Indiana Department of Child Services Unveils More Cuts To Abuse Prevention

I’ve written repeatedly about how the Indiana Department of Child Services (DCS) held back its FY 2008 child fatality task force report for nearly two years.

When DCS released it, it revealed the number of child fatalities increased by 10, from 36 to 46 over the prior reported year, which Governor Daniels touted during his campaign. (We still don’t have a report for FY 2009, though it ended in July of last year, and I anticipate it will have at least as many fatalities as the 2008 report).

I hypothesized that the reason for DCS' evasion was because they knew that if lamakers saw the increase in child deaths, they might want to stop any agency cuts to abuse prevention services. For this reason, I said you shouldn't expect the report to materialize until after the legislative session ended.

As regular readers know, I was right. Even though, by DCS’ own admission the report was "published" in January, it wasn’t released until April 1, 2010. The General Assembly adjourned on March 13.

Well, guess what? The Evansville Courier & Press reports today:

The state is further cutting the budget of a successful program that provides counseling to families at risk of child abuse and neglect, leaving it with about a third less of the annual funding that it received just a few months ago.

Funding for the Healthy Families program, slashed from $42 million to $35 million earlier this year, will drop to $27.9 million for federal fiscal year 2011 that begins October 1 and to $24.7 million in 2012, Director Jim Payne of the Department of Child Services told program managers Monday.

Does anybody think legislators at the Indiana General Assembly would have let the first cut go, let alone the additional reduction, if they had known the real number of child abuse and neglect fatalities in Indiana?

In my opinion, putting the stats in a hole for budget protectionism is the most inexcusable act of Director Payne’s tenure.

Well, except for the cuts themselves. When we get the FY 2010 numbers in 2012, you'll see I was right. Actually, make that 2013. You might not get any more child fatality numbers until Governor Daniels is secure in his next job.

Indiana Department of Child Services Unveils More Cuts To Abuse Prevention

Why Do Governor Daniels' People at the Department of Child Services Lie About Stupid Stuff? Here's Why.

I have now written not once, not twice, but three times about the Indiana Department of Child Services' failure to produce a


child fatality report for the 2008 and 2009 fiscal years.

I hypothesized that DCS would not release a report before the Indiana General Assembly session ended in 2010.

I stated that DCS would sit on the report because it knew that if the child death numbers went up, legislators might want to actually spend money on children or might want to slow DCS' efforts to cut costs with service providers.

I also said the Governor would look foolish for all the boasting he did during his re-election campaign about how adding family case managers would mean better outcomes if, as I predicted, the numbers rose from the all-time low of 36 deaths in FY 2007.

Call me iPOPAdamus.

After only 643 days, the new report is here. The child abuse and neglect fatality number for FY 2008? An increase of 10, to 46.

In fairness to DCS, sometimes no matter what the agency, police, churches, schools, service providers, judges, guardians ad litem, or kind strangers do, children will be killed by evil parents. There's not always a tell-tale sign for the homicidal parent.

But if you strongly imply you're saving kids by adding 800 government employees to the state payroll then it's fair game to ask whether those new case managers are properly trained or whether the agency has a massive turnover rate, or whether DCS is paying millions to service providers for parents without any method for assessing whether the services even work...because it sure isn't working out like you claimed, Governor.

DCS' 2007 report makes a point of noting that not only did the overall number of child abuse and neglect fatalities decrease from 53 to 36, but also that the number of deaths among children with DCS contact went down from 11 to 9.

In the new report, the number of fatalities with DCS contact rose to 15.

Recognizing the obvious, how does DCS respond?

The rise in fatalities from 2007 to 2008 is in part attributed to the collaborative effort to report all child fatalities. Overall, 198 deaths were reviewed in 2007 and 290 were reviewed in 2008. There is an increased awareness in child welfare professionals such as police, coroners, and hospitals personnel who are working together to report all unexpected, unexplained, and suspicious child deaths to DCS.

In other words, DCS is telling you there were just more reports made.

I certainly won't dispute that, but doesn't DCS have to acknowledge that there might have been 66 abuse and neglect deaths in 2006, not 36? Isn't it admitting, point blank, that it has no idea how many actual deaths have occurred in the past because of the very underreporting it acknowledges for 2007? Even now, couldn't the the number be higher for 2008 than 46, given that the additional reporting is based on a PR "collaborative" effort to report deaths, not legislation creating a statewide mandate to law enforcement, hospitals, and the like to report the same?

Doesn't DCS have to admit that Dr. Antoinette Laskey, director of the task force, is right that Indiana will never truly know how many children die at the hands of abuse and neglect until such a mandatory protocol exists for investgating all children's deaths and the state child fatality review team has a budget for performing its work?

But here is what's really interesting. If you read the DCS report cover page, you will see that it says "Published January 2010."

If this report was published in January of 2010, how come when I called in January, February, and March, I was told the report wasn't ready, and why is the report being released to the media on April Fool's Day? From DCS's press release:

Indianapolis, IN- April is Child Abuse Prevention Month and it is a time to remind everyone the importance of prevention and child safety. In conjunction with Child Abuse Prevention Month, the Indiana Department of Child Services (DCS) 2008 Child Fatality Report was released today.

Is there anything that could account for the delay in issuing a "published" report?

Oh, did I tell you when the Indiana General Assembly adjourned? March 13.

Yeah, call me iPOPAdamus.

Why Do Governor Daniels' People at the Department of Child Services Lie About Stupid Stuff? Here's Why.

Hey, Indiana Department of Child Services...DAYS PAST DUE:

613!

But that's not surprising, given my prediction that nothing would be released until the session was over to prevent legislators from doing anything.

But what if my cynicism just isn't cynical enough?

What if the truth is that no new report will be released until the numbers of child fatalities go back up to the low year touted in all of Governor Daniels' campaign commercials? Heck, we might not get another report before Daniels is out of office. If this thing blows apart at the seems, it could hurt his national ambitions, be they presidential or RNC Chair-ish.

Hey, Indiana Department of Child Services...DAYS PAST DUE:

DCS: If The Public Were a Library, You'd Owe Some Hefty Fines

Back on December 29, 2009, I wrote how the Indiana Department of Child Services (DCS) has not produced a child fatality task force report for fiscal years 2008 or 2009, though we’re now in 2010.

If lawmakers cannot assess our progress and challenges in child protection, they cannot suggest changes to those priorities or funding, which might very well be why this doesn't seem to be a DCS priority. DCS ostensibly knows more about how we're doing than anybody, but for some reason, it can't (or won't) get a report to the public.

Accordingly, in the (dashed) hopes that these reports come out before the session ends (they won’t), I am introducing a new iPOPA feature called: “Days Past Due.”

Whenever you see that phrase in a blog post, it refers to the number of days past the end of fiscal year 2008 before completion of these reports.

DAYS PAST DUE: 584

DCS: If The Public Were a Library, You'd Owe Some Hefty Fines

Idle Speculation About Child Abuse Deaths?

Normally, I use this blog to persuade you, valiant reader. Today, I'm going to provide facts and let you reach your own conclusions.

1. There are two annual publications of note in Indiana that deal with child abuse and neglect fatalties.

2. One report, which has no title, is prepared by the multi-disciplinary State Child Fatality Review Team, chaired by Dr. Antoinette Laskey, a forensic pediatrician from Riley Hospital for Children & the IU School of Medicine.

3. One report, entitled, "Child Abuse & Neglect Annual Report of Child Fatalities," is prepared by the Indiana Department of Child Services (DCS).

4. The reports review causes of "reported" child abuse and neglect deaths and provide recommendations to policymakers to lower the number.

5. Each report runs in state fiscal years. The "2007 report" covers from July 1, 2006, to June 30, 2007, which makes calling it the "2007 report" a misnomer. (This sounds like boring accounting goobledygunk, but it will be important later).

6. Among the "reported" fatalities, Indiana made a pretty drastic improvement for state fiscal year 2007. Going back the past five years, the annual reported abuse and neglect fatalities are as follows:

SFY 2003 - 51
SFY 2004 - 57
SFY 2005 - 57
SFY 2006 - 56
SFY 2007 - 36

7. The time it takes DCS to produce/release its report varies. It's quickest time to go public was 6 months in 2003. The longest time it has taken to produce a report is....this year. The clock is about to strike 2010, and DCS still has not produced its report for FY 2008, which ended 18 months ago.

8. In 2008, Governor Mitch Daniels ran for re-election.

9. DCS issued the SFY 2007 report in March of 2008, or only nine months after the close of the 2007 fiscal year. This was faster than 2005 (11 months) or 2006 (14 months).

10. Governor Mitch Daniels' campaign website issued a press release in April of 2008 touting the reduction in child abuse and neglect fatalties to 36. This release, in the same paragraph, celebrated the hiring of 800 new family case managers (a process which began in 2005).

11. The Governor's press release noted that that only 9 of the 36 kids who died had contact with DCS.

12. The general public has no precise idea how Indiana (and DCS) has done since July of 2007, as no report has been issued for the 2008 or 2009 SFYs. (Sure, we've seen child deaths in the paper, but that's hardly comprehensive).

13. If DCS completed its report in six months, as it did in 2003, we would know how we did for both SFY 2008 and 2009, specifically, whether there were more than 36 fatalities in either year, or whether more than 9 children were killed who had contact with DCS in either year.

14. What we learn in those reports might or might not serve as a compelling rationale for legislative funding. In the Governor's own press release, it states:

(Dr. Laskey) questioned whether the 36 child deaths reported Monday was truly an accurate number.

“I just don’t know what that number is,” said Laskey, a forensic pediatrician at Riley Hospital for Children and the IU School of Medicine. “I don’t know what that number means without looking at all the child deaths.”

The group issued a report last month that said the lack of financial support from the state and lack of a fatality network has severely curtailed the scope of child fatality review in Indiana.

Many states review every child death (including all natural deaths) each year,” the group’s report said. “Thorough reviews of all deaths have led to improved knowledge an prevention programs with measurable outcomes. Indiana needs to rise to this level.”

Child Services Director James Payne said some states try to review all child fatalities, not just those documented as abuse and neglect.

“We hope to be able to get to that,” he said. “There is an issue of commitment of persons not only by the department, but commitments of law enforcement and others. There is an issue of funding that has to go with that, but our goal ultimately is to look at all cases.”

15. James Payne runs the Department of Child Services. If there is an issue of "commitment" of persons in the department, he can remedy it or fire people.

16. James Payne has been an actively lobbyist for DCS at the Indiana General Assembly, and DCS has its own lobbyist. The Governor and Director Payne both have legislative liaisons.

17. Knowing the ways Indiana children have been dying over the past two fiscal years might serve as a clarion call for funding, legislative changes, or both at the current Indiana General Assembly session.

18. For example, if deaths from parents sleeping with their children have risen in either of those years, even by one, someone might rethink the decision to cut the public service announcement budget by 63% for ads warning against this practice.

19. The last report issued by Dr. Laskey's team in February of 2008 says the following:

"Many recommendations in this year’s report mirror those made for SFY2005."

20. The only way recommendations from a 2008 report would be made again is if nothing changed in 2007.

Are we really better at protecting children, or was SFY 2007 an anomoly? We still don't know. Let's hope we are as good as advertised and that an opportunity to make things better hasn't been squandered.

Idle Speculation About Child Abuse Deaths?

He Must Have Read Ipopa!?!?

Is DCS Director, Judge James Payne, even more ingenius then I thought?

The day after I asserted Judge Payne messed up by killing the ombudsman bill and leaving open the prospect of a stronger bill next year, State Senator Brent Waltz (R-not real sure) pulled a Lazarus and popped it back into the budget bill. Advocates for stronger DCS oversight talked to Senator Waltz, so it's unclear why he would have used language nobody favored except DCS unless.....ohhhhh! Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm!"

I wanted to make sure I'd grasped all the nuances in the bill, so I read it again. I hadn't. It's worse than I thought.

Say the ombudsman investigates a complaint and finds it has merit. He or she can now ask the agency to:

(1) ...consider the matter further; (I call this the "pretty please" option)
(2) ...modify or cancel its action;
(3) ...alter a rule, order, or internal policy; or
(4) ...explain more fully the action taken.

To say, "Thanks, but no thanks" to the ombudsman, all the agency needs to do is provide its reasons. Presumably, this would require more than, "We don't feel like it!" But who knows. Because of the confidentiality provisions in the statute, neither the general public nor the General Assembly gets the opportunity to critique the rationale offered by the agency (which is probably a good thing because even if it didn't like the rationale, there is no enforcement mechanism for putting the ombudsman's recommendations into effect).

Most of us would assume an agency that learns it has done something incorrectly would embrace a change of course once the information is brought to its attention. But were this so here, would we really need a statutory provision basically explaining how you tell the ombudsman to "shove it?"

This bill doesn't create a toothless tiger. It creates a toothless, blind tiger with chronic arthritisis.

He Must Have Read Ipopa!?!?

Is Judge James Payne Politically Savvy Enough to Be Governor?!?

Sometimes when you watch political events, you can't help but speculate on what goes on behind the scenes. This is true of the debate over an ombudsman for the Indiana Department of Child Services (DCS).

With the support of DCS Director, Judge James Payne, State Representative Charlie Brown's (D-Gary) ombudsman bill (HB 1602) cleared the House 98-0. This should have spelled trouble to advocates. You get unanimous support for resolutions like, "We declare clear air is sorta nice," not on bills giving power to dig into the inner workings of a governmental agency, and definitely not from the guy who runs that agency.

"This bill must hamstring the ombudsman," I told myself as I read it. Yep. Feeble. Not completely terrible, but gravely flawed. The keys to having a good ombudsman are: (1) independence; (2) access to needed information; and (3) public accountability, be it to the actual public or their elected representatives.

HB 1602 failed on the first count by (1) giving the Governor the authority to appoint and remove the ombudsman at his whim and (2) housing the ombudsman office under the Department of Administration, an agency controlled by the Governor. Ideally, an ombudman would be appointed by legislative leaders in consultation with the Governor.

Though he left appointing authority with the Governor, Senator Tim Lanane (D-Anderson) authored a superior bill. Using the Inspector General statute as a guide, Lanane's bill states that an ombudsman, once appointed by the Governor, would serve a term of years equal to that of the Governor. In addition, he or she could only be removed for malfeasance, and his or her salary could not be cut during the term of service. Senator Lanane wasn't reinventing the independence wheel; his bill drew from Federalist Paper No. 48. How could these notions be controversial, unless your goal is to NOT provide independent review or investigation? His bill never moved.

On access, HB 1602 had no subpoena power for third-party records, and it only permited access to records from governmental agencies. On public accountability, the bill required the ombudsman to report to the complainant only. But there was no requirement for even a cursory result of the investigation to be provided to members of the Indiana General Assembly, or the public, even if the complainant agreed. Why not permit legislators to review the reports for their constituents? (Of course, I suppose the complainants could "go public" with their results).

So, a frail bill went to the senate judiciary committee, and inexplicably, got weakened. In the senate version, the ombudsman reported directly to the FSSA commissioner. BUT (and here's the weird part), the duties of the ombudsman, which initially included nothing more than "investigate complaints" and "write a report," are expanded to include:

(1) establish a public education program to secure and ensure the legal rights of children;

(2) periodically review DCS policies and procedures, with a view toward the safety and welfare of children

(3) recommend changes in procedure for investigating report of abuse or neglect and overseeing the welfare of children under juvenile court jurisdiction; and my personal favorite...

(4) examine policies and procedures and evaluate the effectiveness of the child protection system, specifically the roles of DCS, the court, the medical community, service providers, guardians ad litem, CASA, and law enforcement agencies. (If this last one isn't an effort by DCS to give the ombudsman the authority to throw blame on everybody else, I don't know what is!).

This amended bill passed 9-0, but instead of going to the Senate floor, it got re-routed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senator Kenley scheduled a hearing, at which Representative Brown testified that all of the amendments in the Senate version were made after consultation with DCS.

WHAT?!?!? Why would DCS EXPAND the ombudsman's statutory duties?

Stay with me. If you limit an ombudsman's authority to JUST investigating complaints, that's what he or she MUST do. Give him broader authority to tweak your internal operations, and he or she can basically do whatever he or she wants. What starts out as oversight of DCS ends up being a potential $454,000 allocation for additional DCS staff. The ombudsman can even take this money and do a PR campaign to recruit more guardian ad litem volunteers.

Were I a cynic (which is like saying, "were I me"), I would point to the political genius of Judge Payne and advise that this man has the savvy to run for Governor. Judge Payne clearly smelled the air of ombudsman inevitability. As the advocates gained steam in their rock pushing, he ran alongside voicing Mark Anthony-style support, and at the key moment, he redirected the rock to a new target.

At the appropriations hearing, Judge Payne said DCS supported the bill, but any objective observer could tell he didn't, as he undercut his own testimony by telling Senator Kenley that he understood the budget is tight and funding the ombudsman will be difficult. It's a wink and nod between two political heavyweights, and it was breath-takingly effective. At the end of the hearing, Senator Kenley killed HB 1602 by failing to put it to a vote.

As I testified after Judge Payne on the bill, though, I found myself in a weird place...agreeing with Senator Kenley's ultimate decision. To do the ombudsman function meaningfully, you have to have a decent budget, and we're talking about $150,000. I realize in the moment that certain death for this bill is best, and I'm tempted as I'm leaving the table to blurt out, "Give the $150,000 to Child Advocates!" (At least then we can get guardian ad litems on all Marion County CHINS cases from the start).

I have no sadness that this bill has died. Sham review or investigation is the same as no review or investigation, in my mind.

But I realize that maybe Judge Payne did his job TOO well. Had the watered down bill passed, when advocates asked for tweaking next year, legislators would have likely said, "Why are you still crying?!? We gave you a bill last year!?!"

At least now advocates can try to draft a reinvigorated bill. But advocates have a worthy adversary. It would be foolish to underestimate him.

Is Judge James Payne Politically Savvy Enough to Be Governor?!?

Stop Hiding the Truth With New Phrases

- I'm fascinated by the way people use language for PR purposes. In less than two years, every "liberal," "centrist," "Democratic-leaning," "DLC-oriented," or "diversity friendly" blog I regularly read has purged from its pages use of the phrase "illegal alien." Now, they're just "undocumented immigrants."

As I've said before, let's change the law, but until then, let's not act like there is no violation. Next time you're pulled over by a police officer, let me know how this one works out for you:

"I'm not speeding, officer. I'm just traveling at an 'undocumented' speed."

- But let me do you one better. The Indiana Department of Child Services has issued new statewide forms to be used in every case where a child is removed from a parent. As I'm reading the form, I come across the phrase "resource parent." You see, if you know that just since the summer, one "foster parent" in Marion County caused the death of Destiny Linden and another was charged with molest, the smartest thing to do is change the name to "resource parent." Basically, when your public image is horrible, and you're out of ideas for improving it, you change the name. It's kind of like when Phillip Morris changed its name to Altria to make people forget it was in the cigarette industry.

- On a related note, the White House declared today that President Bush has changed his legal name to "America is the Greatest."

Stop Hiding the Truth With New Phrases