Child welfare reform in Maine.

In 2002, Maine's senior child welfare managers began to look at the outcomes for children under the state's supervision. From that review, a plan for reform began to evolve. Information is beginning to accumulate that change is occurring. For example:

* In 2001, there were 3,200 children

* In 2001, less than 10 percent of children under supervision were placed with relatives. In five years, the number has doubled.

* In 2004, there were 770 youths in residential placements in Maine funded by the child welfare system. Two years later, there were 465.

* As late as 2005, less than 50 percent of child protection first contacts were achieved within 14 days. Today face-to-face contact is done in 75 percent of cases within five days.

* In 2004, family team meetings became a part of practice. There are now 600 family team meetings each month.

* Since 2001, there has been a 25 percent reduction in removals, adoptions have increased as a percentage of children in care, and reunifications have risen by 25 percent.

What explains this change, most of which has taken place in the past two years with no added resources? First, the reform that was prompted by the organization was realized in a 2002 review. The initial impetus for reform began in 2002 with the realization by Karen Westburg, the child welfare director at that time, that children in Maine's care were not achieving acceptable outcomes. Children were in care for long periods of time and large numbers were not living in families. A decision was then made to seek support in achieving reform from the Casey Strategic Consulting group, which proved instrumental in the transformation of our management and practice models.

Second, Casey Strategic Consulting supported the reform process and helped extensively over the course of four years.

The reforms included the development of a beliefs statement, practice model, strategic plan and the use of data to measure change. In 2005, all policies were reviewed by assigning them to local offices to ensure that they were consistent with the organizational beliefs statement and the practice model. Each child welfare office assumed leadership in revising policies to meet that goal. Among those changes were: putting into place timely responses to complaints of abuse and neglect; ensuring that domestic violence perpetrators were the focus of interventions; implementing family team meetings to ensure inclusion, safety and permanence; developing clear family-centered policy to make visits child and parent friendly; and a focus on safety, permanence and well-being.

Driving our reform has been a clear statement that it is our responsibility to ensure that every child lives and grows up in a family while being connected to a community.

Training for family team meetings, the practice model, residential use and other changes were the key to building these reforms. Good supervision does cause change and much focus has been on supporting a team of managers invested in a common view of what is right vs. what is easy.

Our staff is recognized now for more timely responses by persons who have made referrals; families and extended families are less fearful of our caseworkers; and family team meetings have resulted in sharing critical information with extended family that we previously lacked. More youths are being placed within their communities in part because it is policy, but also because it is being measured. Community placement data on each caseload and an array of other key data elements will soon be made available to every worker and to each unit and office.

Among the remaining challenges are the offices and units where strategies have not been effective in achieving the strategic indicators. Another challenge is ensuring fidelity to policy as reflected in our quality assurance process.

Findings indicate a lack of documentation of effective work to ensure parent and child involvement in case planning. The quality assurance process also finds a lack of documentation of efforts to reunify and/or place children with extended family.

We continue to recognize the need for ongoing engagement with contracted providers and stakeholders in our efforts to reform. For a variety of reasons, our success in that area has been uneven.

Our reform efforts begun four years ago have given us a road map to improve the work we do. Every year, in every part of our plan, we have done better.

James Beougher is director of the Maine Office of Child and Family Services.