When it comes to protecting kids in Washington state from abuse and neglect, the state Department of Social and Health Service, or DSHS, Children’s Administration has it rough. Complaints pour in on a daily basis. The number of children at risk constantly rises, and the stories of unspeakable abuses never get any easier to stomach. If you think your job sucks, you should try spending a day in the shoes of a DSHS Children’s Administration caseworker in charge of trying to make sure Little Jimmy and Jane don’t get locked in the closet this month, smacked around or burned with lit cigarettes — or worse. There may be no more important, or difficult, job than protecting children from the atrocities that have become all too familiar thanks to nighttime news and daily newspapers. 

And while it’s easy to sympathize with those whose job it is to wade through the gruesome and gut-wrenching world of child abuse, that sympathy should never become an excuse to turn our heads when things go wrong. There’s simply too much at stake.

Let’s be honest. It may be easy to sympathize, but the system is bigger than individuals. Or at least it should be. It’s a fact that DSHS Children’s Administration is a complex and massive operation with an annual budget close to $600 million and roughly 2,900 employees. The Children’s Administration receives an average of 80,000 complaints a year stemming from alleged child abuse; the department physically looks into about half of those complaints. It’s also a fact that roughly 10,000 children are in foster care in Washington at any one time, and every one of those children is assigned to a DSHS Children’s Administration caseworker, who, at least in theory, is looking after them. According to the Children Administration’s data, as of July 2008, the average caseload for a social worker in Washington was 20.1 cases. According to some, that number may be higher as non-case-carrying staff members are included in DSHS’s calculations, at least according to DSHS critics -  an assertion DSHS's Director of Communications Thomas Shapley says is dead wrong.

A 2006 study conducted by the United States Administration for Children and Families, for example, indicated that Washington Child Protective Services screeners — the people who decide whether a case should become an official investigation — were responsible for 292 cases each.

There are two ways screening can go — in or out. Screening “in” a referral means that an allegation meets the state’s standard for investigation or assessment and is then forwarded for further investigation. At that point, the allegation graduates from the screening stage to the so-called report stage.

Screening “out” means the allegation does not meet the state’s standard for an investigation or assessment.

In Washington, about 46 percent of cases get screened in — far less than the national average of 61 percent, according to the federal report. Once a case is screened in, it requires investigation, corroboration and some sort of action. Actions can range from simple dismissal to legal intervention. About a third of cases that get screened in turn up as an instance of bona fide abuse or neglect.

The quality and outcome of investigations are significantly impacted by weight of loads carried by individual caseworkers. The Council on Accreditation, or COA, — an organization that works with human service programs to maintain performance standards through accreditation — has set a standard of 18 cases per caseworker, or eight for those working with children who have special needs.

In 2005, a study was conducted by the federal arm of DSHS, aiming to discover, among other things, how many children were victimized further after finding their way into the system. The study indicates that 10.1 percent of the children who were victims of child maltreatment in the first six months of the year were again victimized within six months. Washington’s 2005 incidence of 10.1 percent was significantly higher than the national average of 6.6 percent and a decline in performance from 2004, when the incidence was just 4.9 percent.

A recent state audit, in turn, expressed concern about 60 percent — 12 out of 20 — of child abuse referrals reviewed. 

Investigations

A recent investigation was conducted into the so-called whistleblower claim that a former Children’s Administration officer from Tacoma had been instructing employees to downgrade cases in an effort to control ballooning caseloads. The state auditor’s office reviewed a sampling of 20 child abuse and neglect referrals to DSHS’ child protective services. While the State Auditor’s Office found no evidence to suggest the former administrator was actually ordering the downgrading of reports of abuse, it did find cause for concern.

In one instance, allegations of physical abuse by a father were backed by three prior referrals, including previous physical abuse findings. The report concluded that the father stated in prior referrals that he can “discipline his children how he wants.” A CPS file indicated that the man “does not appear to recognize the problems as he has continued to escalate in behavior,” and he had a drinking problem.

Despite the pile of concerns, the case closed with an “inconclusive” finding. Less than eight months later, the man shot and killed one of his children.

Another case in Tacoma reports that a 14-year-old child disclosed that one month earlier his mother had beaten him with a miniature baseball bat, spatula and a closed fist and had kicked and choked him. The case was screened in for investigation, reviewed by a so-called consensus committee, and screened out despite the fact that during the prior month CPS had received an allegation of physical abuse of a 5-year-old child by the same mother. That report was deemed “information only” and not investigated. The person who brought the alleged abuse to the attention of CPS officials said that the 5-year-old was anxious when asked about injuries and begged, “Can you tell my mommy I have been really good? Tell her I’ve been really good.”

The children were returned to their mother.

DSHS workers, in turn, raised concern about how the case was handled. A family reconciliation services worker sent an e-mail to the supervisor, expressing concern about handling of the case, saying: “Kids are not being protected and Tacoma is operating outside of State policy … intake is assessing the risk as a three or higher and accepting it for investigation. The ‘consensus’ committee is downgrading accepted referrals … and that it happens so frequently it is very obvious they are controlling their workload.”

“It’s important to note that the auditors’ finding was that: ‘We found no reasonable cause to believe the previous Regional Administrator instructed the screening out of accepted child abuse and neglect referrals. We noted, however, some documentation issues regarding risk assignment we communicated to the Department of Social and Health Services,’” says Shapley.

Mindy Chambers, communications director for the Washington State Auditor’s Office, confirmed that investigations showed a problem with documentation regarding how and why decisions were made regarding the 12 cases in question.

When asked specifically whether Children’s Administration caseworkers downgrade reports of abuse in order to reduce caseloads, Mary Meinig, director of the Office of the Family and Children’s Ombudsman, says she doesn’t believe that to be the case.

Without documentation, of course, it is impossible to determine how the neglect occurred or who is responsible for several tragic stories. And while administrators accused of sweeping cases under the rug were vindicated, the fact remains that children were knowingly placed in harm’s way.

The conversation obviously can’t be laid to rest.

Children’s Administration officials, meanwhile, have addressed the documentation issues regarding risk assignment. Region 5 has eliminated the consensus meetings and now requires an administrator to make the final determination on screenings and to clarify how decisions were made. Officials also conducted intensive training on intake procedures and interview protocol. 

Braam and the Council on Accreditation 

Scrutinizing DSHS and the Children’s Administration is not a new phenomenon. Anytime you have an organization in charge of the safety and well-being of so many children and things go wrong, people in positions high and low are inclined to look for answers, especially those in the public eye.

Nothing has shaped the way DSHS and the state Children’s Administration do business more than the now 10-year-old Braam class action lawsuit and later attempts by the state to become accredited by the COA — a goal that was recently abandoned.

The Braam lawsuit, which was settled by the state in 2004 and dealt specifically with the state’s foster care system, is named after Jessica Braam — a former foster child who was continually bounced from foster home to foster home. Over the course of her time in the system, Braam was placed in an astounding 34 foster homes. Along with a large group of other children who experienced similar repeated placements and removals, Braam filed suit against the state in 1998.

When the state settled the suit in 2004, Washington agreed to make reforms. The lawsuit settlement also created the Braam Oversight Panel, an entity responsible for creating and maintaining a clear and specific implementation plan for the state to follow.

Meinig sees the Braam settlement as a positive development — and one that makes her job a little easier. Meinig’s job is “to protect children and parents from harmful agency action or inaction, and to make agency officials and state policy makers aware of system-wide issues in the child protection and child welfare system so they can improve services,” according to the agency’s Web site. Meinig and the Office of the Family and Children’s Ombudsman is responsible for investigating all complaints about agency action or inaction that involves a child at risk of abuse, neglect or harm, and all children involved with child protection or child welfare services.

“It’s a complex system,” says Meinig. “Because it’s so complex there are lots of problems. (The Braam settlement) forced attention on things we knew were a problem. In the long run it makes the system better. Anything that can be done to fix that would be a good thing.”

In theory, the Braam settlement and the state guidelines the case established should work to make the system stronger and more effective. But it works only if the state actually goes along with the agreement. According to many within the system, strides have been made, but the state hasn’t always held up its end of the bargain. A superior court judge in Whatcom County recently echoed that sentiment. In January lawyers representing foster children from all over Washington returned to court, claiming DSHS and the Children’s Administration has failed to deliver on their promises to comply with the Braam settlement. Along with other complaints, the plaintiffs accused DSHS of failing to conduct monthly visits with kids in the system and reduce caseloads.

In his ruling, which came in late June, Superior Court Judge Charles R. Snyder wasted little time making his ruling and once again found DSHS had not significantly reduced caseloads, had not ensured children in the system receive monthly visits, and did not ensure siblings in the system get to see each other at least twice a month.

“I’m not asking,” Snyder said while issuing his ruling. “I’m ordering. You need to go do whatever it takes.”

“The judge wanted more speed,” says Shapley. “And we’re doing that. We’re doing everything we can (to comply with) Braam.”

Considering the well-documented problems the Children’s Administration has encountered, it seemed like a positive sign when the organization agreed to start working toward accreditation through the COA — almost eight years ago. Among other things, accreditation through the COA requires caseworkers to carry a caseload of no more than 18 children, remember.

Earlier this year, Washington decided to bail on COA accreditation, citing budget concerns, among other reasons.

The standards set forth by the COA are very similar to those established by the Braam ruling, making the Children’s Administration’s recent decision to abandon its plans for accreditation all the more troubling — especially considering the Children’s Administration had already spent $1.2 million on the process and all but three of its offices had yet to comply.

“I think we’re only moving in the right direction if we keep in mind COA standards,” says Meinig. “(Meeting COA standards) meant a lot to (Children’s Administration employees). It meant a lot for morale. When we walked away, people felt deflated.”

Shapley contends that the underlying values and principles of COA standards are now part of daily work at regional offices despite abandonment of accreditation goals.

“What our workers learned from the COA accreditation process dovetails perfectly with the gains we are making on other initiatives such as our focus on engaging families in all cases and safety goals for vulnerable children,” he says.

During the past several years, Children’s Administration has been successful in striving to operate within established accreditation standards and continues to work toward the goal of 18 cases per caseworker, says Shapley.

“The COA process should not be viewed in isolation. It must be considered in light of other major initiatives underway,” he says. “Children’s Administration felt it would be more constructive to invest our energy in areas that are showing positive outcomes.”

Of course, it doesn’t take a boatload of research to see there’s still a problem with the way Washington’s DSHS Children’s Administration does business. Caseworkers are overworked and overwhelmed. Bureaucracy compounds the problem. And the complaints and accusations of abuse just keep coming — with no slowdown in sight. In the most unfortunate of cases, problems can mean death for any one of the 10,000 children in state-designated foster homes or continued horror for any one of the subjects of the 80,000 annual complaints the Children’s Administration receives.

In a recent closed-door meeting, regional administrators were told that despite best efforts fatalities among children under state care continue to rise.

“There was a point in time where there was an increase in fatalities that made everyone take note,” says Meinig.

Meinig says that problems often occur when DSHS Children’s Administration caseworkers have too much on their plate.

“It’s really when the worker is distracted somewhere else when there are problems,” says Meinig. “It’s really impossible to hold people truly accountable when their caseload is huge. It comes down to caseloads, caseloads, caseloads.”