PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT for

Transcription

1 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT for CHILD PROTECTION SPECIALIZED SERVICES PROFESSIONAL INDEPENDENT LIVING CANDIDATE Assessment Assessment Planning Planning Safety Permanency Well-Being Safety Permanency Well-Being Documentation Documentation Interpersonal Effective March, 2011

2 Instructions For full instructions on the implementation of the Performance Assessment process, please refer to 65C , F.A.C. Introduction After successful completion of all of the required classroom and field training provided as part of the State of Florida Child Welfare Pre-Service Training Program (or completion of the individual s waiver plan, if applicable), and upon approval of the candidate s supervisor, the candidate is considered eligible to take the Performance Assessment. The Performance Assessment is a standardized, on-the-job, competency-based performance evaluation of child protection professionals to assess their knowledge, skills, abilities and priorities in performing their jobs; each child protection professional must be evaluated in terms of the primary function(s) of the position which he or she occupies. This Assessment is designed for Child Protection Specialized Services, Independent Living candidates; it was developed by Big Bend CBC to evaluate the candidate s ability to demonstrate core competency elements through skilled performance of minimum applicable key case activities. Although there is no set time frame during which the candidate must begin the Performance Assessment, it is important to consider the following for planning and scheduling purposes: All evaluations of each component of the Performance Assessment (including any retakes, if necessary) must be completed no later than one (1) year from the date of hire, or the date of the candidate s successful completion of the post-test or waiver test, whichever is earlier; and Each case selected for evaluation must be a case which has/had been open for a sufficient length of time so that it includes all of the documents required to be evaluated by the Performance Assessment, and all such documents must have been personally completed by the candidate. There are two (2) components of this Performance Assessment, which are designed to enable Case Manager Candidates to demonstrate their competency in the following areas: Casework Component: o Assessment (Competency A) o Documentation/Planning (Competency B) Interpersonal Skills Component: o Interpersonal Skills Observation (Competency C) There is no requirement as to which component of the Performance Assessment is evaluated first, the Casework or the Interpersonal Skills portion; successful completion of both components of the Performance Assessment is required in order to achieve the certification designation of Certified Child Protection Specialized Services Professional, Independent Living. All candidates for certification are provided with two opportunities to pass the Performance Assessment; both attempts (including all evaluations) must be completed no later than one (1) year from the date of hire into the position, or the date of the candidate s successful completion of the post-test or waiver test, whichever is earlier. 2

3 Casework Component: Case Selection Procedures For each Child Protection Specialized Services Independent Living candidate, the casework portion of the Performance Assessment will be conducted on one of the cases from the candidate s case load which meets the parameters for selection as described below. Each employing agency will establish Performance Assessment case selection procedures which may include identifying one test case per candidate, or a combination of several such cases per candidate, in order to determine an average rating of all standards. Case selection procedures may include random or planned identification of the one or more test cases, which meet the established criteria for the casework component of the Assessment. Inasmuch as the Performance Assessment enables child protection professionals to demonstrate their skills consistent with the specific tasks their job requires, each individual must complete Performance Assessment that is most representative of or most closely matches his or her job responsibilities. The evaluators will be looking at the actual case materials completed while working with the child and family to assess the candidate s ability to demonstrate effective casework skills, therefore, candidates may not create dummy documents for the purpose of the evaluation. The case selected must be one in which the candidate completed all of the case documents being evaluated. The parameters for case selection for this Performance Assessment are: Child Protection Specialized Services Independent Living Candidate: The case must be an open or recently closed judicial case for which the candidate has/had primary responsibility for the provision, coordination and oversight of a youth s Independent Living services and activities. If open, the case must have been open for a sufficient length of time to enable the candidate to have developed each of the documents being assessed; if closed, the case can have been closed for no longer than 90 days prior to the start of the Performance Assessment process. The case must be an out-of-home case, where the youth resides with a foster parent or in another licensed placement such as a group home, temporary shelter or DJJ facility. Casework Component: Work Products Demonstration of skills through written work products will be evaluated during the casework component of the Performance Assessment. All documents evaluated must be the sole work of the candidate. The casework evaluation must include a review of all documentation in both the paper case file (if any) and the electronic SACWIS (FSFN) record of the case. In those situations where it is anticipated or known that an evaluator may be unable to access or view documentation within the FSFN record, all documents, completed forms and information in the electronic FSFN or other record of the case must be printed out and placed into the case file to be evaluated (or otherwise made accessible to all evaluators), prior to the scheduled starting date of the Performance Assessment. No documents may be added to, removed from, or changed within either the electronic or printed case file once the Performance Assessment process has begun. Casework Component: Scoring Procedures Each competency area must be passed by the Child Protection Specialized Services Professional Independent Living candidate in order to successfully complete the Performance Assessment. The criteria which must be met in order for the candidate to pass each of the competency areas are found in the following pages of the Performance Assessment, along with examples and illustrations of each standard, and factors that should be considered by candidates as well as evaluators in determining to what degree each standard was met in each case: 3

4 Competency A: Assessment Competency B: Documentation/Planning Competency C: Interpersonal Skills The ratings to be used by evaluators when scoring the casework components of the Performance Assessment (Assessment; Documentation/Planning competencies) are the following: 1 = Needs improvement to meet basic performance standards (Fail) 3 = Meets basic performance standards (Pass) 5 = Exceeds basic performance standards (Pass) Each individual standard of the Child Protection Specialized Services Independent Living candidate s casework must achieve a score of 3 or 5 to be considered passing. A score of 1 on any standard indicates an insufficiency in demonstrated skills and that entire competency must be retaken and successfully completed in order to be eligible for certification. When a second Performance Assessment attempt is required, the candidate need only demonstrate skills for the competency (ies) not passed on the first attempt. For example, there are 9 standards that comprise the Assessment competency (Competency A). A Child Protection Specialized Services Independent Living candidate who achieves a rating of 3 on standards 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, but receives a rating of 1 on standard number 4 has not passed the Assessment competency. Thus, assuming that this candidate received a rating of 3 or 5 on all of the standards in the other casework competencies (in this example, Documentation/Planning), the candidate, on his/her second attempt of the Performance Assessment, would only need to be evaluated on all of the standards in the Assessment competency (which is the competency in which s/he failed one of the standards); s/he would not need to be evaluated again on either the Documentation/Planning competency, since s/he passed all of those standards. Any casework component standard which has as a choice N/A, means that any evaluator may select N/A only if the standard was not applicable to the case under review; an N/A rating for a standard in which N/A is a choice does not count against the candidate. Interpersonal Skills Component Each Child Protection Specialized Services Independent Living candidate will be evaluated on his or her interpersonal skills while interacting with the youth during a visit or staffing. The youth selected does not have to be the same youth from the same case as that which was selected for the casework component of the Performance Assessment, however it may be. It is the responsibility of the candidate to select the interaction(s) for the interpersonal skills evaluation(s) and to schedule the observation(s). For Child Protection Independent Living Specialist candidates, the interpersonal skills evaluation(s) must be scheduled in a staffing or face to face meeting with the youth. The interpersonal skills evaluation(s) may be scheduled at any time after the Performance Assessment process has begun, as long as there is sufficient time for both the Casework and Interpersonal components of the Assessment (including any retakes, if necessary) to be completed no later than one (1) year from the date of the candidate s hire into the position, or successful completion of the waiver or post-test, whichever is earlier. For all candidates for certification, the professional interaction shall be evaluated per the criteria set forth in the Department-approved basic, core Performance Assessment. The ratings to be used by evaluators when scoring the Interpersonal Skills Assessment are as follows: Yes = Meets basic performance standards (Pass) 4

5 No = Needs improvement to meet basic performance standards (Fail) Each standard must achieve a rating of Yes to be considered passing. A score of No on any standard indicates an insufficiency in demonstrated skills and the entire Interpersonal Skills Assessment must be retaken and successfully completed in order to be eligible for certification. Any interpersonal skills standard which has as a choice N/A, means that the evaluator may select N/A only if the standard was not applicable to the interaction being observed; an N/A rating for a standard in which N/A is a choice does not count against the candidate. Casework and Interpersonal Components: Evaluators Both the Casework and Interpersonal components of the Performance Assessment must undergo a two-tiered evaluation, whereby each component is assessed by two (2) evaluators, either internal or external to the employing agency, both of whom must be certified, and at least one of whom shall be an independent evaluator of the candidate s Performance Assessment (i.e., independent in that s/he is not in the candidate s chain of command). First Tier: If certified as a supervisor, the candidate s supervisor may serve as the first-tier evaluator, but is not required to do so. o If the candidate s immediate supervisor is not certified as a supervisor, he or she must not serve as the first-tier evaluator for either the Casework or Interpersonal components of the Performance Assessment; another supervisor or other evaluator at the supervisory or higher level (supervisor; specialist; trainer) must conduct the evaluation. When possible, the certified individual serving as an evaluator should be certified in the same program area of child protection expertise as that in which the candidate is seeking certification (i.e., Independent Living or Case Management). Second Tier (Independent Evaluator): For Child Protection Specialized Services Independent Living candidates, an independent evaluator may be any individual certified as a Supervisor, Trainer or Specialist. o o o o Independent evaluators may be from within the same employing agency as that of the candidate, or from another agency which performs the same or substantially similar child welfare/child protection case management work, provided that the individuals meet the independent evaluator criteria. Agency policy may include the assignment of more than one independent evaluator or the use of independent evaluation teams. An independent evaluator must not conduct an assessment of any candidate within his or her chain of command, or of any candidate with whom there may exist a personal relationship or other possible conflict of interest. The second-tier (independent) evaluation of the Casework component of the Performance Assessment may be conducted only after the initial evaluation has been completed by the firsttier evaluator. If more than one independent evaluator is assigned, the same independent evaluator(s) is not required to evaluate both components of a candidate s Performance Assessment (including any agency-specific additions); one independent evaluator may evaluate the Casework component, and another evaluate the Interpersonal component of the Assessment. There is no requirement that the first-tier evaluator and the independent evaluator observe separate interpersonal interactions, although they may do so, based upon such factors as scheduling availability and sensitivity to the needs of clients and families. If the first-tier evaluator and independent evaluator observe separate interactions, either evaluator s observation may be completed first. 5

6 Evaluation Process The two (or more, if applicable) evaluators will assess the same case materials; as indicated previously, they may observe the same interpersonal skills interactions or separate interactions, depending upon scheduling availability. Each evaluator will complete his or her Evaluator Criteria worksheets independently of any other reviewers; both the first and second tier Casework component evaluation includes review of the entire case management file (both written and FSFN work products), where each evaluator rates the candidate s ability to meet or exceed basic performance standards, as evidenced by the casework competency the candidate demonstrated in the selected case. Absent special circumstances accommodated by the employing agency, the first-tier evaluator must conclude his or her evaluation within 10 business days of having all case record information provided to him or her by the candidate s supervisor. Upon completion of his or her evaluation (but no later than 10 business days of receiving all case materials), the first-tier evaluator must provide same case materials to the independent evaluator for his or her evaluation, regardless of the results of the first-tier evaluation. Each independent evaluator has 10 business days from the date he or she has been provided with the case materials to conclude his or her evaluation of the candidate s casework. The results of the first-tier evaluator s rating of the Casework component of the Performance Assessment must not be shared with the candidate, the independent evaluator, or any other party prior to the independent evaluator having completed his or her evaluation. Completion of the Performance Assessment All four competency areas (Assessment; Documentation/Planning; Interpersonal) of the Performance Assessment, including any agency-designed and agency-required additional components, must be successfully completed in order for the individual to fulfill the minimum performance standards required for initial certification as a Child Protection Specialized Services Independent Living Successful completion of the Performance Assessment requires that both the first-tier evaluator and the assigned independent evaluator concur that the candidate effectively demonstrated the knowledge, skills, abilities and priorities in both the Casework and Interpersonal components of the Performance Assessment which are necessary for the competent performance of the duties required by his or her position. At such time as the independent evaluator has completed both the Casework and Interpersonal evaluations, he or she (or they), along with the first-tier evaluator and the candidate s supervisor (if different) will meet to review and discuss the findings, prior to meeting with the candidate to present the results. Agree/Pass: If both the independent evaluator and the first-tier evaluator agree that the individual successfully completed all components of the Performance Assessment, the candidate has met the standard for initial certification as a Child Protection Specialized Services Independent Living and the necessary paperwork must be completed per the process set forth in Rule 65C , F.A.C., to request that the candidate be issued his or her certificate. Agree/Fail: If both the independent evaluator and the first-tier evaluator agree that the individual did not successfully complete all components of the Performance Assessment (including any agency-designed additional components), the candidate s supervisor will provide the candidate with a copy of the signed Assessment Results Form documenting the performance deficiencies in those skill areas that need improvement in order for the candidate to pass a second attempt of the Performance Assessment. Disagree: The employing agency shall have established a protocol for the resolution of differences which arise in the event that, after a review of the findings, the first-tier evaluator and the independent evaluator(s) differ in their perspective on whether or not the candidate successfully completed all components of the Performance Assessment. 6

7 Such agency protocol should include convening a Review Panel (or some similar resolution process) consisting of at least three executive staff (supervisory or higher level, at least one of whom must be certified) from the employing or other agency (who did not participate in initially evaluating the candidate s Performance Assessment), to evaluate the same work products and skills assessed during the initial evaluation. Within three (3) business days of the request for a Review Panel, all Performance Assessment work product materials (including all completed first and second-tier evaluation forms) shall be forwarded to the senior member of the panel by the candidate s supervisor. Within five (5) business days of receipt of the Performance Assessment materials by the senior panel member, the Panel shall meet, review the materials and make a determination as to whether or not the candidate successfully completed the Performance Assessment. The Panel must conclude its evaluation of all work products no later than 15 business days after having been notified that the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluators disagree on their findings. As part of the panel s decision-making process, the panel may request that both the first and second-tier evaluators appear and discuss their findings. In the case of a difference of opinion between the panel members as to whether or not the candidate successfully completed the Performance Assessment, the senior panel member shall make the final decision. Within two (2) business days of the panel having reached a decision, the senior member of the Panel shall return all Performance Assessment materials to the candidate s supervisor. Within two (2) business days of having the materials returned to him/her, the candidate s supervisor shall meet with the candidate to officially present the determination of the Review Panel. The Panel decision shall be final and binding. Second Attempted Performance Assessment Case selection for a second attempted Performance Assessment (Casework component), will follow the same agency protocol as established for selection of a case for a candidate s initial Performance Assessment attempt. A candidate may not use the same file/case for the second attempt as was used for the first attempt. Selection and scheduling of a professional interaction for a second attempted Interpersonal Skills evaluation remains the responsibility of the candidate. For both the casework and interpersonal components, the first-tier evaluator and independent evaluator(s) for the individual s second Assessment attempt must not be the same individual(s) as those who participated in rating the candidate s first attempt of the Performance Assessment. All initial and subsequently attempted Performance Assessment activities and evaluations must be concluded no later than one (1) year from the date the individual was hired into the position, or passed the waiver or posttest (whichever is earlier), by which time the individual must have either achieved Child Protection Professional certification or must be removed from any position requiring such certification. 7

8 Planning Assessment Interpersonal Documentation Child Protection Specialized Services, Independent Living, Certification Candidate Assessment Results Form Safety Permanency Well-Being Candidate s Name: Date of Hire/Post-Test/Waiver Test (Earliest): Agency Name: Case Identification Name or Number: Performance Assessment Attempt Number (circle one): 1 2 Each standard in each competency HAS achieved a rating of 3 or higher (or Yes ) from both evaluators. Therefore, we confirm that the Candidate HAS demonstrated competency as required by the Performance Assessment. Each standard in each competency HAS NOT achieved a rating of 3 or higher (or Yes ) from both evaluators. Therefore, we confirm that the Candidate HAS NOT demonstrated competency as required by the Performance Assessment. The competency(ies) not passed are (please check and explain all that apply): Assessment (A) Planning/Documentation (B) Interpersonal Skills (C) Please explain above (and on additional sheets, if necessary) all deficiencies noted and what the Candidate must do in order to demonstrate competency in those areas. We disagree on the results of the Candidate s Performance Assessment, and will forward the Assessment for review (per local protocol) and final determination, which is binding. Supervisor s Name (please print): Date: Supervisor s Signature: 1 st Tier Evaluator s Name (please print): Date: 1 st Tier Evaluator s Signature: 2 nd Tier Evaluator s Name (please print): Date: 2 nd Tier Evaluator s Signature: I, the undersigned Candidate for Certification, have received the results of the Performance Assessment on this date. Candidate s Name (please print): Date: Candidate s Signature: The Candidate refused to sign. The Candidate received a copy of this Assessment Results Form. (Supervisor must initial above) 8

9 Planning Assessment Interpersonal Documentation Child Protection Specialized Services, Independent Living, Certification Candidate Assessment Results Form REVIEW PANEL ONLY (if required) Safety Permanency Well-Being Candidate s Name: Date of Hire/Post-Test/Waiver Test (Earliest): Agency Name: Case Identification Name or Number: Performance Assessment Attempt Number (circle one): 1 2 Each standard in each competency HAS achieved a rating of 3 or higher (or Yes ) from all Review Panel members. Therefore, we confirm that the Candidate HAS demonstrated competency as required by the Performance Assessment. Each standard in each competency HAS NOT achieved a rating of 3 or higher (or Yes ) from all Review Panel members. Therefore, we confirm that the Candidate HAS NOT demonstrated competency as required by the Performance Assessment. The competency(ies) not passed are (please check and explain all that apply): Assessment (A) Planning/Documentation (B) Interpersonal Skills (C) Please explain above (and on additional sheets, if necessary) all deficiencies noted and what the Candidate must do in order to demonstrate competency in those areas. Panel Member s Name (please print): Date: Panel Member s Signature: Panel Member s Name (please print): Date: Panel Member s Signature: Panel Member s Name (please print): Date: Panel Member s Signature: I, the undersigned Candidate for Certification, have received the results of the Performance Assessment on this date. Candidate s Name (please print): Date: Candidate s Signature: The Candidate refused to sign. The Candidate received a copy of this Assessment Results Form. (Supervisor must initial above) 9

10 Planning Assessment Interpersonal Documentation Child Protection Specialized Services, Independent Living Performance Assessment Safety Permanency Well-Being Independent Living Candidate Name: Evaluator Name: Date: Case Identifier (Name or Number): Attempt # (Circle one): 1 2 Please note: The case selected for evaluation must be an open or recently closed case for which the candidate has/had primary responsibility for the provision of IL services. If open, the case must have been open for a sufficient length of time to enable the candidate to have developed each of the documents being assessed; if closed, the case can have been closed for no longer than 90 days prior to the start of the Performance Assessment process. The case must be an out-of-home case, where the youth resides with a foster parent or in another licensed placement such as a group home, temporary shelter or DJJ facility. All case activity and documentation being evaluated must have been completed solely by the candidate. Evaluator Rating for Competency A: ASSESSMENT Evaluate the candidate s work as provided in the Life Skills Assessment; FSFN chronological notes; staffing notes; Judicial Review Social Study Addendum (and any other) court reports; correspondence; and any other supporting documentation. The candidate s assessment should reflect consideration of all factors in his or her analysis of the youth and any out-of-home caregivers, in order to accurately determine the extent to which these factors impact the youth s safety, permanence and well-being. Each standard in the Assessment competency must be evaluated as follows: 1 = Needs improvement to meet basic performance standards (Fail) 3 = Meets basic performance standards (Pass) 5 = Exceeds basic performance standards (Pass) Each of the applicable standards in this Assessment competency must receive a rating of 3 or 5 in order for the candidate to have passed this competency. A score of 1 on any of the following 11 standards indicates an insufficiency in demonstrated skills, and the entire Assessment competency must be retaken and successfully completed (on a different case) in order to be eligible for certification. Assessment Competency: This section assesses if all initial and ongoing assessment processes were completed with sufficient thoroughness to help ensure youth safety, to identify possible risks, and to identify strengths and needs of the youth. The assessment should be appropriate given all of the information gathered about the youth, and the process should reflect information gathered through various means to support the need for any actions taken. Thorough assessment should appropriately address present safety considerations, youth vulnerability factors, and any caregiver protective capacity implications. The reviewer should determine if the assessment, youth visits, Judicial Review Social Study Report Addendum, and any other assessment tools were completed according to statute, code and policy and with sufficient thoroughness to help guide appropriate and effective decision-making in keeping the youth safe and in meeting the needs of the youth. For the purposes of this competency, "consistently" is defined as "a majority of the time" during the life of the case. Evaluators should consider factors presented in determining to what degree each standard was consistently met by the candidate, and rate each standard accordingly. 10

11 1 3 5 I. STANDARD: Has the Independent Living candidate scheduled and conducted the Life Skills Assessment with the youth in a timely manner? The reviewer may find evidence in case narrative, on the Life Skills Assessment form or any other approved documentation in the file. Reviewers/evaluators should consider the following factors in determining to what degree the candidate scheduled and conducted the Life skills Assessment in a timely manner. Requirement: The assessment was conducted each year during the youth s birth month. Requirement: The initial life skills assement was completed within 30 days of receipt of the referral from the Dependency Case Manager, or within 60 days after the court enters an order placing the youth in the custody of the department. (If the times frames are not met, there is documentation that the IL candidate attempted to meet the time frames.) Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: II. STANDARD: There is evidence that the results of the Life Skills Assessment were filed with the court. and served to all parties. Reviewers/evaluators should consider the following factors in determining to what degree this standard was met and based on those findings, issue an overall rating on this standard of 1, 3, or 5. Tip If the evaluator found evidence that the Life skills Assessment had been filed with the court only in the FSFN chrono s and not on the Legal form this should be rated a 3,or vice versa. If found in both areas it could constitute a 5. Evidence of filing the Life Skills Assessment could be found in the file on the Legal log form with a date and signatures from Legal and the candidate. Evidence of filing the Life Skills Assessment could be found in the file in the FSFN chronologicals. Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: 11

12 1 3 5 III. STANDARD: There is evidence that the initial staffing was scheduled, all parties were invited and the staffing was conducted within 30 days of the referral. If staffng was not held within 30 days of referral, there is appropriate documentation as to why it was not held. Reviewers/evaluators should consider the following factors in determining to what degree this standard was met: Check all that apply below, and based on those findings, issue an overall rating on this standard of 1, 3, or 5. Evidence of the initial staffing being held was located on the Staffings form. Evidence of the initial staffing being held was located in the FSFN Chronologicals. Evidence of the initial staffing being held was located in the JR addendum. Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: IV. STANDARD: There is evidence that staffings were conducted as required according to the youth s age. This information may be located in FSFN chronological notes; staffing notes; Judicial Review Social Study Addendum (and any other) court reports; correspondence; and any other supporting documentation. N/A must be selected for the two choices for which the youth does not meet the age criteria. A. Youth, age 13-14, staffings are completed annually in their birth month. YES NO N/A B. Youth ages 15-17, staffings are completed once every six months from the last staffing and according to their birth month. YES NO N/A C.Youth age 17 and over, staffings are completed within 30 days of the special judicial review and the hearing conducted within the month that begins the six-month period before the youth s 18 th birthday YES NO N/A Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: 12

13 1 3 5 V. STANDARD: There is evidence that appropriate strength skills courses that were identified according to the Life Skills Assessment are being provided or being arranged for to meet the youth s needs. (Being arranged for, could be evidenced by being identified on the life skills calendar). This information may be located in the Life Skills Assessment; FSFN chronological notes; staffing notes; Judicial Review Social Study Addendum (and any other) court reports; correspondence; and any other supporting documentation. Tip: Reviewers/evaluators should consider the following factors in determining to what degree this standard was met. Exemplary rating may be given for evidence of discussion with the youth s caregiver to discuss the implementation of the Life skills training. Evidence may be found in documentation, FSFN notes, s, etc.: Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: VI. STANDARD: Documentation reflects that the IL candidate accurately and appropriately identified the youth s needed life skills and the individuals responsible for helping the youth develop those skills. Persons responsible include but are not limited to; IL specialist, foster parents, and group home provider. Some of the life skills include but are not limited to, independent living skills training, banking budgeting skills, interviewing skills, parenting skills, time management or organizational skills, educational support, employment training and health and safety. This information may be located in the FSFN chronological notes; staffing form; correspondence; and any other supporting documentation.. Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: 13

14 1 3 5 VII. STANDARD: There is evidence that the IL candidate discussed the youth s current education and career plan. This information may be located in the FSFN chronological notes; staffing forms; Judicial Review Social Study Addendum (and any other) court reports; correspondence; and any other supporting documentation. Reviewers/evaluators should consider the following factors in determining to what degree this standard was met: The candidate included the youth, foster parents, and case manager. The plan was reviewed at each judicial hearing as part of the case plan. The plan accommodates the needs of the youth served in exceptional education programs to the extent appropriate for each individual. Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: VIII: STANDARD: There is evidence of follow-up on the youth s participation or lack thereof In Life Skills training and outcomes. Tip: If the youth did not participate in the Life Skills training, the reason for their nonparticipation is documented. This information may be located in the; FSFN chronological notes; staffing forms; sign in sheets for attendance, Judicial Review Social Study Addendum (and any other) court reports; correspondence; and any other supporting documentation. Check all that apply below, and based on those findings, issue an overall rating on this standard of 1, 3, or 5 to indicate the extent to which there is evidence of follow-up on the youth s participation or lack of participation in the Life Skills trainings. A. Evidence was located in the staffing form. YES NO B. Evidence was located in the FSFN chronological notes. YES NO C. Evidence was located in the JR addendum. YES NO Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: 14

15 1 3 5 IX. STANDARD: There is evidence that candidate accurately and appropriately addressed and fully explored the youth s strength s/progress and needs/obstacles with regard to each of the following. 1. Educational and work goals 2. Employment/volunteer experience 3. Health 4. DJJ involvement 5. Plans; Normalcy/Teen Plan, Subsidized IL Plan, (For 16 & 17 year olds as applicable), Transition Plan, ( For age 17.5), and JRSSR IL section This information may be located in the; FSFN chronological notes; staffing forms; Judicial Review Social Study Addendum (and any other) court reports; correspondence; and any other supporting documentation. (Tip) Each section should be addressed. Leaving one section out should constitute a failure. The degree to how each section is addressed would determine the rating. Is each section fully explained and clearly documented? Reviewers/evaluators should consider the following factors in determining to what degree this standard was met: The educational section addressed if the youth was at grade level and any obstacles in obtaining future educational goals. The work section identified any previous work experience and any desires for future work employment and any reason why the youth would not be successful in future work environment. The health section addressed any medical conditions that may impact transition into adulthood. It identifies if the youth is currently on any prescribed medications. It addresses if the youth is involved in any on going mental health counseling, and if the youth has a mental health diagnosis. The DJJ section includes if the youth has been or is currently committed to a Department of Juvenile Justice residential facility. It identifies if the youth is currently on probation or under court supervision. And it identifies obstacles for the youth regarding criminal history. The IL candidate identifies if a normalcy plan has been completed by the case manager and if it is has not been completed, then the IL candidate makes appropriate recommendation for completion. The IL candidate determines if the youth is eligible for the Subsidized IL Program and provides the results of the assessment to the case manager. The IL candidate identifies supportive services or persons need for the youths transition and timeframes for the mutually agreed upon transitional tasks. Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: 15

16 Additional Reviewer Comments on Competency A Assessment: Child Protection Specialized Services, Independent Living Performance Assessment Assessment Case Manager Candidate Name: Planning Safety Permanency Well-Being Documentation Evaluator Name: Date: Interpersonal Case Identifier (Name or Number): Attempt # (Circle one): 1 2 Evaluator Rating for Competency B: PLANNING/DOCUMENTATION Evaluate the candidate s work as provided in the Education and Career Plan; FSFN chronological notes; Independent Staffing Form; Judicial Review Social Study addendum: (and other) court reports; correspondence; and any other supporting documentation. The candidate s documentation should reflect consideration of all factors in his or her assessment of the youth, in order to accurately determine the extent to which these factors impact the youth s safety, permanence and well-being. Each standard in the Planning/Documentation competency must be evaluated as follows: 1 = Needs improvement to meet basic performance standards (Fail) 3 = Meets basic performance standards (Pass) 5 = Exceeds basic performance standards (Pass) Each of the applicable standards in this Planning/Documentation competency must receive a rating of 3 or 5 in order for the candidate to have passed this competency. A score of 1 on any of the following 5 standards indicates an insufficiency in demonstrated skills, and the entire Planning/Documentation competency must be retaken (on a different case) and successfully completed in order to be eligible for certification. Planning/Documentation Competency: This section evaluates the candidate s documentation in terms of accuracy, timeliness, objectivity and skill. Evaluators should assess the candidate's ability to accurately, succinctly and thoroughly record the events of the case, including but not limited to the candidate's assessments, all casework activities, and all contacts with the youth, care manager, caregivers, and others with information relevant to the case. This section also considers the extent to which the services described in the Education and Career Plan, Independent Living Staffing Form, Subsidized Independent Living Plan, Transitional Plan and Judicial Review Social Study Addendum are appropriate to the case situation in their design to ensure proper implementation by facilitating the youth s transition into adulthood. The evaluator may find evidence in the chronological notes/case narrative, staffing forms, Judicial Review Social Study Addendum and other court reports, correspondence, etc. 16

17 For the purposes of this competency, "consistently" is defined as "a majority of the time" during the life of the case. Evaluators should consider factors presented in determining to what degree each standard was consistently met by the candidate, and rate each standard accordingly I. STANDARD: There is documentation that the Case Manager completed the Normalcy/ Teen Plan and that the Independent Living candidate reviewed and discussed the plan with the signees of the plan (youth, caregiver and case manager). Tip: If no plan exists, goals are still discussed and the Case Manager is notified and this is documented in the case notes. Reviewers/evaluators should consider the following factors in determining to what degree this standard was met: Age appropriate activities must be in the plan Specific goals and objectives for the youth are identified. Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: N/A II. STANDARD: There is documentation that the candidate developed a Subsidized Independent Living Plan (For 16 & 17 year-olds as applicable). The Independent Living candidate reviewed eligibility which included Age, Legal status, and The ability to demonstrate independent living skills Tip: The Plan should include the following information: employment, education, savings, grades, assessment to be able to live in unlicensed setting with minimal supervision. Tip: The reviewer should check N/A if the youth is not 16 or 17 or if (for a documented and acceptable reason) does not have a Subsidized IL Plan Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: 17

18 1 3 5 III. STANDARD: There is evidence that the candidate worked with the youth to develop an appropriate Transition Plan (For age 17.5, and 90 days prior to 18 years of age) Reviewers/evaluators should consider the following factors in determining to what degree this standard was met: The IL candidate worked with the young adult in developing a joint transition plan that is consistent with a needs assessment identifying the specific need for transitional services to support the young adult s own efforts. The young adult must have specific tasks to complete or maintain included in the plan and be accountable for the completion of or making progress towards the completion of the tasks and timeframes. Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: IV. STANDARD: There is documentation that the following information was communicated to the Dependency Case Manager for inclusion in the JRSSR Independent Living Section: Education and Career Plan Normalcy Plan Independent Living Staffing information The steps that were taken by the youth toward recommendations discussed at the last Indepenedent Living staffing (if applicable) Indentification of obstacles, barriers and possible solutions to address needs identified at the Independent Living staffing Tip: An exemplary rating might be if the IL Coordinator arranged a meeting with the Case Manager to discuss the information. Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: 1 3 V. STANDARD: There is good documentation of the Independent Living candidate s communication with other parties as needed. Tip: Parties include but are not limited to: Dependency Case Manager, Child Legal Services, Caregiver/placement, youth, Guardian ad Litem, school personnel, siblings, staffing participants, etc. 5 18

19 Reviewer/Evaluator Comments: Additional Reviewer Comments on Competency B Planning/Documentation: 19

20 Child Protection Specialized Services, Independent Living, Performance Assessment Independent Living Candidate Name: Evaluator Name: Date: Interaction Type (Meeting/Staffing): Attempt # (Circle one): 1 2 Planning Assessment Safety Permanency Well-Being Interpersonal Documentation Evaluator Rating of Candidate s INTERPERSONAL SKILLS (C): Interaction with Youth Evaluate the candidate s demonstration of interpersonal skills while interacting with the youth one on one, or at an Independent Living Staffing. Examples are provided of actions that may illustrate that a skill has been demonstrated; please provide written comments or examples regarding skills observed. Please note that there are only two standards which may be rated as Not Applicable ( N/A ); all other standards must be rated in order for the observed interaction to be eligible to be used as the Interpersonal Skills demonstration portion of the candidate s Performance Assessment. Yes I. STANDARD: The candidate demonstrated advanced preparation (provided brief oral chronology). No For example, s/he knew the purpose of the meeting; was dressed appropriately. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: Yes No II. STANDARD: The candidate greeted the youth and others appropriately. For example, s/he greeted participants in a professional but friendly manner; stated name and position when appropriate. 20

21 Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: Yes No III. STANDARD: The candidate appropriately explained the purpose of the meeting. For example, s/he provided a clear statement of purpose; used non-accusatory language; explained the agenda of the meeting. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: Yes No IV. STANDARD: The candidate maintained an objective approach throughout the interaction. For example, s/he used appropriate, non-threatening language; also used objective statements and questions in addressing the person/group. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: 21

22 Yes No V. STANDARD: The candidate spoke directly with the youth or other participants, when appropriate. For example, s/he was respectful and maintained a professional demeanor. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: Yes No VI. STANDARD: The candidate communicated professionally with the youth and other participants. For example, s/he restated what was said to ensure understanding; asked for opinions, points of view, and/or questions; asked relevant questions; accessed appropriate resources for foreign language or other special needs. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: Yes No VII. STANDARD: The candidate demonstrated active listening skills. For example, s/he responded to questions appropriately; allowed participants to complete statements or thoughts without interrupting; asked open-ended questions. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: 22

23 Yes No VIII. STANDARD: The candidate maintained the focus of the interaction. For example, s/he redirected the conversation; was flexible; focused on any concerns the participant(s) may have had. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: Yes No N/A IX. STANDARD: The candidate responded appropriately to any unexpected events. For example, s/he confronted unpleasant issues effectively; de-escalated any situation needing to be de-escalated; enabled participant(s) to vent frustration. (If no unexpected events occurred during the observed interaction, rate as N/A ) Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: Yes No X. STANDARD: The candidate verbalized the youth s strengths and needs. For example, s/he provided positive feedback; made clear statements; was able to verify/validate the youth s concerns. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: 23

24 Yes No N/A XI. STANDARD: The candidate offered alternatives and/or choices to the youth, when appropriate. For example, s/he demonstrated the ability to negotiate; explained benefits and possible consequences of certain actions. (If no alternatives or choices were available or appropriate to be offered during the observed interaction, rate as N/A, however, if there were appropriate alternatives but the candidate failed to offer or discuss them, rate as No.) Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: Yes No XII. STANDARD: The candidate conducted appropriate closing activities. For example, s/he summarized the results of the interaction/meeting; asked for questions; provided clarification and any additional information as needed; explained next steps; thanked participants for their time. Reviewer comments/examples of skills noted or absent: 24

25 Additional Reviewer/Evaluator Comments on Candidate s Interpersonal Skills (Competency C): 25