A service of the Children’s Bureau, member of the T/TA Network CFSR/CFSP Coordinators Peer Network National Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement Responses to New Hampshire’s Request for Information on CQI Processes 07/17/2013 Request: Greetings CFSP/CFSP Coordinators Peer Network Members! Your colleagues in New Hampshire have requested your thoughts regarding the following: NH would be curious to hear what other states are doing now while we await further direction. Are other states redesigning their case review process, if so, how? Have they suspended case file reviews for the time being? What models of review or CQI methods are other states exploring to move forward with the ACF CQI IM? Have the pilot states selected for an "assessment" of their CQI systems been reviewed yet and if so, what are the outcomes? Any responses can be sent to my attention, as I will forward them along to the appropriate people. Thank you for your time and attention. Responses: Bernita Hamilton, Alaska- Alaska is continuing its case review process incorporating safety, permanency, and well being. We review each field office annually and the two largest urban field offices quarterly utilizing a slightly modified CFSR instrument. Regions are required to develop a program improvement plan in response to case review findings and other data findings. We are attempting to further develop our CQI process reflecting the federal information memorandum. We have an ongoing analysis of our system and a work plan to make changes. We are implementing a CQI panel for quarterly discussion with each region on their program improvement plan and the ongoing management of change. We have found the federal memorandum challenging but very helpful in examining and further developing our CQI processes. We think that while we await further guidance on the federal level that the concepts of safety, permanency, and well being in the case review process are solid. Katherine Guffey, Arizona -
A service of the Children’s Bureau, member of the T/TA Network CFSR/CFSP Coordinators Peer Network National Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement Responses to New Hampshire’s Request for Information on CQI Processes 07/17/2013 Request: Greetings CFSP/CFSP Coordinators Peer Network Members! Your colleagues in New Hampshire have requested your thoughts regarding the following: NH would be curious to hear what other states are doing now while we await further direction. Are other states redesigning their case review process, if so, how? Have they suspended case file reviews for the time being? What models of review or CQI methods are other states exploring to move forward with the ACF CQI IM? Have the pilot states selected for an "assessment" of their CQI systems been reviewed yet and if so, what are the outcomes? Any responses can be sent to my attention, as I will forward them along to the appropriate people. Thank you for your time and attention. Responses: Bernita Hamilton, Alaska- Alaska is continuing its case review process incorporating safety, permanency, and well being. We review each field office annually and the two largest urban field offices quarterly utilizing a slightly modified CFSR instrument. Regions are required to develop a program improvement plan in response to case review findings and other data findings. We are attempting to further develop our CQI process reflecting the federal information memorandum. We have an ongoing analysis of our system and a work plan to make changes. We are implementing a CQI panel for quarterly discussion with each region on their program improvement plan and the ongoing management of change. We have found the federal memorandum challenging but very helpful in examining and further developing our CQI processes. We think that while we await further guidance on the federal level that the concepts of safety, permanency, and well being in the case review process are solid. Katherine Guffey, Arizona -
IR%20CFSR%20Network%20Info%20Request%207-17-2013.docx