operational in 1996, was funded in part with federal grant dollars made available to all states to help create single statewide computerized child welfare information systems.  

Ultimately, LINK is intended to be the agency's case management system capable of tracking the history and current status of all DCF clients, producing reports for planning and policy purposes, and carrying out certain fiscal functions.  Now it is used primarily for processing payments for out-of-home placements for children in protective services case and reporting caseload and staffing data to the court monitor.  

A major limitation of LINK at this time is the fact that data related to clients of DCF facilities, which include Long Lane School and the mental health institutions, are not incorporated in the system.  Also, the system only includes case information back to 1996; prior data on cases must be retrieved from the agency’s former computerized systems and from paper files.  Agency officials also caution against using information produced through LINK without checking other sources since data entry problems and programming issues have resulted in inaccurate or unreliable reports.    

Quality Assurance  

A strong quality assurance mechanism within the Department of Children and Families is required by the consent decree and by federal law and regulation.   Quality assurance has involved different functions and organizational locations over the past 10 years but currently is carried out by the department's Bureau of Quality Management, which was established in early 1998.  In addition to an administrative case review process, the units in the bureau's continuous quality improvement division are responsible for: licensing the facilities subject to DCF regulation (e.g., clinics, shelters, residential treatment facilities, etc.); investigating complaints concerning licensed facilities and other providers of children's services;  conducting special, internal reviews of critical incidents (i.e., child fatalities and serious injuries); and analyzing information on the performance of outside service providers.   

The foundation of DCF's quality assurance function is the administrative case review (ACR) process.   Implementation of the current process, developed in consultation with the court monitor, began in one regional office in February 1998 and is expected to be fully in place in all regions by the end of 1999.  Under the process, an independent review of nearly every open protective services or voluntary services case involving out-of-home placement is conducted every six months "to ensure the right services are provided at the right time in the best way for children in the custody or supervision of the Department of Children and Families." [2]

The ACR process is integrated into the department's overall treatment planning process. In addition to providing regular assessment of the status of each active treatment case, administrative case review is being used by the department to:  

·       systematically collect data on all cases reviewed;

·       prepare quarterly caseload profiles for regional and central planners that can help identify service trends and needs; and

·       identify corrective actions for improving case practices.