an overview georgia program improvement plan - Department of ...
an overview georgia program improvement plan - Department of ...
an overview georgia program improvement plan - Department of ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
perm<strong>an</strong>ency issues, but not labeling such hearing as a perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearing). Recent judicial training emphasized that perm<strong>an</strong>ency<br />
hearings must be done <strong>an</strong>d documented. A follow up study being conducted this summer <strong>an</strong>d will look for <strong>improvement</strong>. The 4 th Child<br />
Placement Conference is scheduled for November 2003.<br />
4 th Quarter Federal Response: This step is noted to be achieved based on completed trainings again. However, the measurable<br />
benchmark is that timely perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearings (PHs) will occur for each child. 3 rd QR (where the action step is noted as being<br />
achieved) shows that courts are not conducting PHs on a timely basis nor are they properly documenting these hearings. The step<br />
c<strong>an</strong>not be achieved unless each child has timely PHs…according to the action step <strong>an</strong>d benchmark. The State needs to continue to<br />
monitor this action step.<br />
5 th Quarter Report: The Court Improvement Project (CIP) has done <strong>an</strong>other review <strong>an</strong>d is preparing <strong>an</strong>other report based on that data<br />
which includes whether <strong>an</strong>d when perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearings are done. CIP will have the report completed by the next quarter. A draft<br />
document is attached, but it is not ready for public distribution. CIP also has the capacity built within the CPRS to mark when the<br />
perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearing is occurring, however that field is rarely completed, so we c<strong>an</strong>not produce a good report. We will seek better<br />
ways to collect data on this action step <strong>an</strong>d benchmark by next quarter's report.<br />
5 th Quarter DOCUMENTATION:<br />
Draft - Summer Assessment Review 2003 - A Snapshot <strong>of</strong> Juvenile Court Perform<strong>an</strong>ce in Child Deprivation Cases <strong>an</strong>d<br />
Recommendations for Continued Improvement.<br />
6 th Quarter Report: Efforts continued in monitoring the achievement <strong>of</strong> this benchmark. However, as reported in the 3 rd Quarter,<br />
documentation <strong>of</strong> a “perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearing” per se, is not always present in the court file <strong>an</strong>d/or is not clearly labeled as such. When the<br />
Court Improvement Project (CIP) conducted its 2003 case file review, the file documents did not clarify whether the hearing was just a<br />
review (extension <strong>of</strong> custody at 12 months) or when held, if the hearing also reflected a “perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearing” phase. It was estimated<br />
that only ½ <strong>of</strong> the cases had a distinct hearing that was referred to in the court file as a “perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearing.” Since there appears to<br />
be <strong>an</strong> issue with how such hearings are documented as “perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearings,” it is our next step to recommend that judges adopt the<br />
perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearing model order. It is specifically labeled <strong>an</strong>d provides findings for the hearing. Thus, when the court case files are<br />
sampled, the measurement will more accurately reflect the timeliness <strong>an</strong>d occurrence <strong>of</strong> perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearings.<br />
6 th Quarter Federal Response: D6: It is concerning that the State does not yet have the ability to accurately assess whether or not<br />
perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearings are occurring for children as m<strong>an</strong>dated by ASFA.<br />
7 th Quarter Report: The State shares the federal concern that perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearings are not being accurately tracked <strong>an</strong>d monitored<br />
via court files reviewed by the Court Improvement Project (CIP). Efforts continue to r<strong>an</strong>domly review court files. An instrument has<br />
been developed for courts to self-report @ http://www.objectresourcegroup.com/cpp/cpp.html. The CIP is also conducting interviews<br />
<strong>of</strong> judges around the state regarding perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearings. Also, a model order for a perm<strong>an</strong>ency hearing (developed by a group <strong>of</strong><br />
Safe Futures – A Pl<strong>an</strong> for Program Improvement<br />
Georgia <strong>Department</strong> <strong>of</strong> Hum<strong>an</strong> Resources<br />
November, 2004 Quarter 8 - Work Pl<strong>an</strong> D Page 9