ABOUT CHILDREN'S

Back to Results

Quick Facts - Washington's Review

• This marks the first time the federal government has reviewed state child welfare programs using performance-based outcomes. The review process itself has changed since it began in 2000. The federal standards have raised the bar in child welfare practice across the country.
• 41 states have been reviewed since 2001, with reports issued. 32 states were reviewed in 2001 and 2002; nine in 2003, including Washington. None of the 41 assessed states have met all the federal standards.
• Only three of 44 local offices were included in Washington's on-site review. The CFSR team examined a total of 50 cases out of the approximately 25,000 cases receiving services each month across the state.
• Data for the review was gathered from October 2001 through September 2002. The case sample was pulled from cases open between October 2002 and May 2003. Some of these cases were closed early in 2003 and do not reflect current practice improvements.
• Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) cautions against using this data to judge the effectiveness of one state versus another. Comparisons among the states can be misleading because of variations in state laws, policies, definitions and data collection processes. Read report... (PDF, 115kb)
• Washington, like the other 41 states that completed the review, did not meet the federal standards in all areas examined by the reviewers.
• The reviewers identified many strengths in Washington, but found inconsistency in practice across the state. The reviewers also recognized that other systems (e.g., courts, mental health and substance abuse treatment) are factors in achieving permanency and well-being for children and families. We will be looking at these, and all the issues the reviewers identified, as we develop a program improvement plan.
• Washington was found to be in substantial conformity on four of the seven systemic factors. Washington met the federal standards for two of the six data indicators and was within five percent of meeting two others. Washington was not in substantial conformity on any of the seven child welfare outcomes-safety, permanency and well-being-assessed during the review.
• Many of the areas identified for improvement can be addressed through reprioritizing existing resources. Some new resources may be required to solve larger issues such as the accessibility and availability of mental health services, increasing court capacity and representation to help achieve more timely permanence for children. Additional resources may also be required to increase visitation between parents and children and to increase the face-to-face time between social workers and children and families. It is important that we take the time necessary and ensure we get community involvement in assessing the resources we need.
• Financial penalties are a possibility for all states that do not implement a successful program improvement plan. Penalties are one percent of the federal funds for each of the 14 areas that are not in substantial conformity with federal requirements. Washington could have an initial deferred penalty of $1.5 million if we have not demonstrated significant improvement when the state is reassessed in two years.