WA Ombudsman, Group Care-What Youth Say About Living in a Group Home, 2007

7/31/2019 WA Ombudsman, Group Care-What Youth Say About Living in a Group Home, 2007

1/32

Group Care.What youth say

about living in a group home.

2007 Outreach and Survey ResultsFull Report


2/32

The Ombudsman sincerely thanks each youth who

participated in this project, and would like to acknowledge the contributions

made by the Mockingbird Society and Chelsea Spector, OFCO legal intern

during the summer o 2007.

Mary Meinig, Director Ombudsman

Colleen Hinton, LICSW, Ombudsman

Rachel Pigott, MSW, Database Coordinator

Chelsea Spector, BA, Legal Intern

Megan Palchak, MA, Ombudsman

Linda Mason Wilgis, J.D., Ombudsman


3/32

Table o ContentsIntroduction ..........................................................................................1

Project Purpose .................................................................................... 2

Group Care in Washington....................................................................3Group Homes in the Continuum o Care...................................................................3Types o Group Care Programs ...................................................................................4Basic Elements o a Group Care Program.................................................................4Stang Requirements...................................................................................................5Range o Group Care Facilities....................................................................................5Youth Served in Group Care ........................................................................................6

Project Design.......................................................................................6

Youth Surveyed ..............................................................................................................7Survey Design.................................................................................................................7

Assent to Participate......................................................................................................7Visit Procedure................................................................................................................7

What We Found.....................................................................................8

Youth Demographic ..............................................................................9

Youth Survey Responses.....................................................................11Basic Needs & Saety ..................................................................................................11Inorming Youth ............................................................................................................12Privacy ............................................................................................................................14

Wellbeing.....................................................................................................................15NonDiscrimination......................................................................................................15SelDetermination & Future Planning....................................................................16What Youth Say is Working.......................................................................................17Two Best Things About Group Care......................................................................18Foster Care to 21 ..........................................................................................................18Youth Ideas or Improving Group Care ....................................................................19

Discussion.......................................................................................... 22What is Working Well? ...............................................................................................22

Areas or Improvement................................................................................................23

Recommendations ............................................................................. 25

Conclusion..........................................................................................27


4/32

Acronyms used in this report

ACLA Ansell Casey Lie Skills Assessment and Learning Plan

BRS Behavioral Rehabilitation Services

CA Childrens Administration

CASA Court Appointed Special Advocate

COA Council on Accreditation

CPS Child Protective Services

CRC Crisis Residential Center

DCFS Department o Child and Family Services

DLR Department o Licensed Resources

DSHS Department o Social and Health ServicesGAL Guardian ad litem

IL/ILP Independent Living/Independent Living Program

OFCO Oce o the Family and Childrens Ombudsman

RCW Revised Code o Washington

WAC Washington Administrative Code


5/32

Group Care.120 Youth. 22 Group Homes. Ideas worth listening to.

IntroductionWhat happens in our state to youths who cannot remain at home,

do not have an able and willing relative with whom they may live,

and cannot be successully managed in oster care? Where do they

go? They are oten placed in group care. Group care is a residential

program that houses youth with complex behavioral and emotional

issues that require a more structured and therapeutic level o care

than can be provided in a relative or oster home.

The Oce o Family and Childrens Ombudsman (OFCO) is statutorily

charged with review[ing] periodically the acilities and procedures

o state institutions serving children, and statelicensed acilities

or residences.1 Since its inception in 1997, OFCO has visited a

variety o statelicensed acilities, such as the Washington School

or the Dea, resulting in systemchanging reorms. Additionally, in

2001 OFCO issued a report on what was working best in the oster

care system based on input rom youth.2 We have recognized over

the past ew years that the voice o youth was not being heard as

greatly or persistently as we would like within our oce and this

partly inspired our decision to undertake this report.

In the summer o 2007, OFCO visited 22 group homes across the

state to speak directly with 120 youth about their experiences. The

purpose o ourvisits was to elicit rom youth their ideas about how to

1 RCW 43.06A.030 (emphasis added.)2 Foster Care. What young people in the system say is working. OFCO Appreciative

Interview Report. January 2001. Copies may be accessed at http://www.governor.wa.gov/

oco/reports/oco_200101.pd

Group Care is a residential

program that houses youth

with complex behavioral

and emotional issues that

require a more structured

and therapeutic level o care

than can be provided in a

relative or oster home.

1
http://www.governor.wa.gov/ofco/reports/ofco_200101.pdfhttp://www.governor.wa.gov/ofco/reports/ofco_200101.pdfhttp://www.governor.wa.gov/ofco/reports/ofco_200101.pdfhttp://www.governor.wa.gov/ofco/reports/ofco_200101.pdf


6/32

improve group care, explain to them how to access the Ombudsman as a resource i they needed help, and

to identiy strengths and weaknesses within the current group home residential ramework. Based on our

assessment o the situation and input rom youth, we have developed recommendations or improvement

o the group home system.

We believed, and still do, that the youth themselves are best positioned to inorm public dialogue about

what is working and what is not.3 The answers to these undamental questions may be a springboard

to uture study o whether the system as a whole makes good sense and should be retained or whether

it should be reworked in avor o other residential models that have been advanced by child welare

advocates.

There are approximately 127 group care acilities, or group homes, across Washington State. Together, they

provide over 500 beds or youth with a wide range o needs. In 2007, the average monthly group care

caseload was 965.4

During our visits, the Ombudsman conducted group discussions, and provided youth with a paperbased

questionnaire (survey) that included closed and openended questions. One hundred twenty youth

participated in the group discussions, and 106 responded to the Ombudsmans survey.

This report sets orth a description o the project, detailed youth eedback, and the Ombudsmans concerns

and recommendations to improve group care.

Project PurposeOFCO has a duty to periodically review statelicensed acilities serving children.5 Our decision to initiate

a project where we could hear rsthand rom youth living in group homes was inspired by our statutory

mandate and by the lie stories we have had the opportunity to hear over the past several years. These

stories have come to us through advocacy groups such as the Mockingbird Society6, and in testimony by

youth to the Braam oversight panel.7 These actors coupled with the realization that OFCO receives ew

phone calls directly rom youth (since 1997, the number o complaints received rom youth has slowly

3 Childrens Administration and the Braam Oversight Panel recently issued the results o a comprehensive oster youth survey

to gather data to assess the eectiveness o and improve services or adolescents in oster care. Results o the 2008 Survey oWashington State Youth in Foster Care, August 2008, are now available at http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pd/ca/YouthSurveyDataRepor.

pd4 Note that this number excludes children that are placed in Crisis Residential Centers (CRCs). The average monthly caseload or

CRCs or 2007 was 136. Washington State Oce o Financial Management, 2007 Washington State Data Book, Community Social

Service Workload Indicators, ONLINE. Available: http://www.om.wa.gov/databook/human/st03.asp.5 RCW 43.06A.0306 The Mockingbird Society is a nonprot organization based in Seattle committed to reorming public policy and law to better

support oster youth and caregivers. See http://www.mockingbirdsociety.org/7 This is the panel established to oversee implementation o the settlement agreement which arose rom Braam v. State o

Washington, 150 Wn.2d 689, 712, 81 P.3d 851 (2003) (class action suit brought by current and ormer oster children who sought

damages or harm suered as a result o multiple placements while in the custody o DCFS).

2
http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/YouthSurveyDataRepor.pdfhttp://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/YouthSurveyDataRepor.pdfhttp://www.ofm.wa.gov/databook/human/st03.asphttp:///reader/full/http://www.mockingbirdsociety.orghttp:///reader/full/http://www.mockingbirdsociety.orghttp://www.ofm.wa.gov/databook/human/st03.asphttp://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/YouthSurveyDataRepor.pdfhttp://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/YouthSurveyDataRepor.pdf


7/32

increased, but by 2006 totaled just two percent o all complaints in any given year8), made the group

home project a compelling choice.

OFCO had two primary objectives or this project:

1. Outreach to youth residing in group care about OFCOs services and how to access these; and

2. Learn rom these youth about their experiences in group care, to inorm stakeholders in the group care

system about what seems to be working, and what needs improvement.

Group Care in Washington StateGroup Homes in the Continuum o Care

Washington State requires that children needing outohome care be placed in the least restrictive setting,

most amilylike, and most appropriate placement option necessary or their saety and wellbeing.9 Levels

o restrictiveness, rom least to most restrictive, are dened as ollows:

10

1. Childs own home.

2. Relatives or childs tribe.

3. Responsible Adult Placement (suitable adult who has a preexisting relationship with child or amily).

4. Family oster home.

5. Group home.

6. Psychiatric acility.

7. Other institutions accessed only through court commitment.

Within Washington States current system o outohome care, group homes are considered airly

restrictive. However, group homes are oten the only remaining option within the current system or

children and adolescents with complex behavioral and emotional problems, who are not able to be saely

managed in oster or relative care. In recent years, alternative models o care, particularly or adolescents,

have been developed and are showing tremendous promise, such as the Mockingbird Societys Hub

Model.11

The goal or children placed in group homes, i they cannot be returned home, is to transition them to a

less restrictive placement as soon as the youth can successully unction in a less structured environment.

8 i.e. approximately nine complaints in the highest year.9 RCW 74.14A.02010 Washington State Department o Social and Health Services. Childrens Administration. Practices and Procedures Guide, Section

4261. 2008. ONLINE. Available: http://www.dshs.wa.gov/ca/pubs/mnl_pnpg/chapter4.asp [3 Aug. 2008]11 The Hub Model is premised on the concept that six to ten oster/kinship amilies (Satellite Families) that live in close proximity

to a central, licensed oster amily (HUB Home) . . .provide support [similar to the traditional role that Grandmas house might

serve.]. http://www.mockingbirdsociety.org/docs/Additional%20Links/amily%20model.pd

3
http:///reader/full/Model.11http:///reader/full/Model.11http://www.dshs.wa.gov/ca/pubs/mnl_pnpg/chapter4.asphttp://www.mockingbirdsociety.org/docs/Additional%20Links/family%20model.pdfhttp:///reader/full/Model.11http://www.mockingbirdsociety.org/docs/Additional%20Links/family%20model.pdfhttp://www.dshs.wa.gov/ca/pubs/mnl_pnpg/chapter4.asp


8/32

As a percentage o all children placed in outohome care, comparatively ew children live in group homes

during Fiscal Year 2007, the monthly average number o children in relative care was 3,561; in oster

care, 6,737; and in group care, 965.12 This group care number totals 1101 i we include children placed in

Crisis Residential Centers (CRCs).

Types o Group Care Programs13

The Washington Administrative Code (WAC) denes the types o group care programs that can be licensed

by the Department o Social and Health Services (DSHS) Division o Licensed Resources (DLR) to provide

care to children, including:14

Residential care programs, with or without rehabilitative treatment. Those providing specializedtreatment do so through the Behavioral Rehabilitative Services (BRS) program, which provides intensive

support and treatment or children with behavioral and/or emotional disturbances, developmental

disabilities, or medical ragility. Children may receive BRS in their own homes, in oster care, or in

group care.

Responsible Living Skills programs (RLS) providing residential and transitional living services ordependent youth ages 14 and older;

Maternity services or pregnant/parenting teens; Services to severely developmentally disabled and medically ragile children; and Crisis Residential Centers (CRCs) or youth requiring brie outohome care and crisis intervention

(including secure and semisecure acilities).

Day treatment programs are considered group care programs although they are not 24hourresidential programs.

Basic Elements o a Group Care Program15

Group care programs are required to provide a sae and healthy group living environment that meets the

developmental needs o the children in care16, including;

A clean, homelike environment; Basic necessities such as adequate ood, appropriate clothing and recreational activities; Saety;12 Cheryl Stephani, Assistant Secretary, Childrens Administration,DSHS Childrens Administration Report Card, memo, June 30,

2006.13 Also called group homes throughout this report and elsewhere in state law. 14 WAC 3881480670. Day treatment and Independent Living Skills programs are also listed in the WAC dening group care

programs; however, they do not provide 24hour services. 15 WAC 388148068016 WAC 3881480680

4


9/32

An ageappropriate environment with necessary structure, routine, and rules to provide or a healthylie, growth and development.

Group care programs must have a written statement o their mission, goals, and services. They must

provide the specialized services needed by the group being served, either through the program itsel or via

another community resource.17

Stafng Requirements

Group homes must be staed with employees who are competent to provide or the saety and needs o

the children in their care. Stang ratios specied in the Washington Administrative Code are somewhat

complex and distinguish between child care and social service sta.

Child care sta members provide direct care, supervision, and behavior management or children and

must have a high school diploma/GED as well as experience and skills in working with children.18 For

regular group homes, there must be one child care sta member on site or every eight children; however,

to keep the proper ratio o sta to children, the executive director, health care sta, manager, support

sta and maintenance sta may serve temporarily as child care sta i they meet all other child care sta

qualications and training. 19 For staed residential acilities, there must be one child care sta member

to six children.20 While, BRS stang ratios are negotiated per region, within DSHS/CA standards, CA

reports that there is usually one sta or every three youth with high service needs in BRS programs. For

youth with lower service needs, there is usually one sta or every our or ve youth.

Social service sta is dened as a clinician, program manager, case manager, consultant, or other sta

person who is an employee o the agency or hired to develop and implement the childs individual serviceand treatment plans.21 The minimum social service stang ratio or regular group homes is one ulltime

social service sta to 25 children, while at the other end o the spectrum, or CRCs it is 1:5.22 At least one

social service sta member must have a masters degree in social work or related eld; others must have

bachelors degrees and be closely supervised by the masterslevel sta.23 The social service stang ratio

or regular homes is very high, given the special needs o most children placed in group care.

Range o Group Care Facilities

A groupcare acility is an agency, other than a oster amily home, which is maintained and operated

or the care o a group o children on a twentyour houraday basis.24 Group care acilities dier widely

17 WAC 388148069018 WAC 388148072019 WAC 388148072520 WAC 399148104521 WAC 388148001022 WAC 388148061023 WAC 388148058524 RCW 74.13.031

5
http:///reader/full/resource.17http:///reader/full/resource.17http:///reader/full/children.18http:///reader/full/children.18http:///reader/full/children.20http:///reader/full/children.20http:///reader/full/plans.21http:///reader/full/plans.21http:///reader/full/staff.23http:///reader/full/staff.23http:///reader/full/basis.24http:///reader/full/basis.24http:///reader/full/resource.17http:///reader/full/children.18http:///reader/full/children.20http:///reader/full/plans.21http:///reader/full/staff.23http:///reader/full/basis.24


10/32


11/32

Youth Surveyed

Twentytwo group homes were selected across the States six regions.28 Homes o a variety o sizes,

locations (urban vs. rural), and service populations were chosen, to represent a broad range o youth ages

twelve and older. To decrease some o the variability expected rom including very dierent types o group

care settings, certain types o acilities were excluded. Our goal was to target primarily dependent youth

in long term placements. Crisis Residential Centers, or example, were excluded by virtue o the verybrie placements they provide (generally up to ve days).29 Although a small number o youth with mild

to moderate developmental delays were included in our survey, group homes serving youth with severe

developmental delays were excluded.

Survey Design

In developing the written survey, OFCO sought consultation rom the Mockingbird Society.30 We met with

several Mockingbird sta members, some o whom had previously lived in group care. They provided

invaluable input into what questions to include in our survey to elicit the inormation we were seeking, as

well as how to rame the questions to make them accessible and understandable to youth.

The resulting survey included closed and openended questions related to saety, reedom rom racial/

ethnic discrimination, youths knowledge o their legal rights and whether these were being protected,

ormal and inormal sources o support, and contact with these supports.31 Youth were asked whether they

had received any inormation about their group home beore moving there, i they were given any choice

in their placement, and i they had any plans or knowledge o uture placements. Openended questions

inquired into daily lie in the group home, and their suggestions or improvements and change.

Assent to Participate

A youth assent orm32 was sent to each group home prior to our scheduled visit, to allow group home

sta to prepare residents or the visit and explain the purpose o the project. A signed assent orm was

obtained rom each youth participating in the survey.

Visit Procedure

One to three OFCO sta conducted each visit. We allowed each group home to determine whether group

home sta would remain present during the discussion and survey. Some homes asked the youth what

they preerred and ollowed that preerence. Thirteen group homes chose to have sta present, while nineallowed a private discussion between OFCO sta and youth. While there were no clear signs that the

presence o sta aected the candidness o youths input, it is unknown whether this variable signicantly

impacted youths verbal and written responses.

28 See Appendix A or a description o types o acilities visited, acility capacity, acility location and DSHS region. 29 The sample did include a small number o youth in CRC beds located within standard group homes.30 See ootnote 6.31 See the questionnaire in Appendix B.32 See the assent orm in Appendix C.

7
http:///reader/full/regions.28http:///reader/full/regions.28http:///reader/full/days).29http:///reader/full/days).29http:///reader/full/Society.30http:///reader/full/Society.30http:///reader/full/supports.31http:///reader/full/supports.31http:///reader/full/regions.28http:///reader/full/days).29http:///reader/full/Society.30http:///reader/full/supports.31


12/32

Each visit started with a short presentation about OFCOs role and services, including possible reasons why

youth might contact us, and ways in which we may be able to help with their individual situations. Next,

OFCO sta acilitated an inormal discussion about what it was like to live in the group home (both positive

and negative aspects) and how it compared to other group homes youth had lived in. We asked about

daily routines, rules, outings, who youth visit or talk with regularly, and their sources o support.

Following this discussion, our legal intern discussed the assent orm, inorming that participation in the

survey was optional and responses were condential (unless maltreatment or harm to sel or others

was reported). We described the nal product this report in which their individual comments and

suggestions might be anonymously included. Ater signing the assent orm, youth requiring assistance in

reading and interpreting the questions were individually assisted by OFCO sta.

At the end o the visit, we invited youth to meet with us individually i they had any issues or concerns

they wanted to discuss privately. I the issues involved actions by DCFS or the youths legal rights, a

ormal complaint was accepted or later ollowup by the Ombudsman.33 Each youth was given a fyerdescribing OFCOs services and contact inormation.34 Extra surveys and return envelopes were let with

group home sta to allow any residents unable to attend the meeting to participate.

What We FoundWe met with 120 youth rom 22 group homesacross the state, and received 106 completed

questionnaires.35 The vast majority o youth we spoke with had never heard the word Ombudsman,

and very ew were aware o OFCOs existence or role in the child welare system. The group discussions

about daily lie in the group home varied greatly rom group to group: rom animated, opinionated insights

about exactly what was going right and what was going wrong, to subtle hints o inormation revealed

more by the youths bored, anxious or unhappy demeanors than by their verbal responses, to brie positive

responses, surprising in their simplicity, refecting general contentment. Some youth were wary and

tentative in their eedback, while others jumped at the chance to tell it like it is to adults perceived as

having some power to make some changes in their lives. Our objective was to allow youth as much time

as they needed to eel heard.

The acilities we saw varied greatly in their physical environment. Some o the larger group homes elt

institutional and appeared rundown and drab; others elt homelike and modern. The smaller homes oten

presented like larger oster homes, where caregivers were viewed more like oster parents than sta by

the youth who lived there. Interestingly, the youth in some o the plainer acilities presented amongst the

most satised youth, naming wellliked and competent sta as one o the best things about the group

home.

33 See OFCOs orthcoming annual report or urther inormation about the Ombudsmans investigation o youths complaints.34 See OFCO Flyer in Appendix D.35 The survey response rate was 88 percent.

8
http:///reader/full/Ombudsman.33http:///reader/full/Ombudsman.33http:///reader/full/information.34http:///reader/full/information.34http:///reader/full/questionnaires.35http:///reader/full/questionnaires.35http:///reader/full/questionnaires.35http:///reader/full/Ombudsman.33http:///reader/full/information.34http:///reader/full/questionnaires.35


13/32

Almost all o the youth who were living ar rom their home regions were unhappy about this.36 Less

contact with amily and riends, unamiliarity with the area and diculty transitioning rom a large

urban area to a small urban or rural area were the reasons youth cited most oten as the source o their

unhappiness.

Additionally, when group homes had to accommodate widely diering needs among youth, there was

a higher level o discontent by residents. Some o the smaller group homes in particular serving a wide

range o ages seemed to generate a air amount o discontent.

Youth DemographicsYouth had the option to disclose demographic inormation in the written survey. Seventynine percent o

youth surveyed were 14 years o age or older. Five percent o youth we surveyed were over 18 years o

age and were able to access services and pursue higher education through the Foster Care to 21 program.37

While the majority o youth responded to most questions, certain demographic questions elicited airly

low levels o response: many youth (39 percent) didnt identiy their legal status, 43 percent identied

themselves as dependent; 25 percent o the youth did not identiy their race; and 28 percent did not

report the length o stay in their current placement. The low response rates on these questions make it

dicult to accurately describe these demographic data. But, in general we estimate that at least hal the

youth were dependent, and that based on the youths selreporting in OFCOs survey, Caucasians and

Hispanic youth were underrepresented in group homes in comparison to their total numbers in outo-

home placements.38 Very ew youth had been living in the group home or two years or longer, or less

than a week. Over onethird had lived in the group home up to a year.

36 RCW 74.14A.020 species that children should be placed in close proximity to the amily home.37 The Foster Care to 21 Program is a program in Washington State that allows up to 50 youth in oster care per year to stay in

oster care ater they turn 18 so that they can go to a college or vocational program. http://www.independence.wa.gov/programs/

c21.asp38 Washington State Department o Social and Health Services. Childrens Administration. 2007 Perormance Report. ONLINE.

2008. Available: http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pd/ca/07Report2Intro.pd [3 Aug. 2008]

9
http:///reader/full/program.37http:///reader/full/program.37http:///reader/full/placements.38http:///reader/full/placements.38http://www.independence.wa.gov/programs/fc21.asphttp://www.independence.wa.gov/programs/fc21.asphttp://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/07Report2Intro.pdf%20[3http:///reader/full/program.37http:///reader/full/placements.38http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/07Report2Intro.pdf%20[3http://www.independence.wa.gov/programs/fc21.asphttp://www.independence.wa.gov/programs/fc21.asp


14/32

Youth Demographics

Dependent Status Gender

3%Dont know 1%No response

39%

No Response

14%

Non-

dependent

43%

Dependent

47%

Male44%

Female

9% No

Response

Race/Ethnicity Number o Youth by Region2%-Other

1%-Asian4%-Hispanic

37%

25%

11%

10%

10%

Caucasian

AfricanAmerican

No Response

Biracial

NativeAmerican

Region 3

Region 1

Region 4

Region 5

Region 6

Region 2

427

13Region 3

17

Region 1

15Region 6Region 5

12Region 2

Region 4

Length in Current PlacementYouth Age

No Response*19 to 21 years

No Response

11%

12%

21%43%

18 years

8%5%

Don't Know

> 3 years

10to13 years 2 to 3 years

1 to 2 years

6 to 12 months

1 to 6 months

1 week to 1 month

14 to 15 years < 1 week

16 to 17 years 0 5 10 15 20 25*See page 18 for discussion of the

Foster Care to 21 program. Number of Youth

1 0

30


15/32

Youth Survey Responses

The ollowing section discusses Survey Question (SQ): Are your SQ: Are your emotional needsphysical needs met? met?

survey responses rom the 106

completed surveyswe received.

Survey questions are groupedaccording to the broader themes

that the individual questions

were designed to capture.

Background inormation related

to the survey question (such as

legal requirements o group care

73%

16%5%5%

51%28%

15%6%

Yes YesNo Sometimes No Response No Sometimes No Responseproviders) is also provided.

Although threequarters o youth Approximately hal the youth

Group care providers are required

Basic Needs & Saety

responded armatively to this reported that their emotional

to provide children with a healthy question, those who said no gave needs were being met. However,

and sae environment that meets concrete examples o truly basic it is concerning that about one

their basic needs and protects needs that should be met under third o the youth reported eeling

them rom any kind o child the law. Clothing vouchers were that their emotional needs are

maltreatment.39 They are also a requent source o complaint; either sometimes met (6 percent)

required to develop and ollow a specically, lack o timeliness or not met at all (28 percent).

treatment plan and provide any in providing them, and their Many o these youth provided

specialized services needed by insucient amount. explanatory comments, as

the children in their care, either illustrated by the examples below.I need my contact lenses. Ivebeen waiting or two months.through their own program I I have a problem it takes them

too long to get to me.or via other resources in the I need a doctor.

community.40 I need a therapist.I need school clothes andshoes.

Not enough contact withamily.

Not really much physicalactivity.I need help with my depressionand suicidal thoughts.

Dental care.

I need more sympathy romExercise. We dont get it!

sta.

It depends who is working. Idont eel comortable talking toemales about my problems or

39 WAC 3881480005; WAC 388148-

0420eelings.40 WAC 3881480560; WAC 388148-

0690

1 1
http:///reader/full/maltreatment.39http:///reader/full/maltreatment.39http:///reader/full/community.40http:///reader/full/community.40http:///reader/full/maltreatment.39http:///reader/full/community.40


16/32

No one to really talk to andactually listen to me.

SQ: Do you eel sae here?

66%17%

12%5%

Yes No Sometimes No Response

This was one o the most

important questions on the survey.

The majority o youth (66 percent)

reported eeling sae in their

current group home. However,

17 percent reported not eeling

sae; an additional 12 percent

reported sometimes eeling

unsae. Examples o these youths

comments are illuminating.

In nearly a quarter o the 22

homes surveyed (ve homes, or

23 percent), 100 percent o youth

respondents reported eeling sae

at all times. Conversely, there

were our group homes in whichover hal o the youth reported

eeling largely unsae or unsae

at times41. In one home, or

41It should be noted that the sample sizes

or individual group homes is very small,

and youth were not randomly sampled;

thereore these data are not statistically

signicant.

example, some youth reported

being uncomortable with requent

police visits to the home due to a

residents outocontrol behavior.

OFCO took action to investigate

the history o licensing andCPS reerrals on these acilities,

and monitored any current

investigations and corrective action

being taken by DLR (see Youth

Ideas or Improving Group Care on

p.19 or details).

Yes, because the lady who

owns the group home was also aoster kid so she knows what its[sic] like.

Its a secure and sae environment.

[Yes] cuz [sic] they really care somuch about us.

I eel that i someone is beingabusive sta will help.

Except rom wild animals.

Saer than most places.

I eel sae with people I knowbut its better to be here insteado the streets.

No, because sta cannot seeeverything.

No, because I was hit in the

past.

Not really, because a residentis making threats and threwsomething at me yesterday.

I dont know i I can keep mycool and not hit someone.

Kind o the [residents] are outo control.

Sta doesnt keep good lookoutor [residents] here.

Sex oenders live down thestreet and knock at our windowat night.

[Sta] make me eel uncomortable.

People or sta looking andstarring [sic] at me all the time.

We have violent girls and stacant really control them.

Except when kids have to getrestrained, out o control.

Inorming YouthOFCO was curious to know what

inormation is routinely provided

to youth in group care. Although

we could not nd a policy setting

orth what inormation must be

provided to such youth, we did

nd a specic policy or youth

in the Behavioral RehabilitativeServices (BRS) program. The BRS

Handbook or contracted service

providers requires that youth must

be inormed about their individual

behavior management plan (IBMP)

within 24 hours o their admission

to a BRS program. In addition,

BRS providers are required toorient youth within eight hours o

the youths admission, including

inormation regarding behavioral

expectations o the youth, how to

contact their social worker, and

a crisis response protocol. The

Handbook does not stipulate that

1 2


17/32

youth be inormed o their rights,

or the group homes grievance

process.42

SQ: What inormation did youhave about this group home

prior to moving in?

2%

Services

Group Home Rules

No Information

All Information

Facility Information Other/Miscell.

Residents' Rights Staff

37%

18% 12%

10%

9%7% 5%

102 youth responded to this

question. Some youth provided

multiple responses. Over onethird

o the youth (37 percent) reported

getting no inormation at all.

Youth who did not know where

they were being moved to

reported eeling scared and

anxious. One youth reported

having been sent to a new

placement on a plane without

knowing where she was going.

42 Washington State Department o

Social and Health Services. Childrens

Administration. Behavioral Rehabilitative

Services Manual. ONLINE.2008. Available:

http://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pd/CA/

BRSHandbook.pd [3 Aug. 2008]

SQ: Where did this inormation[about your group home] comerom?

3%3%

49%

19%

10%7%

6%3%

Caseworker Other/Miscell.

Group Home Staff Other Foster/Group Home

Family School

Counselor Treatment Provider

Fewer than 70 youth reported the

source o their inormation.

SQ: Do you know your rightsand the grievance process inyour home?

2%

74%

17%

7%


OFCO reviewed several

inormational documents

addressing the rights o youth in

outohome care developed in

other states. At the time o our

site visits, we could not nd such a

document or youth in Washington

(although various state statutes

reerence general or specic rights

o children in outohome care).43

The Mockingbird Society has since

completed a useul pamphlet

setting orth the rights o youth.

Some o these basic rights includethe right to physical and medical

care, reasonable discipline, contact

with an attorney and other

proessionals, education, visits

with siblings, phone calls and

letters, and to reuse medication.

One o the larger group homes

provided OFCO with detailedwritten inormation provided to

residents regarding their rights

and the grievance process, but

most group homes (especially the

smaller ones) did not seem to have

written inormation they give to

residents.

It was clear in talking with youth

that they were very interested in

knowing the grievance process.

Many youth described specic

instances when the process had

been used. While several youth

stated that their group homes

grievance process was not helpul

in bringing about changes, a ew

youth reported changes occurring

as a result o ollowing the internal

grievance process.

43 See Appendix E or a list o such rights

listed in statute.

1 3
http:///reader/full/process.42http:///reader/full/process.42http://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/CA/BRSHandbook.pdfhttp://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/CA/BRSHandbook.pdfhttp:///reader/full/care).43http:///reader/full/care).43http:///reader/full/process.42http:///reader/full/care).43http://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/CA/BRSHandbook.pdfhttp://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/CA/BRSHandbook.pdf


18/32

Our group discussions revealed

that many o the dependent youth

did not appear to know whether

they had an attorney or a CASA/

guardian ad litem assigned to

them, or who that person was,and how to contact them. OFCO

reerred these youth to the group

home sta or their caseworker

or assistance in contacting

their attorney. We asked youth

to contact us i they aced any

diculties in reaching their

attorney.

I talk to sta and they listen.

We have complaint orms.

They dont explain anything tome.

Privacy

Children in outohome care

generally have a right to receive

personal mail and phone calls.

However, DSHS or its delegates

(which could include group care

providers) are permitted to censor

mail and/or monitor telephone

calls to the extent necessary and

in the manner specied by the

court order or the childs saety or

wellbeing. 44

44 WAC 3881480422.

SQ: Do sta respect yourprivacy?

3%

45%

38%

14%


I think the sta membersrespect my privacy. They are inthe middle because when I usethe bathroom the door has to beopen or saety or not.

Sometimes they dont evenknock on the door o your room.

Sta pull down our bed coversto do bed checks

Yes, except or night person.Opens door and makes meuncomortable.

Sta are ok people.

Wish they would [respect myprivacy].

Everything I do is told toeverybody.

SQ: Do other residents respectyour privacy?

58%26%

11%5%


For the most part.

They know what its like, sothey respect privacy.

SQ: Is there a place in yourhome where you can make

confdential phone calls?

51%40%

5%4%


The responses to this question

were group homespecic.

Youth in several homes reported

having to make calls in the

open or anyone to hear. Others

reported only being able to

make calls in the presence o asta member. Youth described

phone calls with amily, riends,

and their service providers as

being a very important aspect o

eeling supported. The phone

policy was a hotbutton issue

that requently came up in our

inormal discussions and on surveycomments.

I have to use the sta phoneto make phone calls. The sta

phone is in the open. Everybodycan listen to my conversation.

Yes, but I dont get condentialmessages.

1 4


19/32

Well-being

A group care program is required

to support the developmental

needs o children.45 This is a

broad obligation, which might

include access to a variety o

service providers, recreational

activities, or simply contact with

amily and riends.

SQ: Who do you turn to or helpand support?

3%3%

40%

23%

19%

12%

Family CounselorFriends CASA/GALNo Response Other

As might be expected, a large

number o youth identied amily

(40 percent) and riends (23

percent) as a primary source o

support. Almost oneth o the

youth (19 percent) did not respond

to this question.46 These youth

may eel they have no source o

support at all.

45 WAC 388148068046 Unortunately, our survey did not

include I do not have anyone I eel I

can turn to as a response option to this

question, which may have increased the

response rate.

SQ: Do you have visits with thepeople you turn to or support?

2%

70%18%

10%


We were encouraged to nd that

the majority o youth reported

having acetoace contact withsupportive people in their lives.

Again, the almost oneth o

youth reporting a lack o ace-

toace contact with sources o

support refects a gap in meeting

a critical need or these youth. A

number o youth talked about

how being placed in a home that

was distant rom their amily and

riends (oten in another region o

the state) limited their ability to

have satisying contact with these

sources o support.

Non-Discrimination

While it is encouraging to see

that the majority o youth (81

percent) do not believe that their

race aects how they are treated

by sta, a little more than one in

ten youth believe it does, at least

sometimes (14 percent). O greater

concern was the high number o

youth almost one in our (24

percent) who reported that

their race actored into how they

are treated by other residents.

Group home sta are expected to

ollow all state and ederal lawsregarding nondiscrimination in

their provision o services.47

SQ: Has your race/ethnicityaected how you are treatedhere by sta?48

67%19%

9% 5%


SQ: Has your race aected how

you are treated here by otherresidents?

2%

81%

12%5%


47 WAC 388148042548 O the nineteen percent o youth (20)

who reported that race aected how

they are treated by residents: nine did

not identiy their race; seven identied

as Caucasian; two identied two or more

racial groups; one identied as Arican

American; one identied as American

Indian or Alaska Native.

1 5
http:///reader/full/children.45http:///reader/full/children.45http:///reader/full/question.46http:///reader/full/question.46http:///reader/full/services.47http:///reader/full/services.47http:///reader/full/children.45http:///reader/full/question.46http:///reader/full/services.47


20/32

Im in more programs becauseIm Native.

Some Black sta make un ome.

[The residents are] racist.

Everything I do is based onmy race. They always call mewhite-girl.

Sel-determination andFuture Planning

OFCO was interested in how much

choice youth are provided in

where they live and who provides

them with services. For older

youth, we wanted to know how

they are assisted with planning

or adulthood. Regarding the

rst question, we could nd no

policy addressing whether or

how youths preerences should

be considered in placement or

service decisions. Regarding

uture planning, although there is

no specic law or policy requiring

group home providers to assist

youth with uture planning, it may

be argued that the more general

policy requiring group homes to

provide specialized services that

are needed by the group that

[they] serve49 would cover this

type o service or older youth.

Youth in the BRS program, some

o whom are in group care, are

covered by very specic policy

49 WAC 3881480690

regarding uture planning. Youth

aged 16 and older are required to

have, as part o their individual

service and treatment plan, an

Independent Living Service Plan.

50 Dependent youth aged 15and older are eligible or the

Independent Living (IL) program.

A new policy regarding planning

or adolescents transition to

independence became eective on

April 15, 2008. DCFS caseworkers

are now responsible or ensuring

that youth aged 15 and older whohave been in outohome care

or 30 days or longer, have an

independent living assessment

and plan as part o their Individual

Saety and Service Plan. The

assessment and plan may be

conducted by a contracted IL

provider, such as a group home.The Independent Living program

includes the ollowing services51:

Ansell Casey Lie SkillsAssessment (ACLSA) and

Learning Plan

Daily Living Skills50

Washington State Department oSocial and Health Services. Childrens

Administration. Behavioral Rehabilitative

Services Manual. ONLINE.2008. Available:

http://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pd/CA/

BRSHandbook.pd [3 Aug. 2008]51 Washington State Department o

Social and Health Services. Childrens

Administration. Independent Living

Program. ONLINE. Available: http://ca.dshs.

wa.gov/intranet/programs/adolIL.asp [3

Aug. 2008]

Educational Support Career Exploration Vocational Training Job Placement and Retention Funding available up to

$500 or Independent Living

enrichment activities

SQ: Did you choose this home?

2%1%

24%

73%

Yes No No ResponseKind of/Sometimes

I do not know why I movedhere. My caseworker chose it.

I chose to live here so I couldmove to an independent livinghome.

SQ: [Many youth have severalhelping proessionals in theirlives]. Do you have a choice inwho you work with?52

37%

46%

11%6%


52 This question ollowed a survey

question asking Who are some [o the

helping proessionals] that you work

with and what do they do or you? This

question had a very low response rate

and data is excluded rom this report or

that reason.

1 6
http://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/CA/BRSHandbook.pdfhttp://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/CA/BRSHandbook.pdfhttp://ca.dshs.wa.gov/intranet/programs/adolIL.asphttp://ca.dshs.wa.gov/intranet/programs/adolIL.asphttp://ca.dshs.wa.gov/intranet/programs/adolIL.asphttp://ca.dshs.wa.gov/intranet/programs/adolIL.asphttp://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/CA/BRSHandbook.pdfhttp://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/CA/BRSHandbook.pdf


21/32

I wish I did.

I dont but I like it like that.

SQ: Do you have plans orwhere you will live next?

2%1%

64%33%

*Yes No Maybe No Response

Hopeully I will be living withmy mom or my sister.

I want to get emancipated butevery time I talk to someonethey never give me inormation.

*A caveat on these yes responses is

that many youth acknowledged in the

comments section o this question that they

have plans or where they wanted to live

next, but were unsure whether these werealse hopes versus a realistic possibility.

Most youth were unaware o the

new state law passed in 2007

allowing legally ree youth ages

12 and older to petition the court

to reinstate previously terminated

parental rights o a parent under

certain circumstances.53 Several

youth believed this might apply

to them and were interested in

hearing about this inormation.

They were reerred to their

attorneys or legal advice.

53 RCW 13.34.215. See ENGROSSED

SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 6792.

SQ: Have group home stahelped you with your utureplans/goals?

50%42%

4%4%


They have pushed me to mylimits to do the best I can.

We make goals then we talkabout them.

What Youth Sayis WorkingWe asked youth to identiy two

o the best things about living

in their group home. Most youth

readily provided appreciative

comments. By bringing these

to the attention o stakeholders

in group care, we hope to ocus

energy and resources on those

aspects o group care that are

working well and encouraging

replication and enhancement

o such strengths. The youths

responses are summarized

by theme in the table on the

ollowing page.

Some youth gave elaborate

responses, providing us with

insights that may not have been

captured in our group discussion

or elsewhere in the survey. Many

youth used this section to express

the impact that their group homes

have had on their individual lives

and outlooks. Here are some otheir comments:

The rst couple o months Iwas here I was really violentand verbally aggressive towardsothers. Now I have totallychanged. I listen to eedback

positively, Im a great role model,and I give positive peer support.This place has changed my lie.

Sta and this program hashelped me a lot and my son and

I bonding.

My experience here has beengreat. Im maturing and gettingmy lie back on track. Im doingwell and Im moving on. I havechanged since I have been here.

I have a job. I have learned tobe independent.

Lastly, one youths overall

perspective on lie in a group

home:

Its hard, but possible.

1 7
http:///reader/full/circumstances.53http:///reader/full/circumstances.53http:///reader/full/circumstances.53


22/32

Two Best Things About Group Care

Learning Lie Skills and Gaining Sel-confdence

Treatment. And more treatment.

I get treatment and learn skills.

The groups: relational healing and anger management.

I can talk about what I need to talk about.

Next step. (A treatment program)

I am able to become a better person.

Becoming able to treat people right.

The sta and treatment.

Anger management.

Get a second chance to do treatment.

I can learn to be independent and be ready

to move out when Im 18.

I can get my lie prepared.

I get treatment.

I learn skills.

Learning DBT skills.

I have a good attitude.

Me, everyone likes me.

I can talk about what I need to talk about.

Freedom, Privacy, Independence

I have more reedom. (x2)55

The amount o reedom is better than

where I was last. Its not as strict as where I was at.

Independent.

I can rely on mysel. I dont have to have people do things or me. I canlearn to be independent and be readyto move out when Im 18.

I can be alone when I want.

Quiet time.

You have your own space.

I get to do things that I couldnt do

beore.I have privacy in my room.

Getting a job.

I have multiple choices.

They let me live.

You get to lock your room door and have a key.

People Who Care

Having people who care.

The people.

Sta

The stathey are nice and alwayshelp.

The sta are usually helpul.

Some o the sta. (x4)

Help with school work.

Cool sta.

Other Residents

Some o the kids at the group home

The kidsthey are un.The other residents.

I get to make lots o riends. (x3)

Having riends (x3)

Having riends to depend on.

Being with amily. (This youths cousin is also a resident.)

Girls.

Foster Care to 21Several youth we surveyed were previouslydependent youth between 18 and 21 years old, participating

in Washingtons new Foster Care to 21 program.

This threeyear pilot program (rom 2006 through 2008) allows dependent youth to stay in their current

oster or group care placement ater they turn 18, as long as they are pursuing postsecondary education.

Eligible youth must be graduating, have graduated, or received a GED, rom high school during the

calendar year in which they are applying. Additionally, youth must have been accepted or applied or a

college or vocational program or the ollowing year.

Youth who return to their biological amily may not participate in the program. Only ty youth are

accepted into the program each calendar year, and not all youth who apply are accepted.54 The

Washington State Institute or Public Policy (WSIPP) is evaluating the eectiveness o the program and will

54 To access inormation on how to apply or the program, see http://www.independence.wa.gov/programs/c21.asp55 Number o occurrences o similar comments.

1 8
http:///reader/full/accepted.54http:///reader/full/accepted.54http://www.independence.wa.gov/programs/fc21.asphttp:///reader/full/accepted.54http://www.independence.wa.gov/programs/fc21.asp


23/32

Saety, Structure, Basic Needs

Youre able to have a home and a place to call home.

Provides a sae home and environment or me and my child.

I eel sae and comortable.

A place to stay until urther notice.

Its not jail.

A roo overhead.

A bed.

Low rent.

Its ree. (x4)

Free rent.

Outings and money.

Getting a job.

The allowance. (x2)

We get money to buy stu.

Having structure.

The ood. It is very good! (x11)

Food choice.

Free ood.

Cooking on our own.

Activities and Community /Family Contact

Fishing and boats.

Swimming.

Going on passes with amily.

Seeing my brother.

The online net connection.

Games. (x4)

T.V. (x2)

Free activities.

Outings. (x4)

My passes.

They take me places.

The activities.I get to go into the community.

Going places is un.

I love living here. We go to the lakes, swimming at the Y, and to the park.

I have an online net connection.

Fun stu games, color, art project.

Playing rec or an hour.

We get ree time and go outside.

I like calling my mother (she can call me).

Facility and Location

The house.

Being centrally located.

Its great location. (x2)

The area.

Its beautiul view.

be reporting its nal results to the Washington State Legislature by December 31, 2008, in time or the

2009 legislative session.

The youth we surveyed commended the program or allowing them to transition to college by assisting

them with rent, ood, and health care, and by maintaining other critical support services they had

received through the oster care system, and continued to need in order to succeed academically and live

independently.

Youth Ideas or Improving Group CareEqually valuable insights were gained rom youths suggestions or ways to improve their group home and

the group care system. Some prominent themes arose in our discussions and in the openended survey

questions. While there were several comments expressing strong negative eedback about the group

home (I dont like it here; I hate it here; I want to leave; Close it down; Its stupid), the majority o

1 9


24/32

youth provided constructive, concrete suggestions or making daily lie in a group home easier and more

enjoyable or them.

Theme 1: More Freedom, Contact with Family and Friends, and Privacy

Regardless o the acility, youth repeatedly voiced their desire or more reedom in terms o activities,

communication within the group home, and contact with amily and riends.

More reedom. (x3)

Talk to people our own age or experience rom someone you trust on the phone.

Less rules/less strict

Be allowed more privileges.

I would ask or more reedom or each person.

Going places by ourselves and not just one hour.

More independence.Let us wear what we want.

Let us stay up later.

Let people visit me.

More phone calls.

The phone is a BIG problem I need the phone to stay sane and I only get 3 phone calls a day that are 15 minutes only!

Theme 2: Improve Stafng and Management

Being allowed to go swimming without a lieguard.

Not be so strict.

Go on walks whenever or 20 minutes or less.

Walks by mysel.

Do what we want.

More privacy.

Private phone calls. (x3)

Communication.

Cell phones.

I would like to be able to call any amily [member] I want.

More time to talk to riends and more calls - it is whatkeeps us sane!

Let us work/give us more money.56

Youth had some practical suggestions or improving the running o their group homes. They requently

mentioned the qualications and skills o sta. Youth readily identied (and highly valued) sta they

viewed as competent and caring, and who treated them airly.

Better qualied management.

They need to get more sta cleared so we could goon more outings.

I management would talk to us more and sta do

what their [sic] supposed to do.Sta [should be] more willing to negotiateconsequences.

Things should get done aster.

Strong sta.

Revise some rules.

More sta. (x2)

56 WAC 3881480695 requires group care acilities, except receiving centers, to provide children under their care, based on age,

needs and ability to handle money, with an allowance. Facilities must keep track o allowance in a ledger. WAC 3881480440

states that children may do regular household tasks without payment, and they that may do other work assignments that are

appropriate to physical conditions and receive monetary compensation i this is part o their service plan.

2 0


25/32

Theme 3: Increase Saety

Some o the youths suggestions about saety revealed their concerns that sta were behaving in an

emotionally or even physically abusive manner. Their specic comments correlate strongly with youths

perceptions that sta lacked adequate skills and sensitivity, indicating a need or better training and

more rigorous screening or higher qualications o sta. The Ombudsman ollowed up on specic saety

concerns by reviewing licensing complaints and CPS reerrals regarding acilities in which youth made any

statements o concern, to ensure that they were being appropriately investigated and acted upon by DLR,

and taking urther action as necessary (see Saety in Discussion section, page 23).

Not getting hurt by sta (restraining, throwing, laid on top o).

Sta not grabbing me or no reason, yelling, racist, cussing at us.

No yelling at children that arent yours.

Less ghting and yelling.

This place needs to be shut down!

The boys boss me around.

Not allow people to run away.

Theme 4: Increase Nurturing and Respect

Sta mean.

Sta abuse us emotionally; sta avor. It takes monthsto get clothes; its gross and dirty; no one keeps to their

word; promises are constantly broken; were bribed.

I keep to mysel.

When people come home high and put other peopleschildren in danger they should not get second, let alone

Many youth expressed a desire to be treated with more respect and airness.

Equality rom every sta.

Not to have as much o an attitude.

Respect rom sta at group homes.

Not butting in others business.

Have ideas listened to and tried.

More respect rom foor sta.

Increase airness.

People dont respect our orientation!

third chances.

More respect.

Negotiate more.

Understanding.

More maturity.

More respect or all.

Respectul sta.

Its unair.

just listen to the sta.

2 1


26/32

Theme 5: Meeting Basic Needs

Food, cleanliness and money were the main subthemes in this category.

Being able to have jobs when needed. Better mattresses.

Cleaner rooms, bathrooms, and the rec room. More ood.

Cleanliness. They need to get much better ood.

Food. Our needs should be met.

Dierent/cleaner showers. More work opportunities.

Theme 6: More Structure and Activities57

In contrast with the many suggestions to increase the level o reedom given to youth, there were almost

as many suggestions expressing a desire or greater structure and clearer rules. Many youth expressed

boredom and a need or more structured activities.

Designated bath times.

More rules.

More strict rules.

Things to do.

I really dont like it here; sta are lazy and dont like to do anything. We dont do anything but sit on our

butts all day.

More stu to do with sta and peers.

DiscussionWhat is Working Well?

I think oster kids should have the chance to havethey [sic] dreams come true, but they [sic] caseworker

wont take them and when they do they dont havethe money to get you the classes. Its not air and Iwill do whatever it take [sic] to get the governor to

listen.

No more quiet time.

More outings. (x4)

Going to ootball games.

Put a game system in the home.

Youth identied the ollowing elements as the best things about their group home:

The learning they experienced rom therapeutic interventions; A sense o reedom, and being trusted with responsibilities; Having their privacy respected; The important role played by sta and residents;57 WAC 3881480445 requires outohome care providers to oer youth activities that contribute to developingtheir physical, mental, social, and emotional skills.

2 2


27/32

Recreational activities, and opportunities to have contact with amily and riends; and Good ood, a comortable and pleasant physical space, and the location o the home.Interestingly, these same themes were echoed in youths suggestions or improvements to group home lie,

providing us with a consistent message about their values, their hopes and their priorities regarding the

care they wish to receive.

Youth in this sample appear to eel airly positive regarding their saety and basic physical care. Regarding

the latter, however, there were some complaints specic to a small number o group homes that were

concerning (such as cleanliness o the acility, unhealthy/unappetizing ood, limited opportunities

or physical exercise, and access to health care). OFCO ollowed up to ensure that these were being

investigated by DLR.

The Foster Care to 21 Program received very avorable eedback rom youth, who are probably unaware

that this is not a permanent change in the law. Hopeully, evaluation data will conrm the participantsperceptions regarding the positive outcomes this program has aorded them.

Areas or Improvement

Saety

Youths saety concerns prompted OFCO to contact DLR to request reviews and/or corrective action with

specic acilities. One acility we fagged as problematic was directed to take no urther placements until

a corrective action plan was devised and implemented; that acility reopened but has since been closed

again temporarily. Another two acilities OFCO fagged as problematic have been closed. At OFCOsrequest, a ourth acility is being reviewed by DLR or the pattern o reerrals and ongoing concerns

identied in DLR investigations, at OFCOs request. A th acility has received a combination o coaching

and corrective action by DLR to improve the saety o residents.

Basic needs

It is unacceptable that several youth identied that they had unmet physical needs such as clothing,

personal hygiene items, decent ood, and cleanliness o the acility in general. Any such problems

reported by youth should receive priority attention rom DLR.

Sta Supervision & Capacity

OFCO ound that the state requirements or ratio o sta to residents and credentials o sta did not meet

recommended COA standards. A high concentration o youth with challenging behaviors who are being

managed by unskilled sta.

Give me more reedom, but give me boundaries too!

The apparent contradiction in both the large number o responses indicating a desire or greater reedom,

and the number o responses indicating a desire or greater structure and airness can be seen as

2 3


28/32

developmentally typical o adolescents, and warrants urther exploration by policymakers and individual

group homes to nd the ideal balance or these competing needs. The ideal balance to be achieved is so

dependent upon the age group, treatment population, and the structure and type o acility; it might be

impossible and in act undesirable to have a one size ts all policy dictating what this balance should

look like. This appears to be an area where highly successul or more experienced acilities may have

lessons to share with less experienced and less successul homes (such as homes with a high runawayrate or a high level o complaints rom residents). Ater most o our visits, we were let with a clear

impression o either general contentment or general dissatisaction among residents.

Social and emotional needs

Youths desire or much more attention to their emotional, social and recreational needs came through loud

and clear in the survey comments and in the group discussions. The yearning or connection with amily

and riends as well as with sta and residents, or youth who elt that was lacking, was painully evident.

Given the history o abuse or neglect that so many o the youth in outohome care have, the need or

therapeutic connections is great, and should receive high priority, regardless o whether or not the youth

are in a treatment acility.

Privacy

The act that over hal the youth elt their privacy was either not respected or only sometimes respected by

sta in group homes, begs urther inquiry into what privacy means to these youth and how privacy can be

better protected while still protecting youths saety and wellbeing. This area could be urther explored

by OFCO in uture visits to other group homes.

Interracial tension between youth

The high number o youth (almost one in our) reporting that they eel dierently treated by other residents

because o their race is concerning and warrants urther exploration. Various levels o interventions could

be considered, rom simply increasing the level o monitoring o resident interactions by group home sta,

to increasing the level o sta intervention in racially discriminatory statements or behaviors between

residents. On a broader level, group homes with higher levels o interracial tension should consider

providing educational programs or youth to promote racial tolerance.

Youth rights and access to inormationLack o inormation regarding their group home, their rights, resources available (including attorneys and

CASAs) and their case plan was a common theme or many youth. It was also clear that youth eel they

have little to no choice regarding where they are placed and who provides them with services. While

choice is a luxury seldom available given the scarcity o placements and services in general, where choices

are possible, youth should be given options.

Unortunately, our survey question regarding youths knowledge o their rights combined the more general

concept o rights with the more specic grievance process. As a result, while it was encouraging to see

2 4


29/32

that threequarters o the youth reported knowing their rights and the grievance process, in the group

discussions youth were more inclined to discuss the specic grievance process related to complaints about

their group home, and appeared to have more knowledge o this than o their rights in general.

In instances when OFCO investigated a youths complaint that they lacked specic inormation (such as

who their attorney or CASA was), the youths caseworkers oten reported that the youth had been provided

with the inormation in question. It may be useul to explore ways in which this inormation can be more

eectively provided to youth, and to ensure that youth ully understand the important inormation they

need to advocate or themselves.

Planning or the uture

Given the range o ages in this sample, the act that hal the youth reported receiving assistance in

planning or the uture is encouraging. The new CA policy regarding independent living planning or

youth ages 15 and older should result in an increased ocus on this important transition planning or youth

in care.

RecommendationsRecommendations or the Childrens Administration and other stakeholders in the childwelare system:

1. Prioritize youths need or basic essentials. Complaints or concerns expressed by youth about

unmet basic needs such as ood, clothing, personal hygiene items, and basic cleanliness and main-

tenance o acilities should be addressed and given high priority by caseworkers, DLR, and others

responsible or the youth and acility

2. Improve saety and quality o care by reducing the minimum social service stafng ratio.

Minimum social service stang ratios or group homes should be lowered, rom the current ration

o 1:25, to the ratios specied in COA standards o 1:15.58 This would enable sta to provide and

implement more careully tailored service and treatment plans or the youth in their care.59 Revise

the minimum qualifcations or group home child care sta to meet COA standards. This

would require all youth care workers to have a bachelors degree or to be actively pursuing a degree.

Compensation should refect the educational qualications and experience o sta and allow or

successul recruitment and retention o a skilled workorce. Ensure that sta (and caseworkers)

receive ongoing training and supervision,60 including on matters such as a youths right to receive

and make private phone calls.

58 WAC 3881480610; COA standard PAGLS 14.05, Ibid.59 Although current policy regarding stang ratios or direct care o youth is in line with Council on Accreditation standards or

group care (i.e. 1:8), since many youth raised this as a concern [what kind o an issuesaety or supervision?], this warrants urther

inquiry. It may be that required stang ratios are not consistently being ollowed by some group homes, or that this ratio is

insucient in the homes serving youth with more severe behavior problems. 60 COA standard PAGLS 14.04, ONLINE. Available:www.coastandards.org/standards.php [3 Aug. 2008]

2 5
http://www.coastandards.org/standards.phphttp://www.coastandards.org/standards.php


30/32

3. Empower youth by engaging them in all decision making regarding changes in their case plans

and placement in a timely manner (give consideration to the manner in which the individual youth

is best able to understand and absorb this kind o inormation, e.g. written versus verbal, telephone

versus acetoace, etc. I the youth disagrees with the case plan, their attorney should be brought

into the decision making process); by distributing to them a publication that describes their

legal rights and the dependency process61 (and a poster with such inormation to be posted ineach group home, with publications providing OFCOs contact inormation); and by ensuring that

dependent youth have an attorney or CASA/GAL (preerably an attorney or youth ages 12 and

up) and know how to contact them. The youths attorney or CASA should be inormed about any

change in placement.

4. Ensure that each group home is continually supervised by an on-call, proessional social

service sta member available on a 24-hour basis, in alignment with the COA standards. Current

WACs regarding stang should be amended to require this.

5. Reauthorize the Foster Care to 21 program, i evaluation data rom the Washington State Institute

or Public Policy (WSIPP) conrms that this program is making a positive dierence in preparing youth

or their early adulthood and uture. 62

OFCO will continue its periodic visits to statelicensed group homes, with the goal o reaching each home

in the state. To increase direct contact rom youth about issues o concern to them, we will also mail fyers

to group homes to ensure that inormation about our services is easily accessible. These mailings will

include a letter to management to maintain sta awareness o OFCOs role as a resource or youth.

Recommendations or individual group homes:

1. Actively acilitate contact between youth and their sources o support; this should consist

o acetoace visits wherever possible. Push the bounds o what is convenient or the adults

this was a key need identied by youth. For youth who are placed distant rom their amily and

community in particular, eective communication needs to occur between the assigned caseworker,

the worker providing courtesy supervision o the placement, and the group care provider to assure

coordination o visits and services to the youth and amily.

2. Develop and implement a consistent process or providing youth with inormation in a

ormat they can understand when they frst arrive at a group home or enter into group

care. (Consider adopting the BRS guidelines or providing inormation/orientation to new residents,

61 The Mockingbird Society has recently issued a pamphlet designed to inorm youth about their rights. Mockingbird Society

is a nonprot organization based in Seattle committed to reorming public policy and law to better support oster youth and

caregivers. See http://www.mockingbirdsociety.org/62 WSIPP carries out nonpartisan research as directed by the Washington State Legislature. Pursuant to HB 2687 enacted in

2008, WSIPP will issue a preliminary report to the legislature on the success o youth transitioning out o oster care by September

1, 2008, and a nal report by December 31, 2008. see http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/

2 6
http:///reader/full/http://www.mockingbirdsociety.orghttp:///reader/full/http://www.wsipp.wa.govhttp:///reader/full/http://www.mockingbirdsociety.orghttp:///reader/full/http://www.wsipp.wa.gov


31/32

or all group homes.) Youth should understand their rights as well as their responsibilities.

3. Balance individual youths needs or independence with their need or supervision (possibly

by developing an individual plan tailored to each youths particular needs) to provide the least

restrictive environment or each youth where possible.

4. Ensure that the group homes phone policy is consistent with the legal rights o youth

under State law, i.e. that children in care have the right to private phone calls and letters unless

otherwise ordered by the court63. Educate sta on the policy to ensure that residents can exercise

their rights in this regard.

5. Actively solicit youth suggestions or improvement o daily routines, rules, structure, and

activities. In larger homes, provide opportunities or leadership by youth themselves in organizing

resident participation in the shaping o the homes policies, such as a youth advisory committee.

6. Consider introducing educational programs or both residents and sta to promote cross-

cultural understanding.64

ConclusionGroup care in Washington State is a study in contrasts. Our contact with youth highlighted sharp

dierences in the quality o group care across the state that did not appear to correlate to particular

regions o the state, size o home, or even to how physically pleasing the setting was. Instead, dierences

were related quite simply to the ability o the group home to enhance connections with the oster youth:

connection to sta; connection to riends and amilies; connection to other residents; connection to

proessionals who provide them support such as their social worker, lawyer, or CASA/GAL; and nally,connection to their uture. Without connection, youth elt marginalized and vulnerable. The good

news is that the youth were very articulate and insightul about what encourages connection: they

need to have their basic physical needs met; they need air sta looking out or them; they need to

have their privacy respected; they need opportunities to create riendships with other youth, and to

engage in activities and outings; they need to have contact with their amilies, lawyers, CASA/GALs,

and social workers. They valued structure and routine because this helped them to know what was

ahead, and helped to manage their expectations. They preerred being placed within their community so

that they could more easily have contact with riends and amily. Youth who did not have these thingscommunicated ear, powerlessness, and loss o selesteem.

63 WAC 388148042264 Two examples o widely used programs are the Undoing Racism workshop developed by the Peoples Institute or Survival and

Beyond [www.pisab.org], and the Teaching Tolerance program developed by the Southern Poverty Law Center [www.tolerance.

org].

2 7
http:///reader/full/understanding.64http:///reader/full/understanding.64http://www.pisab.org/http://www.tolerance.org/http://www.tolerance.org/http:///reader/full/understanding.64http://www.tolerance.org/http://www.tolerance.org/http://www.pisab.org/


32/32

This document is available in alternative ormats to accommodate persons with disabilities,and can be obtained by contacting

The Ofce o the Family and Childrens Ombudsman

Phone (206) 439-3870 Toll Free (800) 571-7321 TTY (206) 439-3789 Fax (206) 439-3877

WA Ombudsman, Group Care-What Youth Say About Living in a Group Home, 2007

Documents

Transcript of WA Ombudsman, Group Care-What Youth Say About Living in a Group Home, 2007