ILNews

Indiana first in region to complete child welfare improvement plan

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Department of Child Services announced Thursday it has received word from Region V of the Administration of Child and Families, an affiliate of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, that it has satisfactorily finalized its Program Improvement Plan.

The PIP was required as a result of a 2007 federal review of state child welfare cases. All 50 states are required to complete the three-fold review, comprised of statewide assessments, on-site analysis of a random number of various cases and a review of child welfare practice data. The review indicated the state was not meeting several key compliance steps, including adoption, training and the availability of services necessary to reunify children and families.

DCS developed a proposal which included 11 data goals and 133 compliance steps necessary to meet and exceed the federal assessment benchmarks. In 2009, DCS began implementing its PIP into practice. On Oct.18, the Chicago Region V office of the Administration of Children and Families informed DCS that it had successfully completed the program.

“This is an important milestone for Indiana’s children and families,” said James W. Payne, DCS Director. “The completion of the PIP highlights the continued evolution of the state’s child welfare system but also demonstrates the commitment of the men and women working each day to ensure the safety of Indiana’s abused and neglected children while at the same time changing our culture from a placement system to a permanency system.”

Indiana is the first of six states within Region V to complete its PIP requirements and its successful implementation is being recognized by other states as a guidepost for child welfare practice reform. Region V states are Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin.
 

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT