Legislature(2021 - 2022)DAVIS 106
04/08/2021 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Alaska Early Childhood Environmental Scan | |
| Overview: Myhouse Mat-su Homeless Youth Center | |
| Overview: Child Welfare in Alaska | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 8, 2021
3:02 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Liz Snyder, Co-Chair
Representative Tiffany Zulkosky, Co-Chair
Representative Ivy Spohnholz (via teleconference)
Representative Zack Fields
Representative Ken McCarty
Representative Mike Prax
Representative Christopher Kurka
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: ALASKA EARLY CHILDHOOD ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN
- HEARD
OVERVIEW: MYHOUSE MAT-SU HOMELESS YOUTH CENTER
- HEARD
OVERVIEW: CHILD WELFARE IN ALASKA
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
TAMAR BEN-YOUSEF, Executive Director
All Alaska Pediatric Partnership (A2P2)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a presentation reviewing the
report commissioned by A2P2 in 2019 entitled, "Alaska Early
Childhood Environmental Scan & Baseline Report on the Condition
of Young Children."
IRIS MATTHEWS, President
The Stellar Group
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the presentation
on the Alaska Early Childhood Environmental Scan.
JUSTIN PENDERGRASS, Suicide Prevention Advocate
Mat-Su Youth Housing
MyHouse Mat-Su Homeless Youth Center
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a presentation on the MyHouse Mat-
Su Homeless Youth Center.
KIM GUAY, Director
Office of Children's Services (OCS)
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a PowerPoint presentation
entitled, "Child Welfare in Alaska," dated 4/8/21.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:02:24 PM
CO-CHAIR TIFFANY ZULKOSKY called the House Health and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:02 p.m.
Representatives Prax, Spohnholz (via teleconference), Snyder and
Zulkosky were present at the call to order. Representatives
Fields, McCarty, and Kurka arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
[The committee took an at-ease from 3:04 p.m. to 3:09 p.m. to
resolve audio issues.]
^PRESENTATION: Alaska Early Childhood Environmental Scan
PRESENTATION: Alaska Early Childhood Environmental Scan
3:09:01 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the first order of business
would be a presentation regarding the Alaska Early Childhood
Environmental Scan.
3:09:35 PM
TAMAR BEN-YOUSEF, Executive Director, All Alaska Pediatric
Partnership (A2P2), provided a presentation reviewing the report
commissioned by A2P2 in 2019 entitled, "Alaska Early Childhood
Environmental Scan & Baseline Report on the Condition of Young
Children." She noted that the extensive number of funders [for
the report] reflects an understanding across many sectors that
this is an important priority that impacts more than just
families or children.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF pointed out that there is more than one
interpretation of what makes up the term "early childhood." She
said everyone agrees that early childhood is a critical focal
point for creating healthier communities. But for some, she
continued, it is associated with an age range and for others it
is mostly about childcare or preschool or babies and
developmental health. These varying perceptions make it hard to
be effective when advocating or planning policies for the early
childhood sector, which is why A2PS felt this report necessary.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF explained that the report is focused on children
prenatal through age 8 and pregnant mothers and is the first
step towards identifying and prioritizing statewide needs for
this population. The report was commissioned to serve as a
resource to support stakeholders, including policy makers, in
efforts to better coordinate, align, and integrate the services,
supports, and resources that are needed to build a stronger,
more comprehensive early childhood system, which in turn leads
to a healthier, and in the long term, less costly population of
Alaskans. Healthy and supported young children are essential
for Alaska's future. Alaska's children are falling behind their
peers nationally in health and education outcomes. The roots of
the achievement gap start well before children ever enter
school. Early interventions work, including family supports and
early childhood education opportunities. Investments in early
childhood are cost-effective and produce large benefits to
children, parents, and society. Many children and families are
not receiving the services and support they need.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF stated that in the last few years A2PS has become
more involved in the early childhood arena through its work to
implement its Help Me Grow Alaska program. She said A2PS is
actively participating in several committees and groups such as
the Alaska Early Childhood Coordinating Council (AECCC) and has
engaged in advocacy and education on prevention, early childhood
brain development, and pediatrics best practices. Being active
in this realm of early childhood highlighted the ways in which
Alaska struggles to work collaboratively and efficiently to
improve outcomes for children and families. It isn't easy to
advocate for early childhood to be a higher priority in Alaska.
The state has much data showing how badly its children are doing
compared to other states but has only recently started looking
in an organized way at why or how Alaska's entire system that
should be supporting children and families to thrive could
sometimes be contributing to some of the bad outcomes.
3:14:44 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF expressed her hope that this background
information will help members to browse through this report and
recognize the connections between systems and outcomes. She
recalled that about three years ago A2PS attempted with several
of its state and nonprofit partners to provide information to
policy makers on the programs that fall within Alaska's system
of early childhood services and to map out how services were
delivered and funded. The goal was to identify inefficiencies
and possible duplications in response to early childhood
stakeholders advocating to keep early childhood programs off the
chopping block. However, despite great presentations given over
a two-day hearing before House committees, the biggest takeaway
was that ultimately [Alaska] is challenged in defining and
framing its early childhood system and there is little clarity
about the funding. Upon thinking about this report in response
to those questions, A2P2 got excited about what other questions
it could answer and how the report could be used to support a
focused systems approach to improving early childhood outcomes
and healthier communities altogether. To kick off its work A2P2
formed a cross-sector advisory committee that has seen this
project through from inception to the end. Input was sought
from others outside the community, including tribal healthcare
leadership, and the instrumental feedback improved the report.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF related several points for committee members to
consider when going through the report. Alaska has more than
94,000 children ages zero through eight. The report is not the
end all, many deeper dives that can be taken based on the
information. The report highlights some big issues that hugely
impact the ability to create effective policies and programs in
an equitable way. The data section of the report, "The Status
of Young Children and Families," provides a baseline on the
status of children zero through eight and pregnant mothers based
on 2018 data. This baseline is critical to evaluating the
impact of investments and programs. The pandemic was not
anticipated in early 2019, but this baseline is even more
important now while trying to measure the impact that COVID-19
has had on families and young children and on the services that
they need. Finally, A2P2 worked hard to let the data speak for
itself and recommendations are intentionally not included in
this report. Every stakeholder will find some sections that are
more connected to their work than others and A2P2 hopes it will
provide everyone with some tools to advocate and plan in a more
unified and coordinated way.
3:17:56 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF noted the report is divided into four sections,
with the two larger sections being the early childhood system,
which is the Environmental Scan, and the status of young
children and families, which is the data section. At the end of
the report are individual regional profiles based on the seven
public health regions of the state.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF stated that the timeline in Section I identifies
significant milestones in early childhood initiatives, policy
changes, and program developments over time starting with
Alaska's purchase from Russia in 1860. While young children and
mothers lived here long before 1860, a documented datapoint from
which to start was needed.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF said Section II is the early childhood system
scan. Early childhood systems are defined nationally as dynamic
cross-sector collaborations between organizations with a shared
mission to help children and families thrive. To be able to dig
into the data for this report A2P2 first had to determine what
made up Alaska's early childhood (EC) system. This section
defines the elements/components of a high functioning EC system
and discusses the status of each element in Alaska - funding,
data systems, quality standards, family engagement and outreach,
workforce and professional development, and governance and
leadership. For each of these components, this section
identifies what is in place, where the system has gaps and
challenges, and where it has strengths. These components are
linked, overlapping, and mutually reinforcing pieces, and when
properly functioning these components should provide a strong
infrastructure for young children and their families to thrive.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF said Section III is where most of the data is
reported and this section essentially creates a baseline on the
status of young children and mothers. It identifies and reports
on a set of research-based indicators that could be used to
measure population level changes and trends over time in four
main areas - demographics, health and development, child safety
and family supports, and school readiness and success.
Indicators were selected based on nationally recognized measures
of child health, wellbeing, and development, as well as the
availability of data in Alaska. This baseline is pre-COVID-19
and now some of these indicators most likely look very
different, for example, childcare availability, and maternal
mental health.
3:21:19 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY confirmed to Representative Kurka that the
document being discussed by Ms. Ben-Yousef is not in the
committee packet.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF clarified her presentation is not a PowerPoint
presentation and is essentially the report broken into visuals.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF resumed her presentation. She specified that the
regional profiles are divided into Alaska's seven public health
regions and highlight select indicators for each of these
regions. The indicators are demographics, mothers and babies,
child safety and maltreatment, family supports, and early
childhood education. The regional profiles when compared to one
another shed light on the distribution of resources across the
state. Not surprisingly the indicator data on outcomes almost
always corresponds with access or lack of access to supports.
3:23:06 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF focused on the component of funding within the
Environmental Scan. She displayed a map that many members saw
last month when A2P2 made legislative visits and said that
seeing the flow of funding for early childhood illustrated in
this way helps to understand the level of complexity in these
funding streams. It also explains why there are no simple
answers when asked whether the state's investment in early
childhood is effective or sufficient. She stated that
understanding the sources of funding, how these dollars flow,
and all the attached mandated restrictions is key to
strategically financing the system and to understanding what
flexibility is had to work with these funding sources, leverage
them, or tailor policy or regulations to do more with the
funding available. Drawing attention back to the map, she
explained that this funding analysis is a preliminary look at
recurring state and federal investments within Alaska that
directly target young children and pregnant post-partum women.
Using this map anyone can look up the individual programs and
funding sources to get a better understanding of the complexity,
restrictions, eligibility barriers, and opportunities that
impede or enable these programs' ability to serve children and
families in the state in an equitable and efficient way.
3:25:01 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF specified that in fiscal year 2018 Alaska
received $138.4 million in federal investments and $26.4 million
in state investments for early childhood programs. State
dollars made up 16 percent of all investments in Alaska's early
childhood system. Not all federal funding goes directly to the
state: $64.9 million flowed through the Department of Health
and Social Services (DHSS) and the Department of Education and
Early Development (EED), and $73.5 million flowed directly to
grantees such as Head Start, Early Head Start, and other tribal
programs, bypassing the Office of the Governor and state
departments. At the local level, blending and grading of funds
is already occurring to sustain programs, so the map doesn't
cover those funding streams and doesn't include the large amount
of money that families spend out-of-pocket on early childhood
services. The report itself does touch on Medicaid.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY noted that the full report is on BASIS and
that Ms. Ben-Yousef is discussing pages 18 and 19 of the report.
3:26:21 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF continued her presentation. She said the report
goes through some of the challenges and barriers to funding and
highlights some of the strengths that exist. One challenge is
that the actual importance of the first years of a human's life
is not necessarily reflected in state budgets. Early childhood
programs are continuously put on the chopping block. Addressing
the challenges of Alaska's childhood population requires
significant investment, but there is no oversight body or
organized way to identify opportunities to coordinate these
complex funding streams or to strategically make system level
recommendations. An example of a strength is that Medicaid
expansion has increased access to health care for children and
pregnant women and the Medicaid 1115 Behavioral Health Waiver
increases preventative care opportunities that are known to
reduce costs. Alaska also has several initiatives to improve
the early childhood workforce, including professional
development for infants and early childhood mental health
providers, which is an identified need. As well, there are
scholarships and incentives for specialized early intervention
staff, health care providers, and early childhood educators.
There have been several iterations of early education bills
illustrating that there is a strong appetite to rethink some of
these areas of improvements. Finally, Alaska has a strong and
vocal network of engaged stakeholders who want a strong early
childhood system.
3:28:01 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF stated that the governance component has been the
major focus of A2P2's work in early childhood. She related that
the report talks about three common approaches to state level
early childhood governance used by most states - coordinated,
consolidated, and creation of an altogether new agency. Alaska
currently uses a coordinated model where multiple agencies
coordinate and collaborate with each other through formal
interagency agreements. This model may or may not have state
level task force, committee, or other type of leadership body.
Alaska's coordinated model has programs and services housed
primarily within EED and DHSS. With the recently proposed DHSS
bifurcation, early childhood services would have potentially
been coordinated between three different departments.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF addressed why Alaska's coordinated model is so
uncoordinated. She related that within Alaska at least seven
convening bodies provide leadership and direction to different
components of the early childhood system, with each body having
different authority and focus and some impacting early childhood
efforts more directly than others. The bodies are Alaska Early
Childhood Coordinating Council (AECCC), Alaska Children's Trust,
Alaska Mental Health Board, Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority, Alaska Workforce Investment Board, Governor's Council
on Disabilities and Special Education, and State Board of
Education and Early Development. She pointed out that AECCC is
the only council strictly focused on early childhood and is also
the only body with no paid staff, no statutory authority, no
written mandate to produce an annual report or issue
recommendations to the governor or legislature, and no formal
avenue for advocacy. Many of AECCC's members are state
employees and therefore they are limited in their ability to
respond to policy and budgetary decisions that affect young
children. As far as the question of AECCC's role in
coordinating early childhood, she advised the short answer is
that it can't.
3:30:46 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF stated that regarding system-level coordination,
Alaska gets bogged down in the program level. She explained
that Alaska has a coordinated governing structure that spans
across departments but lacks the strong governance or organizing
structure that can provide a common vision, oversight,
management, and accountability of the state's early childhood
system and funding streams, including the ability to report to
stakeholders in a meaningful way. Many of the previously
mentioned leadership bodies have overlapping priorities related
to early childhood. For example, while the AECCC is tasked with
providing oversight for five federal grants it doesn't have
oversight of all early childhood programs. Some programs fall
under the Governor's Council on Disabilities, the State Board of
Education and Early Development, or other state boards or
commissions that have responsibility for goals or plans relevant
to Alaskans and children. Also, the AECCC is more limited in
both resources and authority, which means that there is a need
and an opportunity for more coordination of early childhood
coalitions, tribal organizations, and entities like hospitals,
private funders, and businesses that fund or support community
early childhood initiatives.
3:32:17 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF, in response to Representative Prax, stated there
are 94,000 children in Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX offered his understanding that between the
federal government and state government, $154 million is being
spent per year.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF replied that in 2018 the federal investment in
Alaska for early childhood specifically, so it doesn't include
Medicaid for example, was $138.4 million with a $26.4 million
state match.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX calculated that that is $14,000 per year per
child, plus Medicaid and others. He concurred there is room for
improvement.
3:33:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether the 94,000 children aged
zero to eight is the number of children in Alaska or the number
of children being served by these programs.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF answered that it is the number of children in
Alaska in 2018 aged zero to eight.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY inquired about the number of children
being served.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF responded she will get back with an answer as she
doesn't have the number off the top of her head.
3:34:45 PM
IRIS MATTHEWS, President, The Stellar Group, stated that the
number probably could be [calculated] but explained it wouldn't
necessarily be a unique number because some children might
receive funding through multiple programs and some of Alaska's
numbers are based on eligibility, not actual. She said it is
known how many sites receive CACFP [Child and Adult Care Food
Program] redemptions, how many children they serve roughly, but
that the number can fluctuate throughout a month or a week or
even a day. She said she therefore wouldn't feel comfortable
just adding up all the numbers of children served across the
categories and giving that as a unique number.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY said he would appreciate getting the
numbers.
MS. MATTHEWS noted that the need for data is one of the sections
of the early childhood system that Ms. Ben-Yousef hasn't yet
talked about. She specified that one of the only ways to answer
a question like that is to have an integrated data system, which
Alaska does not currently have. When data can be linked across
programs a much more complete picture is provided of how
different programs might be contributing to particular or unique
children and allow a look for outcomes later down the line. For
example, a question that could answered with an integrated data
system is whether children who receive a certain set of services
do better in, say, their third grade reading scores than a set
of children from the same community who maybe do not [receive
that set of services]. Some states have invested in those
systems and are able to answer some of those more complex
questions about how services are distributed across their state.
3:37:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA stated he knows many children, including
his own, who don't receive services. He said he therefore
questions the relevancy of the 94,036 children in this category
and would appreciate receiving the data.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF answered she would argue that all children are
involved in this in one way or another "because we're not just
talking about services or supports for children in need, we're
talking about workforce development, so childcare, teachers, and
early education, and we're talking about health care, and ...
early intervention services, developmental screening that occurs
within a pediatrician's office." She added that she "would
argue that every child in the state is accessing one form of
service here in early childhood programs or another in one way
or another."
MS. BEN-YOUSEF resumed her presentation. She brought attention
to the regional profiles and pointed out that the northern and
southwestern regions of Alaska are consistently underserved.
She explained that poverty, which is the single greatest threat
to a child's well-being, has the highest rates in those same
areas. For children ages zero to seventeen, it is 27 percent in
the Northern Region and 35 percent in the South Region versus
11-15 percent in the Matanuska-Susitna ("Mat-Su") and Southeast
Alaska regions. The teen birth rate is over 43 percent in the
Southwest Region and 56 percent in the Northern Region versus 9-
19 percent in other regions. These profiles highlight some of
those areas where there could be clear benefit from digging
deeper to understand what is behind these disparities.
3:40:14 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF stated that rural Alaska is underutilizing the
childcare assistance program, which operates under Public
Assistance at the DHSS. She related that for the Northern
Region, which includes the Nome Census Area, North Slope
Borough, and Northwest Arctic Borough, children zero through
eight make up 16 percent of the regional population, but the
average monthly caseload for Child Care Assistance Program
(CCAP) represents less than 1 percent of average monthly
caseloads for the state, which translates to just over $5,000 in
average monthly benefits to that region. She compared this to
the Gulf Coast Region where young children make up 12 percent of
the population, roughly 9,490 children compared to 4,425 in the
Northern Region, and the average monthly caseload is 12 percent
of monthly caseloads in Alaska and translates to nearly
$164,000. Children zero through eight make up about 16 percent
of the population in Southwest Alaska and less than 1 percent of
the average monthly caseloads are utilized there, amounting to
just $150. In Anchorage young children make up 13 percent of
the population, like the Northern Region, but in Anchorage it
translates to about 36,856 kids, approximately 8 times more kids
than the Northern Region, and the average monthly caseload for
childcare assistance is 64 percent, which amounts to over
$740,000, which is 148 times 5,000 the monthly average of
benefits utilized in the Northern Region.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF noted that something to reflect on while looking
at the above-mentioned numbers is that based upon the Providence
Community Health Council's 2018 Anchorage Community Needs
Assessment, Anchorage is considered an underserved area. She
said she recognizes that this isn't black and white and that
there are other sources of funding distributed directly to
tribes that could be supplementing some of these services. But,
she continued, it does raise some big questions about how these
benefits get distributed, whether regions are set up to even
utilize these benefits, or how much is understood about how
funding gets distributed across the state.
3:43:30 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF stated that there are some logical answers behind
some of these questions about how regions utilize resources and
assistance programs, but they're not widely known or understood,
and a better understanding can provide opportunities for serving
families more efficiently. For the Child Care Program Office,
for example, it's likely a question of access to licensed
childcare. There are only five licensed childcare facilities in
the Northern Region compared to 56 in Southeast which has a
smaller percentage, 11 percent of young children, than
Southwest. Of the five licensed childcare facilities, two
accept Child Care Assistance Program vouchers, both of which are
in the Nome Census Area. The CCAP childcare assistance program
vouchers can only be used at licensed facilities or with exempt
providers. Head Start and Early Head Start and school district
pre-K programs provide most early learning opportunities,
although not all children are served in a classroom setting.
Thread estimates that 40 percent of children zero to five in the
Northern Region were in unlicensed care, which might include
using family, friends, or neighbors to care for children.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF advised that tribes receive federal tribal
childcare assistance funds which are not included in these
regional profiles. As sovereign governments, she explained,
that data is not reported to and through the state, so the
bigger picture isn't had that tells how those funds are being
spent by each community. There are missing pieces that could
explain how different communities are braiding and blending
their funds to support families outside these state resources.
Understanding those pieces, or whether the state funds are
considered meaningful and effective investments, could help
increase or strengthen the services and supports provided by the
tribal assistance funds. Knowing this information would provide
the ability to identify what supports communities have or don't
have access to and would provide the ability to strengthen and
elevate investments that lead to positive outcomes. State level
priorities and policies must also consider the diversity between
Alaska's different regions and the very different challenges and
strengths of each of them.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF pointed out that the Mat-Su School District's
school readiness and success rates are higher than the statewide
average and higher than Anchorage. She asked why that is and
noted that there is anecdotal information on private investments
and initiatives that bring community members and organizations
together in collaboration to promote family resilience and
reduced child maltreatment. However, she continued, it would
require a deeper level of analysis of how Mat-Su invests private
funds to make any causal correlation and understand which of
those investments are most effective.
3:46:52 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF moved to the status report and examined the
section on health and development. She noted that this baseline
report on the status of young children and moms would look
different if it were compiled today. She explained that many of
Alaska's communities were already struggling with access to
childcare pre-COVID-19, and now new data is showing staggering
increases in the rates of maternal depression during pregnancy
and in the year after pregnancy. Research, including studies
from Harvard University Center for the Developing Child, shows
that mothers experiencing depression are less able to
sufficiently respond to their baby's needs during the most
critical period of the baby's development. Mother's stress
disrupts the infant's brain development which then impacts the
ability to learn and the child's physical and mental health
later in life. In Alaska pre-COVID-19, depressive symptoms
among mothers are reported at the same rate at four months post-
partum as at three years post-partum. New data shows the rates
of maternal depression doubling and tripling due to COVID-19.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF turned to the topic of social workers. She said
Alaska has three professional licenses for social workers but
only the highest level of licensed clinical social worker (LCSW)
can go Medicaid for services, such as psychological testing,
psychotherapy, and crisis intervention. To be an LCSW, a person
must hold a Master or Doctor of Social Work from an approved
college or university, have two years of post-master supervised
experience, have passed a licensing exam, and met all other
requirements. The median salary for social workers in Alaska is
just over $47,000. The emotional stress with that job can be
high, especially when dealing with kids and infants. Other
barriers make it hard for Alaska to retain and expand its mental
health workforce, especially for this population, but Alaska's
Medicaid policies tend to disincentivize providers from offering
their services to the Medicaid population, which often are the
ones most in need.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF returned to the discussion of data and noted that
a lot can be done with data inform policy, assess program
effectiveness, ensure the right investments are being targeted,
and develop quality improvement practices and accountability.
She looked at the sources and types of data for early childhood
in Alaska. She explained that integrated data systems are all
the rage these days and rightfully so, but while there is a
significant interest in having better data for decision making
and for answering questions like the committee has asked today,
these types of integrated systems require a significant
investment to build and maintain. Alaska had an attempt during
the development of its Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)
through the Alaska Postsecondary Commission with an
administrative order signed by Governor Parnell. But after the
initial funding ran out, the SLDS, known as the Alaska Navigator
Statewide Workforce and Education Related Statistics (ANSWERS),
struggled to find sustainable funding and decommissioned ANSWERS
in 2019. While fully integrated data systems probably still are
a faraway dream for Alaska, the state has within DHSS the Alaska
Longitudinal Child Abuse and Neglect Link (ALCANLink) Project
developed by Dr. Jared Parrish. That program is already
providing extremely valuable data to programs and initiatives.
3:51:54 PM
MS. BEN-YOUSEF related that A2P2 has been involved in leading a
group of stakeholders tasked with developing recommendations for
a new organizing structure for Alaska's early childhood system,
and the state now has an Early Childhood Strategic Plan. This
strategic plan was created in 2019 and the Environmental Scan
report served as one of the key source documents for the plan.
She said 540 Alaskans provided input for this strategic plan
through three community gatherings, three joint task force work
groups, two statewide video conferences with 19 participants,
six joint task force meetings, 63 early childhood professionals
in 11 sessions, 301 online stakeholder survey responders, and
over 50 joint task force leadership team meetings.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF stated that this strategic plan presents a north-
star 10-year vision that was approved by federal funders and was
adopted last week by the AECCC. The governance work is the
result of goal three of this plan. Alaska's children and
families are supported by a functional comprehensive mixed
delivery early childhood system. She urged that while working
to allocate the American Rescue Plan dollars, legislators refer
to the strategic plan as a data driven evidence-based resource
for how to infuse the funds that can be spent on early childhood
services in Alaska. The plan was created and reviewed by people
with the closest and most extensive experience in both utilizing
and providing services to families and it is one of the most
collaboratively created documents in Alaska today. Ms. Ben-
Yousef encouraged members to read the 16-page Policy Impact
Summary From Zero to Three on the benefits for infants and
toddlers in the 2021 ARP Act. She related that many people in
this sector are working hard to understand the guidelines and
restrictions in this Act and to identify opportunities to infuse
money into areas where it will truly make a systems level
impact. Opportunities are in there to support the type of
governance work being done for early childhood systems. She
encouraged committee members to reach out to A2P2 with any
questions when work is begun on those allocations.
3:55:27 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY recalled Ms. Ben-Yousef mentioning that she
wanted the data in the report to speak for itself and therefore
a conscious decision was made not to include any sort of
specific recommendations. She asked how Ms. Ben-Yousef
envisions a document like this being worthwhile in terms of its
utilization by policy makers.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF replied that it takes understanding the system to
be able to make effective decisions about it. The document,
through the visualizations of the funding map and through
looking at each of those components that make up the system, can
provide a user-friendly way of getting to know what makes up the
components of the early childhood system. It is a resource to
refer to and flip through while working on policy. The report
has served already as a supporting document for SB 8, Senator
Begich's Reads Act, and she hopes it continues to serve as a
resource for other policies moving forward. It served as one of
the key resources for the strategic plan and can be used to look
at where Alaska has some big gaps and disparities in how
resources are distributed. It is a baseline to measure
effectiveness in the future and she encourages folks to use it
in that way and to ask the questions: "What is the data that we
want? Can we answer the questions that we have with this data
and if we don't then how can we get that data?" The report
helps to bring everyone together in a more cohesive way.
3:58:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ commented that compensation to early
childcare providers is under $27,000 per year, which is not a
livable wage, while kindergarten teachers make an average of
$62,000. Early childhood providers should be paid in a
commensurate fashion, she opined, because this is a profession
and children are the most important national asset. She
recalled Ms. Ben-Yousef stating that only a very narrow pool of
social workers, the licensed clinical social workers, can bill
Medicaid. She asked what the barrier is to those folks being
able to bill Medicaid.
MS. BEN-YOUSEF responded it is the way Medicaid policies are
written and who is eligible to bill.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ further asked whether there are special
hoops that must be gone through to be able to bill Medicaid or
whether it is the range of services that can be billed to
Medicaid. In other words, she continued, whether it is a
licensure issue or the categories of services for which Medicaid
allows billing from social workers.
Ms. BEN-YOUSEF answered it is the type of licensure that is the
barrier.
4:01:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS offered his appreciation for the
presentation. He related that Alaska is apparently going to
receive about $76 million through the Rescue Plan for CCDBG
grants. He agreed with Representative Spohnholz about underpaid
early education providers and a lack of adequate supply of early
childhood education, and thanked Ms. Ben-Yousef for the graphs
on pages 14 and 15 which provide this information. He offered
his hope that the committee can keep looking at how to
strengthen the system, including making early childcare and
learning a living-wage profession so there can be an adequate
supply [of professionals].
^OVERVIEW: MyHouse Mat-Su Homeless Youth Center
OVERVIEW: MyHouse Mat-Su Homeless Youth Center
4:02:59 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the next order of business
would be an overview regarding the MyHouse Mat-Su Homeless Youth
Center.
4:03:10 PM
JUSTIN PENDERGRASS, Suicide Prevention Advocate, Mat-Su Youth
Housing, MyHouse Mat-Su Homeless Youth Center, explained that
MyHouse is a drop-in center for homeless teens in the Matanuska-
Susitna (Mat-Su) Valley. He said it serves the demographic of
14- to 24-year-olds who are at risk of being homeless, couch
surfing, or who are sleeping outside in tents or vehicles. Over
the last 10 years a job training program has been developed
through this facility, but other needs are also directly
affecting the youth in the Mat-Su Valley. A big thing is
suicide, so he was brought on to help collect data and combat
some of the difficulties and things that are struggled with in
the Mat-Su Valley as far as suicide goes.
MR. PENDERGRASS related that during his time in this work, he
has noticed that there is a lot of awareness across Alaska, but
that awareness does not provide outcomes. If there are no
measurable outcomes, he advised, it is not prevention. If it is
not intended to be prevention and offers no connections and no
outcomes, then it is awareness. He said things need to be done
in a different direction to lower the rates of suicide in
Alaska. He pointed out the ways that this can be done. The
opposite of suicide is connection, he explained. True
prevention requires connection strategies for moving out of the
depression and sadness and using mentors and peer support models
for recovery. Peer led support has proven time and time again
to make large impacts on substance abuse recovery across the
state because of the connections it builds.
4:05:12 PM
MR. PENDERGRASS stated that if true authentic connections are
established between those who are struggling and those who have
struggled, a true shift in suicide will be seen in Alaska. He
advised that this requires the building of a statewide network
of peers who understand the difference between awareness and
prevention. Placing a peer in every school who is fully trained
with the standard of living experience would help to connect the
counselors to extra resources to be able to help these youth.
Counselors are not fully equipped for helping someone who is in
a crisis for suicide. Over the last six years MyHouse has
implemented the strategies of true prevention with peer mentors
and support that builds actual authentic connections. Of the
more than 700 clients, 480 struggle with suicide - that's 67
percent of homeless youth who struggle with suicide in the Mat-
Su Valley alone. Since implementing these strategies, MyHouse
has not had a completed suicide within its program since 2015
and he has yet to see a program that can show something that has
done better.
MR. PENDERGRASS shared that the reason he is so passionate about
this is because he struggles with suicide. He fell through the
cracks, he related, he didn't have school to help him, he was
homeless at 16, and he battled for years. He said he would like
to see for-real change in his community because the numbers are
increasing and the awareness is increasing, but a change is not
being seen and the numbers are not going down. The continued
funding of programs that aren't providing true prevention will
result in rates continuing to increase and youth continuing to
succeed in ending their lives. This [suicide] pandemic will
continue for years to come and affect more and more youth
throughout the Mat-Su Valley and the rest of the state.
MR. PENDERGRASS said he wants to make clear that counselors are
doing a great job in providing clinical support to kids, but
they are not doing a good job in providing real human
connection. Real human connection is the difference between
someone ending their life and someone not ending their life. He
found that in mentorship and peer support, people came around
him and loved him when he had no one who could.
4:08:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX inquired whether Mr. Pendergrass said he had
700 clients in the Mat-Su Valley.
MR. PENDERGRASS replied correct, 700 homeless youth, 700 clients
in the Mat-Su Valley. Responding further to Representative
Prax, he clarified it is 700 clients with 1,300 being the cap.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX recalled Mr. Pendergrass saying these are
homeless [youth] who are couch surfing or living outside a
building in a tent or car.
MR. PENDERGRASS answered correct.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX remarked, "Incredible."
4:09:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY shared his experience in Kodiak as a
tennis coach and that suicide awareness was one of several
themes. Regarding connections and that it takes a village, he
asked what Mr. Pendergrass would suggest for how others in the
village, especially youth, could be involved.
MR. PENDERGRASS suggested that a peer-to-peer network be built
that includes people like himself who have struggled and come
out on the other side. He related that while growing up in the
Mat-Su Valley he lost four friends in high school to suicide.
He said he was homeless and didn't go to school much because it
wasn't a priority to him; if he went to school, it was for food.
It is building a connection group of peers who know the
difference between awareness and prevention. Prevention is real
authentic connection, having conversation, listening, meeting
with these people, it's going where they are. Real peer support
is someone who has gone through the darkness and come out on the
other side and has grown through it. He said it is the job of
every person in the state to prevent suicide.
^OVERVIEW: Child Welfare in Alaska
OVERVIEW: Child Welfare in Alaska
4:13:21 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the final order of business
would be an overview entitled, "Child Welfare in Alaska."
4:13:34 PM
KIM GUAY, Director, Office of Children's Services (OCS),
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), provided a
PowerPoint presentation entitled, "Child Welfare in Alaska,"
dated 4/8/21. She displayed slide 1 and stated she would be
talking about the day-to-day work of the Office of Children's
Services and how a case or family flows through the OCS. She
moved to slide 2, "Office of Children's Services," which
outlined the mission, vision, guiding principles, and core
values of OCS. She said OCS strives toward its vision to have
safe children and strong families; its guiding principles; and
its core values of hope, integrity, respect, and empathy. She
stated that these are talked about with staff from the day they
come in the door.
MS. GUAY turned to slide 3, "Office of Children's Services:
Progression of a Case." She explained that things begin with a
Report of Harm through community and mandatory reporters who are
concerned about children they are working with, or exposed to,
or related to. The report is next screened by Intake and then
progresses to Investigation and Assessment, where OCS folks
around the state investigate child maltreatment and assess for
safety. About 10 percent of the investigations end up in a
legal relationship with OCS. Those families are called "family
services cases" or "family services families," and this is where
OCS is working with the families more formally through court
intervention. With family services cases there is then a
conclusion that OCS calls Permanency, such as reunification or
other forms of permanency for children.
4:16:39 PM
MS. GUAY addressed slide 4, "Office of Children's Services:
Intake." She related that OCS has an Intake hotline and that
OCS receives around 20,000 reports a year via walk-ins, faxes,
and phone calls. The intake worker talks to the reporter and
tries to ascertain numerous things, such as the demographic
information, but primarily OCS needs to know what the concern is
and how immediate the concern is so that OCS can determine its
response to that call. The two decisions that come out of
Intake are whether OCS is going to "screen in" a call report and
investigate it, or whether OCS is going to "screen out" that
report. She noted that sometimes several mandatory reporters
are exposed to a situation and so OCS gets multiple calls on
that one incident, in which case it will screen in one call and
screen out the others. Sometimes the information that is called
in does not rise to the level of a maltreatment and
investigation and assessment by the state. Sometimes OCS needs
to gather more information and may end up calling the school or
a doctor to help determine if this needs to be a screen out or a
screen in. For the cases that are screened in, OCS must
determine if it's a priority 1, or a priority 2, or a priority
3, which means that OCS must see the children face-to-face
within 24 hours, or 72 hours, or 7 days, respectively.
Sometimes that's easy, but Alaska's vastness and the children's
location can make it very difficult, especially if OCS must fly
into a community within a 24-hour period. If it is a situation
of needing immediate safety for a child, OCS often depends on
local law enforcement or village public safety officers (VPSOs)
or the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) workers who are within
the communities.
4:20:25 PM
MS. GUAY discussed the data depicted by the bar graph on slide
5, "Office of Children's Services: Intake." She stated that in
calendar year 2020 [the start of the COVID-19 pandemic], OCS
received about 18,000 reports, and of those 18,000 reports
around 7,000 were screened in. A lot less reports are screened
in than are screened out, she noted, and this can be due to
there being duplicate reports, or reports go to law enforcement
and so OCS does not have jurisdiction. Jurisdiction for OCS is
defined by parent or caretaker abuse. Something that happens
outside the home is not something that OCS investigates; OCS
investigates caretaker and parental abuse and neglect.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY inquired whether screened in cases were
duplicated or individual cases.
MS. GUAY replied that those are new cases and are not duplicated
cases. She said that sometimes OCS will get a report about a
situation and then several days later more information comes in.
If it meets the criteria to be investigated, it too could be
screened in, and so numerous investigations could be open on one
family at a time.
MS. GUAY resumed her discussion of slide 5. She stated that OCS
investigates and assesses neglect, mental injury, physical
abuse, and sexual abuse. She related that 75 percent of the
reports are alleging neglect in some fashion, which is substance
abuse, abandonment, lack of food or clothing, or children's
medical needs not being cared for. Neglect is the primary issue
in Alaska and the number one issue is families struggling with
alcohol abuse and what occurs to children in that situation.
Thirty percent are mental injury, which is domestic violence
with families in front of the children; 25 percent are physical
abuse of children, and 10 percent are sexual abuse of children.
4:22:06 PM
MS. GUAY displayed slide 6, "Office of Children's Services:
Investigation and Assessment," and explained that once a case is
screened in, it goes to investigation and assessment. She said
OCS has a practice model, so it has a method, a methodology
about how to approach, investigate, and work with families.
Once a case is screened in for investigations and assessment, a
protocol is followed. One of the first things OCS does is look
at the history of the family, whether the family has been
investigated before. A third of the reports are first time
reports and about 66 percent are families that OCS has been
involved with or has had other reports on. So, OCS always looks
at what's happened in the past and at criminal history. If the
family is Alaska Native and OCS knows who the tribe is, OCS will
coordinate with the tribe to help in the investigation and
assessment and tries to coordinate the response when
interviewing the children and talking with the parents. After
doing the paperwork to gather information about what's going on
with the family, OCS goes out and talks with the children, which
is called assessing for present danger. Is the child safe right
now? Can OCS leave here and feel comfortable doing that? Most
cases are not present danger situations, typically those happen
after hours and many times law enforcement is involved.
Sometimes it is serious things like skull fractures and broken
bones, but many times it is inebriated parents where domestic
violence ensued, the police show up, people are arrested, and
somebody needs to care for the children.
4:24:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA inquired whether the categories and
percentages on slide 5 are based on the total protected services
reports (PSR) or on the screened in.
MS. GUAY replied that they are from the screened in reports.
4:24:54 PM
MS. GUAY resumed her review of slide 6. She stated that if it
is determined that present danger is there, OCS takes immediate
action. A team decision making meeting is held, and OCs looks
to figure out how to put a safety plan in place to determine
what's going on with the family and make sure the child is safe
and then find out the circumstances that have led to this child
to be unsafe. If there is no present danger, OCS then looks at
what is going on in the family and what are the needs.
MS. GUAY spoke to the data shown on the bar graph on slide 7,
"Office of Children's Services: Investigation and Assessment."
She explained that Investigation and Assessment determines
maltreatment and determines if the child is safe. These are
independent decisions that are made, and the data is a little
bit different - about 40 percent of the children are screened in
and 10 percent of the screened in children end up in a removal
type situation, so the rest of those cases end up closed in
investigations, which is different than a substantiation. There
may be a family where OCS substantiates maltreatment, but
removal is not necessary, so that is why the number for
maltreatment is higher than the removal episodes. Calendar year
2020 had 10 percent removal and 19.3 percent in substantiations.
When OCS goes to close out a case, after having completed the
protocol of talking with the children and talking with the
parents, if there's a medical concern on a child OCS wants to
talk to the doctor, if it's an educational concern or the
children are not showing up at school, they don't have food,
they don't appear well kept, OCS wants to talk to the school.
So, OCS tries to talk to the people who have the collateral
information to help in making determinations about what is going
on with the family. And then OCS tries to make referrals as
needed. If it's basic needs OCS tries to help with food,
clothing, and shelter within the communities and it all depends
on the communities in which the family resides and how easily
that can happen.
4:28:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA requested clarification of the removal and
substantiation tables found on the right side of slide 7. He
offered his understanding that these tables are the percentage
breakdowns of the blue bar (screened in category) depicted on
the graph.
MS. GUAY responded, "Correct."
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA surmised the two charts on slide 7 were
comparing "apples to apples."
MS. GUAY answered yes. In further response, she confirmed it is
quite a bit of difference [between removal and substantiation].
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA explained he is asking because it seems
that the bar graph doesn't depict as big a difference [between
removals and substantiation] as is stated in the tables; for
example, in the tables for calendar year 2016 the removals are
at 9 percent and the substantiations are at 24.7 percent.
MS. GUAY confirmed it is quite a bit of difference. She
explained how that works by providing scenarios. She said some
parents can have a very stressed moment and end up leaving
bruises on their child, it's reported to OCS, they've already
engaged in services, they are remorseful of what's been done,
they don't want this to happen again. The Office of Children's
Services may substantiate maltreatment because maltreatment did
occur to a child but there is no need to remove a child.
Another situation could be a child was sexually abused, the
other parent had no idea that was occurring and when that parent
found out they took appropriate action such as immediately
getting a restraining order or leaving the house, and they
protected their child. So, yes, the maltreatment occurred but
the other parent was protective. That is why the discrepancy is
seen between a substantiation compared to a removal.
4:30:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY referred to slide 7 and inquired about
the number of intakes for calendar year 2020.
MS. GUAY replied that OCS screened in 7,268 for calendar year
2020.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asserted that 17 percent was removed
rather than 10 percent.
MS. GUAY responded that this is where it gets complicated. She
explained there could be numerous reports that have been
screened in on the family, but one report led to a removal and
that is where it gets harder to understand the data. She
reiterated that typically the families are familiar to OCS and
the OCS system and that is where it gets hard to track the data.
It takes a lot of research analysis to get the correct number.
4:32:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX referred to slide 7 and asked whether some
of the 1,270 removals for calendar year 2020 were repeats.
MS. GUAY answered that 1,270 is the number of children that were
removed.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX surmised that that is likely to be unique
individuals.
MS. GUAY replied yes, that would be 1,270 children that were
removed in calendar year 2020, which is a little bit different
than the number of PSRs that were screened in. The PSRs that
were screened in, which is closer to 18,000, are cases not kids.
4:33:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS recalled Mr. Pendergrass talking about the
importance of peer support and said his staff have done great
work looking at how to expand peer support. Representative
Fields asked how much that expansion in peer support is going to
be integrated with the school system and/or with OCS.
MS. GUAY responded that OCS has some grants for youth who are in
care as far as mentors for youth. She agreed with Mr.
Pendergrass as far as the social connections, which is one of
the things that OCS strongly believes in. She said there is a
lot of research studying families that are strong to figure out
what are their protective factors and OCS works with families to
increase their social connections, their resilience, and their
knowledge of parenting and skill and resiliency. In addition to
children, it is also a very important aspect for parents and OCS
is working on trying to increase peer support for parents who
are going through the child welfare system because it is a
difficult system to navigate, and it is complex.
4:35:45 PM
MS. GUAY continued her presentation. She turned to slide 8,
"Office of Children's Services: Court Process," and reiterated
that 10 percent of OCS cases end up in a removal situation. She
pointed out that Alaska statutes regulate how this works. She
referred to the twelve subsections listed on the slide for AS
47.10.011 and explained that when OCS files a petition with the
court when OCS removes a child, OCS has 24 hours to file that
petition with the court saying that OCS has removed children and
is alleging it's due to whatever the situation could be, such as
neglect, substance abuse, physical harm. She said OCS files a
petition and that gets it into the court and OCS will be in
front of a judge within 48 hours after filing that petition.
She explained that the flow chart on the right side of slide 7
is about the child in need of aid court process, it is often
referred to as the CHINA process. That very first hearing will
be a temporary custody hearing and there are strict timelines:
120 days to have an adjudication hearing; a disposition hearing
is done quickly after that; and a permanency hearing is done
every 12 months.
4:37:25 PM
MS. GUAY spoke to slide 9, "Office of Children's Services:
Family Services." She related that when children enter the
custody of OCS, one of the first things OCS does is try to have
a meeting of the parents, their social supports, and talk about
relative placements. It is very important to make sure that
children are placed with their relatives when safely able to do
so. Statute requires OCS to do a thorough relative search
within 30 days. In the assessment process, OCS tries to include
the tribes very early on. At this point OCS typically does know
the tribes and the tribes are active members in these CHINA
cases and proceedings. She said OCS meets with parents and
talks about their protective factors - how are they doing with
their social connections, resiliency, concrete supports in times
of need, and OCS tries to figure out where some deficits could
be and how OCS could put in activities and services to help some
of those deficits to increase protective factors. Many
referrals are made by OCS to community providers to try to do
assessments to figure out what level of treatment is needed if
it is substance abuse or mental health needs. Also, OCS always
is evaluating progress of case plans. A case plan is developed
within 60 days when a child has been removed and OCS meets with
the families and the children monthly. During that monthly
conversation there is discussion about how they are doing and
whether behavioral changes are being seen. It is not just
attending a parenting class; it's about looking for behavioral
change. Also, OCS makes sure that there are family contacts set
up with the children. That is one area that is a hard one to
set up and have enough family contact for families, but it is
something OCS strives to increase as things move forward into
the system.
MS. GUAY stated that if a relative placement cannot be found,
OCS has foster homes that it places children in. When the
process is first started, almost always the permanency plan for
children is reunification. Around 50 percent of children who
are in out of home care are reunified. The other 50 percent end
up in adoptions, guardianships, or tribes sometimes assume
jurisdiction. A small number of children age out of their
planned living arrangement. The children typically coming into
custody are younger children, under the age of six; these
children are typically the most vulnerable but not always, it
also depends on the kind of maltreatment. The children who do
age out are the ones often that have had significant needs, have
been in mental health facilities, numerous changes of placement,
and have significant trauma. Even when children are placed in
foster homes, OCS still has an obligation to continue looking
for relatives throughout the child's experience within OCS.
4:41:41 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY related that she recently participated in a
child welfare seminar where there was discussion about kinship
navigator, which sounds similar to Alaska's requirement to
search for relatives for children who are removed from the home.
She further related that in the seminar it was indicated that
there is an eligibility for federal reimbursement for those
types of services from April 2020-2021. She asked whether DHSS
has sought reimbursement for its staff time looking into placing
children with family members, regardless of whether the children
are American Indian or Alaska Native.
MS. GUAY replied that Alaska is one of the number one states in
Title IVE claiming for reimbursable activities and she believes
DHSS is pulling down as many dollars as possible. She noted
that an initial and ongoing relative search is one of the
activities that Alaska tribes do through the Alaska Child
Welfare Tribal Compact. She said she doesn't know the specific
amount for reimbursement and offered to get back with an answer.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY stated she is interested in any follow-up
information the department can provide with respect to drawing
down federal dollars for all Alaska children regardless of
Native beneficiary status since that is what it sounded like the
federal relief funds were being provided for.
4:43:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA related he has an internal conflict between
balancing the rights of the accused and protecting the children,
particularly when immediate action is needed, and a judgement is
being made. He asked how DHSS reaches that balance. He said he
is also concerned about the constitutional rights of the accused
to know who the accuser is.
MS. GUAY responded that the parents have the opportunity when in
front of the judge to be afforded attorneys if they cannot
provide one for themselves. She said there are many checks and
balances within [Alaska's] child welfare system. It isn't
common for OCS to remove children, and it is very infrequent
that OCS goes into court and has someone say the child shouldn't
have been removed. Many families are struggling with addiction,
historical trauma, or mental health issues, and there is statute
and regulation that allows OCS to investigate and make these
determinations but then immediately go into court to determine
that OCS isn't abusing its power or authority. The parents then
have attorneys appointed to them or provide their own attorney
to help navigate the system and to advocate for their rights.
There is statute that protects the identity of a reporter,
although the judge can choose to release that information. The
reason a reporter's information is protected is so people will
reach out and protect children when they are in harm's way.
4:47:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ observed on slide 7 that of the number
of reports of harm made annually only a very small number result
in removal. She concurred there is a system of checks and
balances so that nobody's children are taken from them on a
permanent basis without there being clear and convincing
evidence that a child is at harm. She inquired whether Ms. Guay
knows the average number of reports of harm that are filed in a
case before a child is removed.
MS. GUAY answered she will get back with specifics, but she
knows that 33 percent are first time reports to OCS and 40
percent have three or more reports that have come to OCS. She
said many of these families have significant history, including
having been in the foster care system before and having been
returned and then ending up in another removal episode. Alaska
has a poor statistic of repeat maltreatment, she advised. It is
one area that Alaska doesn't do well in. Over the last couple
years OCS has focused on looking at children who have been
repeatedly maltreated because these children end up with trauma
and so it is a concern for OCS. Of the 20,000 reports received
by OCS, 1,200 end up in some type of legal intervention removal
from the home. There is often a thought that OCS goes out and
removes all the children that it gets reports on, but that isn't
true. Ninety percent of OCS's investigations end up in a case
closure, so 10 percent end up into further involvement with OCS.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ expressed the importance of prevention
to keep children from entering the child welfare system and
opined that this is the area where Alaska could do a better job.
She recognized the work that OCS is trying to do in that regard.
4:52:27 PM
MS. GUAY displayed slide 10, "Office of Children's Services:
Family Services," which outlines how OCS goes about engaging
with families. She said OCS creates case plans and evaluates
case plans, and it's about behavioral change because that is
what OCS is looking for. She drew attention to the five
protective factors listed on the slide that are important in the
strengthening of families [parental resilience, social
connections, concrete supports in times of need, knowledge of
parenting and child development, social emotional competence of
children].
MS. GUAY reviewed slide 11, "Office of Children's Services:
Child Experience." She reiterated that the system is complex
and explained that the slide depicts the child's experience.
She pointed out that the removal creates trauma, being
maltreated, and repeatedly maltreated creates trauma, and moving
foster homes can create trauma. There are checks and balances
in the child's experience with OCS. There is OCS, tribes,
foster parents, extended family, courts, guardian ad litem,
service providers, and public defenders.
MS. GUAY showed slide 12, "Office of Children's Services: Parent
Experience," and said the parents' experience is similar in that
there are a lot of people involved in the parents' experience
with child welfare and the CHINA process; there are attorneys,
court hearings, service providers. There are lots of different
struggles, with transportation often an issue. There definitely
are challenges within the system of child welfare and all the
providers that surround families.
4:54:00 PM
MS. GUAY spoke to slide 13, "Office of Children's Services:
Services Array." She explained that this slide depicts "behind
the scenes" of OCS. Typically heard about is OCS case workers
and supervisors and their interaction with families. There are
other programs within OCS, such as the giving of grants to
children's advocacy centers. There are the foster care
licensing programs, Title IVE. Many staff are behind the scenes
that help support all the work done by OCS around the state in
child welfare.
MS. GUAY turned to slide 14, "Office of Children's Services:
Oversight," and pointed out that OCS has many levels of
oversight. For example, OCS is reviewed by the federal
government on a consistent basis; OCS is currently on a program
improvement plan. She said OCS works closely with the ombudsman
and that many families seek out the ombudsman if they have
issues. She noted that OCS has audits and a citizens' review
panel, which is a legislative requirement that oversees and
looks into OCS's cases and makes recommendations that come to
the legislature. The OCS is involved with courts all the time
and OCS also has an internal quality assurance unit that reviews
the cases and offers feedback and suggestions.
MS. GUAY concluded her presentation with slide 15, "Office of
Children's Services: Current Priorities." She stated that
current priorities include prevention, as OCS is very interested
in getting upstream. She said OCS is being strategic about this
because it knows it is still downstream trying to help those
families that are currently in the water. Another priority is
OCS's retention efforts for its staff as OCS isn't going to get
anywhere unless it can get better retention of staff. Yet
another priority is essential services, which are the services
that OCS gives to children and families, such as monthly
meetings with the families, meeting the children and making sure
they have case plans. Also a priority, are community and tribal
collaboration because OCS cannot do this work alone and needs as
many people at the table as possible trying to help families be
successful, connect, and have a strong partnership so they can
be successful in parenting their children safely.
4:56:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY referred to slide 7 and observed that
1,270 children were returned home [in calendar year 2020]. He
inquired about the average caseload of an OCS worker.
MS. GUAY replied that it is a hard number to give. If averaging
every worker who is filling a PCN and looking at how long
they've been here, that number would be around 16 cases per
worker, which is not bad. Realistically, she advised, that is
not the truth. When workers are out on leave or have quit the
agency but not yet walked out the door, and those cases all must
be redistributed, she said her best guess statewide is around 24
cases per worker, some higher, some lower. It also doesn't tell
that someone in a "roll office" has enormous travel for going to
see some of these families, so their caseloads should be a lot
lower when it takes two days to travel to see a family, which is
much different than jumping into a car and driving across town.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY offered his understanding that most of
the cases involve substances. He asked whether there is any
ability to do monitoring, such as a portable breathalyzer
several times a day that records body chemistry.
MS. GUAY responded that OCS uses a variety of methods depending
on the location in Alaska, but the most common is a urinalysis
at different facilities to determine drug and alcohol use.
Sometimes it is hair follicles. She said she doesn't believe
OCS typically does any kind of ankle monitoring at home.
5:00:01 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health and Social Services Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| A2P2 - Alaska Early Childhood Environmental Scan.pdf |
HHSS 4/8/2021 3:00:00 PM |
All Alaska Pediatric Partership |
| Prenatal-to-3 Policy Impact Center - ARP Benefits for Infants and Toddlers.pdf |
HHSS 4/8/2021 3:00:00 PM |
A2P2 |
| Early Childhood Alaska - Strategic Direction - Planning Report and Appendices.pdf |
HHSS 4/8/2021 3:00:00 PM |
A2P2 |
| Early Childhood Alaska - Strategic Direction Brochure.pdf |
HHSS 4/8/2021 3:00:00 PM |
A2P2 |
| Early Childhood Alaska - Strategic Direction Slides.pdf |
HHSS 4/8/2021 3:00:00 PM |
A2P2 |
| Early Childhood Alaska - Strategic Direction 2020-2025.pdf |
HHSS 4/8/2021 3:00:00 PM |
A2P2 |
| OCS Case Flowcharts 6-8-17.pdf |
HHSS 4/8/2021 3:00:00 PM |
OCS |
| OCS presentation final.pdf |
HHSS 4/8/2021 3:00:00 PM |
OCS |