Earlier ParentalRepresentation:

Engaging Parents inChild Welfare Cases

Judge Darlene Byrne– Travis County Model Court for Children and

Families Vivek S. Sankaran

– Clinical Assistant Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School

October 22, 2010

Parent Representation Pilot

Project

A Project of the Travis County Model Court for Children and Families

Lead Judge, Darlene Byrne

Background – Travis County, TX Many parents’ first contact with

the court system is the first court hearing, which occurs 14 days after the removal of the child.

In majority of cases, that’s when parents request appointed attorney.

Indigency/Eligibility is usually determined at that 1st hearing.

Background – Travis County, TX For Parents, we have:

– Travis County Office of Parental Representation

4 Attorneys & Support staff Usually Represent the Primary Parent

– Private Attorney Appointment Wheel 30-40 Attorneys Subset of these attorneys were trained

to take cases off the Pilot Project

Why Early Appointment? OJJDP says: “The earlier the appointment occurs,

the sooner the interests of the parent begin to be represented. Early appointment may enable the case to proceed faster, minimizing the length of separation between parent and child and clearing the way for delivery of needed services earlier rather than later.”i]

[i] U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Court Performance Measures in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases: Technical Guide, Published December 2008, From “Measure 3D: Early Appointment of Counsel for Parents”, page 104. Available online at: http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/publications/courttoolkit.html

Tracking Appointments

PM 3D – Early Appointment of Counsel for Parents

Measures how early parents’ advocates are appointed and whether these appointments are made early enough in the process to allow for meaningful participation in the first hearing.[i]

[i] See Generally “Measure 3D: Early Appointment of Counsel for Parents” Court Performance Measures in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases: Technical Guide, Published December 2008 by U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, available online at: http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/publications/courttoolkit.html

Q’s - What are Benefits of Early Appointments ?

– more informed decision making?– improved parent understanding and

involvement in the filed case?– improved family finding efforts earlier in

the case? – reduced impact of disproportionality in

the child welfare system in Travis County?

– cost savings to the taxpayers of the County in the area of legal fees paid for indigent representation?

In a Nutshell

The Parent Representation Pilot Project is an Effort to assign pilot project attorneys to all parents named in a CPS petition as quickly as possible after the signing of the order authorizing removal of the child or court-ordered services.

History of Pilot Project

Started in September, 2009– Initially was to Expire in October,

2009

Continued through April, 2010

Total of 70 cases and 151 Parent Appointments.

Pilot Appointments are Limited in Scope

These pilot project attorney appointments are limited in scope to allow only for consultation with the parent client regarding their eligibility for appointed counsel.

Appointment Ltd in Scope

–ONLY for purpose of consultation regarding eligibility for an attorney under Texas Family Code § 107.013.

–Includes assistance with completing an affidavit of indigence.

Appointment Ltd in ScopeDoes NOT include:

–filing of an answer–any other action, appearance, or representation taken beyond the presentation of an Affidavit of Indigence to the Court; or

–any in-court appearance.

Appointment Ltd in Duration

EXPIRES AUTOMATICALLY at 8:00am on the Morning of the First Hearing

Pilot Appointment can become Full Appointment If the parent is eligible for

an appointed attorney, the pilot project creates a mechanism to allow full appointment to be made easier and more quickly.

Parent can arrive at the First Hearing prepared with counsel

How it Works

Every Day at around 2:00pm, Judge Byrne holds Ex Parte Hearings on CPS cases.

All parents named in the Petition (including Alleged Fathers and Presumed fathers) are provided a Pilot Project Attorney.

Certain Cases Excluded: the Department is only seeking an

Order in Aid of Investigation; the allegations are a Refusal to Accept

Parental Responsibility; the reason for the allegations of abuse

or neglect result in a simultaneous criminal investigation; or

Judge Byrne does not preside over the ex parte hearing.

How Appointments are Made in the Pilot Primary Parents are assigned

to OPR on a Pilot Basis. All other parents named in the

Petition are assigned an attorney from a List of Pilot Project Attorneys.

Notification of Appointment Judge Byrne or staff notifies the

District Attorney’s office, the OPR, each appointed pilot project attorney and the AAL of these attorney appointments, usually SAME DAY.

The District Attorney’s office emails electronic versions of the relevant pleadings in each case to all appointed counsel and the court.

Actions by Pilot Attorney Attorney obtains contact

information for their client from the Petition, the Department, or other reasonable means.

Attorney attempts to contact client to determine whether client desires to request court appointed counsel under Texas Family Code §107.013.

If the Pilot Project attorney makes contact with the parent and the parent desires to request a court-appointed attorney,

– Attorney Assists the client in executing an “Affidavit of Indigence and Request for Court-Appointed Attorney”.

– Attorney Submits Affidavit to Court Staff via email (with cc’s to all other parties).

If the attorney can’t make contact w/ the client before the Expiration of the Limited Purpose Appointment,

1. Attorney should not appear at the first hearing. The attorney may present the Court with a proposed dismissal order or allow the limited-purpose appointment to expire on its own terms.

Results so Far

Of the 151 Pilot Appointments…– 56.6%: Full Apptmt BEFORE 1st

Hearing– 19.8%: Full Apptmt DAY OF 1st

Hearing– 1.3%: Hired Private Counsel– 0.66% Did NOT QUALIFY for Full

Apptmt– 9.9% - Pilot Apptmt Expired and No

indication in file that Parent ever received Full Appointment

Results so Far

Of the 9.9% (15 Appointments) - for whom Pilot Apptmt Expired and No indication in file that Parent ever received Full Appointment… 1 Parent was ruled out as the Father 1 case was Dismissed at 1st hearing 1 case was Transferred out of Jurisdiction

at the 1st hearing Majority of rest appear to be absentee

parents

Comparison of Results

Pilot Project: 89% of Parents Represented by Counsel

– 77.5% Attorney Apptd ON or BEFORE Day of 1st Hrg

– 10.5% Attorney Apptd AFTER 1st Hrg 10.6% of Parents NOT Represented by

Counsel– All Cases (including Pilot Project):

75% of Parents Represented by Counsel– 67.3% Attorney Apptd ON or BEFORE Day of 1st

Hrg– 8% Attorney Apptd AFTER 1st Hrg

24.7% of Parents NOT Represented by Counsel

Impact on Relative Placement For Pilot Project cases:

– Of 90 children in cps conservatorship

58.9% in parent / relative / kinship placement

41.1% in other (non-relative) placement

For All of Travis County*:– Of 702 children in cps

conservatorship 31.7% in parent / relative / kinship

placement 68.3% in other (non-relative) placement

(Source – Texas Department of Family and Protective Services – Data is Snapshot of Child Placements on 7/31/10)

One Lesson Learned – New Affidavit of Indigence Aff First Developed in September, 2007 Now a few Changes:

– Added lines for parents to include their mailing address and telephone number.

– Modified the question which asks for # of dependents 

– Removed a confusing question.– Included a line specifically for TANF,

foodstamps, and/or WIC

Cost of Pilot

Average Cost $203.75 per Appointment:2.68 Avg Atty Hours at

$75/hourPlus $2.75 Avg Addtl Fees

per Apptmt

Hope is that this Investment will Improve Outcomes… Still Tracking

Only 13 of the 70 Cases have Closed to date…– 3 due to Dismissal– 9 due to Legal Permanency

Relative Placement– 1 due to Transfer out of

Jurisdiction

We will continue to analyze results for…

– Lessons Learned Anecdotal vs. Data / Evidence-

based

– Challenges– Benefits– Trends/Costs over time

For More Information on the Travis County Parent Representation Pilot Project… Please contact Judge Byrne’s

Court Operations Officer:Ms. Rene Salinas

Ph. (512) 854-9870rene.salinas@co.travis.tx.us

THE DETROIT CENTER FOR FAMILY ADVOCACY

AN INITIATIVE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LAW SCHOOL

HTTP://WWW.LAW.UMICH.EDU/CENTERSANDPROGRAMS/CCL/CFA

Old Paradigm – Nancy Colon’s Story

Safety Concern Removal Foster

Care

New Paradigm

Safety Concern Collaborative Problem Solving

Child remains with family

A Unique Approach: Upstream Advocacy to Reduce the Number of Children in Foster Care

Old Model: Providing parents legal assistance after families are separated

Comprehensive legal and social services can prevent the number of children that enter the foster care system

New Model: Providing families with Multidisciplinary Advocacy prior to and in order to prevent family separation– Attorney– Social Worker– Parent Advocate

Why is pre-petition advocacy important?

Who are we

Founded in July 2009 Project of the University of Michigan Law School, Child

Advocacy Law Clinic Funded by private/public partnership Based in Detroit – focus on the Osborn neighborhood Provide multidisciplinary legal, social work, parent

advocacy to families to reduce the number of children in foster care

Staff – 3 attorneys, social worker, parent advocate, legal assistant

Two types of cases – prevention and permanency Close collaboration with the DHS Evaluation Component

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Too many children enter careToo many children stay in careTreatment of children while in care is inadequateToo many legal orphansProspects of children aging out of care are troublingAny attempt to reform foster care must begin with reducing the number of children in foster careKids need families. Families need not be perfect.

What we do – Prevention Cases Provide legal, social work and parent advocacy

to parents to prevent the unnecessary entry of children into foster care.

Criteria-CPS substantiates case as Category I, II or III-Child(ren) residing with parent, guardian or custodian-Legal services are expected to help parent, guardian or custodian provide a safe and stable home for the child

Common Legal Barriers

Landlord-Tenant Public Benefits Domestic Violence Special education Custody Guardianship Power of Attorney Expungements/Criminal History

Social Work Barriers

Housing Public Benefits Day Care Securing Move-In Expenses Appliances / Furniture Utilities “Shut-Off” / Account Openings Employment Medical Insurance Educational Needs Afterschool Programs

Where we get our cases from Referral Sources (Non-Exhaustive)

– DHS – MAIN SOURCE– Court– Private child-placing agencies– Self-referrals– Family Members/Friends– Mental Health Professionals– Community Agencies– Churches/Clergy

Our Team - Attorney

Develops legal strategy to address concerns of the DHS

Advocates on Behalf of Client with DHS

Initiates Court Action on Behalf of Client

Negotiates/Advocates on Behalf of Client with Adverse Parties

Our Team – Social Worker Identifies Resources for Client

Makes Referrals for Client

Advocates on Behalf of Client to Obtain Resources

Provides Emotional Support

Promotes Client Empowerment

Our Team – Parent Advocate Helps Clients Understand and Navigate “The

System”

Helps Lawyer and Social Worker “Read” Client

Helps Team Members Understand Practical Implications of Situation

Provides Emotional Support

Facilitates Client Empowerment

Leads the “parent café”

Client-centered approach“What can you do to live the life you have always imagined for you and your children?”

“How can we help you get there?”

Examples of our work

Early Data - Prevention

Served 68 children/23 families All children substantiated by the

DHS as being abused or neglected

Closed the cases of 9 families

None of the children have entered the foster care

system

The Detroit Center for Family Advocacy (CFA) Contact/Visit Us

– 3031 W. Grand Blvd, Suite 440, Detroit, MI 48202

– Osborn Satellite Office, 13560 East McNichols, 48205

– 313-875-4233 (phone)– lawdetroitcfa@umich.edu– http://www.law.umich.edu/

centersandprograms/ccl/cfa