ILNews

Indiana Department of Child Services urged to set course for new direction

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

With a new governor taking over Indiana’s executive branch in January, what changes, if any, will come to the Department of Child Services are unknown. However, some contend that should not stop the agency from addressing criticism and implementing new policies or programs now.

DCS, established in 2005, has faced a continuing barrage of outrage stemming from allegations that several children have died despite having been reported to the agency as being abused or neglected. It has also drawn ire for its centralized hotline and how it has handled children who have mental health issues.

cindy noe Noe

Currently, the Indiana General Assembly has two groups – the Indiana Commission on Mental Health and Addiction and the Department of Child Services Interim Study Committee – examining the agency, its policies and processes.

Sen. Travis Holdman, R-Markle, and Rep. Cindy Noe, R-Indianapolis, co-chairs of the interim study committee, have already outlined legislation regarding the hotline they intend to introduce during the next legislative session. Moreover, both have met with DCS Interim Director John Ryan and have encouraged him to move forward with addressing the concerns he can administratively.

In the three months remaining before a new governor takes the oath of office, Noe has recommended to Ryan that he first identify three to five of the most pressing issues and concentrate on finding resolutions or the pathway to a remedy. Then he should work toward putting these solutions into operation with the goal of having them in place by the end of the 2012.

Any new director will have to quickly gauge where the agency is headed then shepherd it in that direction rather than charting a new course, Holdman said. Upending the entire structure and changing direction would, in his words, be fatal.

Larry Landis, executive director of the Indiana Public Defender Council and member of the study committee, also advocated the agency be proactive in addressing concerns. He advised hiring an independent management consultant to do an objective, nonpartisan assessment of the organization, including its mission, priorities, strategic direction and operations, and then provide recommendations. These would be passed along to the next governor, giving the new administration a starting point.

He does not see the problems currently plaguing the agency as being beyond solutions.

“I think there are obviously a number of issues about DCS, but my guess is that is because of the difficult subject of what they are dealing with,” Landis said. “You’re never going to get it right all the time. … I don’t think the problems are insurmountable. I think they have to do an organizational reassessment.”

Tweaking the hotline

Neither Holdman nor Noe wants to dismantle the centralized hotline and return to the previous system, but they are calling for more involvement at the local level. A key provision in their proposed legislation would provide a separate line for community professionals such as police officers, judges, prosecutors, physicians, school personnel and mental health providers to use that would give them direct contact with the local child protective services branch.

travis holdman Holdman

The centralized hotline, Noe said, brings consistency and removes the unevenness in the screening process that had arisen when calls were handled at the local level. In addition, the current single hotline collects data that can be used to spot trends and help determine where best to focus the state’s resources.

“We have increased the efficiency,” she said. “We have done it in a way some people say is ineffective. I think what we need to do is adjust to where we find the sweet spot between trying to be efficient and effective.”

Adding a local element to the hotline would reduce the workload at DCS by separating out the calls from community professionals who traditionally have a better quality of information, Holdman said. Calls that come from people in the communities who work directly with children are substantiated at a rate that exceeds 80 percent. This compares to the tips from anonymous callers that are substantiated at a 17 percent rate.

The legislative proposal by Holdman and Noe also calls for more staff at the local and state levels to handle the incoming calls. Adding more personnel would lower the amount of work each individual has and may help reduce a turnover rate that Holdman estimated equates to three to four people walking out the door every month.

In a presentation before the study committee, the DCS proposed hiring an additional 92 workers with at least one intake specialist located in every local office along with hiring another 100 new family case managers.

The decision to introduce legislation that addresses issues with the hotline was “simply a judgment call,” Noe said. Handling the changes to the hotline administratively through rules raises the potential for tweaks and modifications to be made without the Legislature being aware.

However, Landis is skeptical of imposing a legislative solution, as doing so can limit any changes the DCS may need to make to improve the system.

“It’s premature for the Legislature to say we know what the problems are and we’re going to fix them through legislation,” Landis said.

CHINS 6

The outcry over DCS providing mental health services to children reached a peak in May when Morgan Circuit Court Judge Matthew Hanson wrote a scathing opinion, characterizing the agency as “refusing to handle mental health/disease cases as they should be” and charging that the system DCS uses for reviewing and filing CHINS 6 cases is broken.

Prosecutors contend that since the Legislature took away their ability to file Child In Need of Services petitions to get minors treatment for mental health and behavioral issues, these children are landing in court where the only option is to treat them as juvenile delinquents. In addition, some parents, desperate to get their child help, are having to declare themselves to be abusive or neglectful.

DCS is launching a pilot program in Lawrenceburg to address these concerns. In a presentation to the Indiana Commission on Mental Health and Addiction, the agency outlined its plan to rely on community mental health centers to assess the child and coordinate care. For children who need services but are not covered by private insurance or are not Medicaid eligible, DCS will step in and provide the funding.

Noe, who is also the chair of the commission, applauded the plan, saying it charts a new path because the child and parents will not have to become involved with DCS to receive services. School teachers, judges and other professionals in the community, along with the parents, will be able to recommend services for the minor.

While calling it innovative, Andrew Cullen, legislative liaison at the Indiana Public Defender Council, said the DCS proposal does not go far enough. The program will never be able to compel uncooperative children to participate in their mental health treatment, he said. Only the courts can do that and, therefore, prosecutors should be again given the ability to file CHINS 6 petitions.

Noe acknowledged she has not made up her mind regarding what to do about CHINS 6 petitions. She said she wants to get all the discussion on the table then find the places of obvious agreement before making a decision.

The Indiana Commission on Mental Health and Addiction’s last scheduled meeting is Oct. 15. The DCS Interim Study Committee is scheduled to have its final meeting Oct. 25.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT