Children’s Court Improvement Commission

2016 Annual Report

Supreme Court of New MexicoAdministrative Office of the Courts

Ezra Spitzer and Judge Jennifer Delaney, Co-Chairs

1

A Message from the Co-Chairs:

Dear CCIC Community,

The past year has been a productive one. The Commission went through a robust assessment and planning process that has helped to create the structures necessary to accomplish the broad reach of the Commission. The work and the aligning of existing initiatives and community efforts have rejuvenated members. The Commission developed a new strategic plan and developed new staffing structures that will help assist members in moving the work forward. The Commission exited this period of self-

assessment and planning with renewed focus, a clarity of purpose, and the organizational structures to successfully execute our mission. 

We look forward to a productive year ahead and to continuing to challenge ourselves to bring new partners to the table and to authentically engage with young people and their families. The Commission is a body founded on collaborative principles and a belief in the power of collective action. We look forward to partnering with you to ensure that our systems work equitably for children and families.   

Ezra Spitzer and Judge Jennifer Delaney

2

History

In 1993, the federal government through the Health and Human Services Department created a Court Improvement Project (CIP) grant in order to enhance the court's role in achieving stable, permanent homes for children in foster care. Since 1995, New Mexico has applied for and received CIP grant funds.

The New Mexico Supreme Court created and formally named the Children’s Court Improvement Commission (CCIC) to ensure the grant’s purpose of court improvement for child welfare. The Chief Justice of the New Mexico Supreme Court appoints a broadly-based Commission to coordinate the CIP purpose and grant funds. This Commission includes judges, state legislators, representatives from protective services and juvenile justice (The Children, Youth and Families Department), attorneys, child and family advocates, educators, service providers, foster parents, youth, and other interested parties.

Traditionally, the Commission has been entirely focused on court improvement of child welfare cases. Following the restructuring and strategic planning retreat in June of 2016, the Commission decided it should pursue a broader focus, working on all aspects of children’s court improvement instead of solely focusing on child welfare cases, although oversight of the CIP funding continues by the CCIC and remains child welfare focused.

The participants of the CCIC form a strong coalition collaborating to improve New Mexico's child welfare and juvenile justice systems. The CCIC envisions a seamless system of collaboration in order to provide for the safety and health of all children and families in New Mexico.

Committees that have been formed to work on these additional focus areas include: Juvenile Justice; Protective Services; Behavioral Health; Lead Team; and Education. Racial equity is a focus area in all committees.

The previous federal strategic plan covered the 2014-2016 timeframe. Goals pertaining to data-driven and evidence-based processes were achieved along with goals concerning increased knowledge, new mechanisms, improved communication between stakeholders, and enhanced collaboration. Expediting permanency was not completed; therefore, it was folded into the new strategic plan submitted in November of 2016 covering 2017-2019.

3

Vision and Mission

The mission of the New Mexico Children’s Court Improvement Commission is “to improve the safety, permanency, and well-being of children and families involved in Children’s Court proceedings by developing innovative initiatives through court, agency, and stakeholder collaboration.”

ValuesThe CCIC’s shared values include:

We value all children and families in New Mexico and believe that they all deserve support

We value non-duplication of work, instead seeking to be innovative in our initiatives and approaches

We value the diversity and voice of our members, stakeholders, partners, children, and youth

We value acknowledging existing efforts and then developing strategies to complement and leverage them (not to compete or overshadow)

We value envisioning and building holistic, collaborative systems We value race, gender, and sexual orientation equity

4

New Mexico Permanency and Outcomes at a Glance:

32%

57%

3% 1%6%

2% 0%

Permanency Outcomes for Children in New Mexico

Adoption Reunification Kinship Guardianship Non Relative GuardianshipICWA Transfer Aged out Emancipation PPLA

The chart above depicts the percentage of New Mexico children that exited foster care through a particular outcome during the 2016 calendar year. It should be noted that adoption, reunification, or legal guardianship are considered “permanent” placement for children and all other outcomes are those in which a child never reached “permanent” placement. Over half of the children reunify with their birth families and about a third reach legal permanency through adoption. Less than 3% exit care to kinship or familial guardianship.

Adoption

Reunification

Kinship Guardianship

Non Relative Guardianship

ICWA Transfer

Aged out

Emancipation

PPLA

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Statewide Time to Permanency

Median # OF MONTHS

The chart above shows the median number of months from the filing of the original petition to the time a child exited care. For example; if an abuse and neglect petition

5

were filed and the child was eventually adopted, the child would spend almost 3 years in foster care, however those children who exited to kinship guardianship were doing so in less than 6 months from the time they entered care. This data can help children’s courts monitor the time the children in their jurisdiction are spending in foster care in order to achieve permanency more quickly.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 20160

200400600800 662 685 639 594 549 607 578 657 712 672 667

Number of Filings Statewide

Calendar Year

Abus

e &

neg

lect

cas

es

filed

The chart above shows the number of abuse and neglect cases filed in New Mexico each calendar year for the last ten years. There was a slight decrease in filings from 2009-2012, but filings returned to an average of 638 cases each year. For perspective, the courts have about 1500 cases pending at any one time. This chart does not depict the number of cases the court has pending; only the number of new CYFD petitions filed for the calendar year.

Any case that had a TPR or relinquishment hearing in 2016 is captured in this data set. The chart shows the length of time it took from Petition to the TPR or relinquishment hearing. Ideally, the TPR or relinquishment hearing occurs within 12 months. Some districts show a much longer period. This concern was identified by the Protective Services Subcommittee and will be a focus of their work in 2017.

First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth Nineth Tenth Eleventh Twelfth Thirteenth0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Time from Petition to TPR/Relinqiushment

1-12 Months 13-16 Months 17-21 Months > = 22 months

6

Program Accomplishments

Children and Family Services Review (CFSR)

Additionally, in the beginning of 2016, the Children and Family Services Review (CFSR) by the Children’s Bureau within the Department of Health and Human Services was presented to the CCIC. This review is conducted for all states’ child welfare agencies CYFD in New Mexico. The Children’s Bureau expects the particular state’s Court Improvement Program to collaborate with CYFD in developing and implementing the Program Improvement Plan (PIP) designed to address any issues found during the CFSR. After the presentation to the CCIC, members of the Commission participated in PIP planning and implementation, incorporating the goal of timely permanence into the priorities identified by the Protective Services Subcommittee.

Data Quality

Quality court data continued to be a priority in 2016. The CCIC, in conjunction with the AOC, monitored all 13 districts’ monthly abuse and neglect data quality. Using the Odyssey case filing system reports, each court is required to submit a matrix of clean data quality reports to the AOC. If the reports contain errors, the AOC staff work directly with district courts to make any corrections. The data quality reports include identification of parties, assignment of attorneys, notice and return of service from required parties, child missing from hearing, child placements, judgements per child, respondents missing from hearings, and party relationships.

Training Initiatives

The New Mexico Supreme Court Task Force on Foster Care created the Corinne Wolfe Center for Child and Family Justice (the Center) in 1997 in order to provide law-focused, multidisciplinary training, education, resources, and technical assistance to the professionals and volunteers who work in Children’s Court. This includes judges, lawyers for CYFD, parents and children, social workers, CASA volunteers, and many others. 

In 2016, the Center provided the following educational opportunities and resources with Court Improvement Project funds:

7

1. Essential Information for Practicing and Presiding in Child Welfare Cases, the two-plus day “core” training for attorneys and judges new to Children’s Court;

2. Contract Attorney Mentoring (half-day training, plus six weeks of intensive one-on-one mentoring for attorneys for parents and children);

3. A series of Judges video conferences on a variety of topics, including a brief presentation by experts followed by peer-to-peer learning and conversation, as well as print resources. In 2016, videoconferences included:

a. Legislative changes to the Children’s Code; b. Adverse childhood experiences in New Mexico; c. Infant mental health (in two parts: the neuroscience, and how the

neuroscience informs judicial decision-making); d. Every Student Succeeds Act; e. Changes to the Indian Child Welfare Act and transition planning;

4. Developed and tested the Orientation for new Children’s Court Judges, a three-hour, in-chambers introduction to child welfare proceedings in New Mexico for judges and their staff;

5. Completed an interactive, online flowchart that provides a basic overview of each stage in abuse or neglect cases, intended for law professionals, social workers, and members of the public, including parties in these cases;

6. Updated the Indian Child Welfare Act bench card; and

7. Provided two updates to the NM Child Welfare Handbook.

With other funding, the Center provided the following additional programs and supports:

1. Social Justice Lunchbox Series, a speaker series that addressed the following topics for law students, lawyers, and members of the public:

a. Secondary Traumab. Cultivating Listening c. Cultural Literacy

2. Moving Children and Families Out of Poverty: A Tax Lawyer’s Perspective (noon knowledge presentation);

8

3. Essential Information for CASAs in Child Welfare Cases;

4. Five-day NITA train-the-trainer program specifically for Child Welfare cases;

5. The annual legal pre-session for lawyers and judges at the Children’s Law Institute. In 2016, the legal pre-session focused on intensive trial skills training;

6. Co-sponsored the annual Children’s Law Institute;

7. Provided a child-focused workshop at the annual Judicial Conclave (“Protecting and Providing Permanency for Immigrant Children: Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Findings in Domestic Relations, Child Welfare, and Delinquency Cases”);

8. Facilitated “New Mexico Children’s Code Open Discussion for Tribal Matters,” a meeting of tribal and state leaders to discuss possible changes to the Children’s Code related to improving outcomes for Indian children and enhanced compliance with the Indian Child Welfare Act;

9. Provided on-going technical assistance to infant mental health teams and judicial districts related to best practices for child welfare cases involving infants and infant mental health professionals;

10.Provided one-on-one technical assistance to contract attorneys.

11.Updated a “forms bank” for contract attorneys.

Court Appointed Attorney Compensation

9

One major accomplishment was the creation of a new model for contract attorney representation. Since 2013, CCIC had been conducting listening tours and collecting information about the challenges of quality legal representation. The overwhelming response regarding hindrance to quality legal representation was lack of equity and adequate compensation for work the cases require. The new compensation model involved transitioning the abuse and neglect contract attorneys from a monthly flat rate to an hourly rate. The hourly rate included compensation for in- and out-of- court time, staff time, travel time, and mileage. The contract terms were completely redone and included provisions for performance and compliance with contract terms, along with the new model for financing. The aim was not only to increase equity across the state but also to improve the quality of legal representation for both parents and children involved in abuse and neglect cases. The attorneys were required to submit detailed logs of all hours worked. The Supreme Court approved this change in 2016 and the new compensation model took effect in July of 2016. The CCIC is still in the process of developing a model for evaluation and effectiveness of this compensation structure. The chart below shows each judicial district and the percentage of time all court appointed attorneys were spending on each category of work from July – December of 2016. These data points were required to support the attorney billing. The data can be used to track how attorneys are spending their time, for example, attorneys who work in the 7th and 10th districts are spending a considerable amount of their time traveling – work that went uncompensated prior to July of 2016.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 130%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Attorney Activities by District - Percent of Total Time

Travel Client Contacts Casework ContactsPhone/Corr. Hearings Reading/writing/Invest.Other

Strategic Planning and Restructuring

10

The CCIC Leadership Team began a strategic planning process in 2016. They identified areas to consider and developed strategies to gather important input from stakeholders, including Commission, community, and youth who are in the system. Working with strategic planning consultant, Everette Hill, of Social Innovation Strategies Group, funded through Casey Family Programs, the Leadership Team began forming a process, which was conducted over a six-month period. They incorporated a 5-D approach (Define, Discovery, Dreaming, Design, and Delivery) in order to focus on both an organizational and system-assets analysis. The process is described in more detail in the following section.

Strategic Planning Process

The CCIC Leadership Team began a strategic planning process in 2016. They identified areas to consider and developed strategies to gather important input from stakeholders, including Commission, community, and youth who are in the system. Working with strategic planning consultant, Everette Hill, of Social Innovation Strategies Group, the Leadership Team began a process conducted over a six-month period.

During this time, the Team incorporated a 5-D approach (Define, Discovery, Dreaming, Design, and Delivery) in order to focus on both an organizational and system-assets analysis.

Phase I, Define: Decide Who and How to Gather InputIn this first phase, stakeholders were identified and engaged. They were surveyed by a combination of site-based interviews, phone interviews, and small focus groups. This resulted in capturing strengths, assets, resources, capabilities, and creative thought imbued in the strategic plan in order to carry CCIC into the future.

Phase II, Discovery: Inquiry into Strengths and Opportunities

11

Commission members and many stakeholders were interviewed, surveyed, or participated in youth focus groups in order to gather important information about strengths, resources, perspectives, and aspirations. This multi-tiered strategy allowed the process to give individuals multiple ways to connect to the process interview tool to gather information pertinent to Commission members and other important stakeholders. A review of Commission literature was also conducted to discover how the CCIC operationalizes and communicates its work. Internal operational environment and external environment were considered as strengths and opportunities were assessed.

Phase III, Dream: Identify Aspirations and ResultsThe third phase included the July 28, 2016 day-long strategic planning event, held at the National Hispanic Cultural Center. Nearly all Commissioners attended the function with support from Casey Family Programs. Attendees received a Feedback Report, including all gathered data. Using data and Commission documents, the group did an assessment of Commission work and reviewed the current framework of the Commission. Further, the participants brainstormed about engaging strategic areas. Small groups discussed priorities and committee work. Participants agreed to inspire and challenge the push towards important work in the future.

Phase IV, Design: Decide Which Opportunities Have the Most PotentialStrategic priorities were codified to produce a plan that could move the CCIC forward, taking into account that opportunities lie both inside and outside the organization. This asset-based approach aligned strategic opportunities for a shared vision of the future by stakeholders rather than solving a list of problems.

12

Phase V, Delivery: Implementation and Measure SuccessThe Leadership Team assigned each actionable goal to appropriate committees, considering capacity and capacity development. The Commission will provide support, resources and training, and identify connections between goal areas to maintain momentum throughout the planning process.

Following the strategic planning event, the Leadership Team and consultant team have clarified and prioritized goas and methods to achieve them. The plan is a living document, one that will continue to align strengths and opportunities for the Commission.

CCIC’s Restructured Framework

At the top of the organizational chart is the New Mexico Supreme Court. Co-chairs Judge Jennifer Delaney and Ezra Spitzer oversee the Children’s Court Improvement Commission with assistance from AOC staff, including Sarah Jacobs and Jennifer Vieira.

CCIC’s new framework arose from the strategic planning process and considered the subcommittees working across systems and in conjunction with each other to meet objectives and create change.

The last quarter of 2016 was dedicated to the formation and structure of each subcommittee. Each committee named co-chairs, set a meeting schedule, and identified priorities.

13

Five committees serve CCIC:Juvenile Justice (co-chairs Justice Barbara Vigil and Anne Ryan)

Priorities include:

Crossover youth System transitions Expedite permanency Racial equity

Behavioral Health (co-chairs TBD)

Priorities include:

System transitions Education outcomes Racial equity

Lead Team (Judge Jennifer Delaney, Ezra Spitzer, Beth Gillia, Jennifer Saavedra, and Justice Petra Maes)

Priorities include:

Commission operations Racial equity

Education (co-chairs Judge Angie Schneider and Grace Spulak)

Priorities include:

Education outcomes System transitions Racial equity

Protective Services [CIP] (co-chairs Beth Gillia and Chuck Neelley)

Priorities include:

Expedite permanency Racial equity ICWA System transitions

14

Strategic Planning Priorities

The strategic plan developed in 2016 will end in June 2019. The timeline follows:

Commission pre-plan deployment operations -July 2016-December 2016

CCIC begins operations through adopted framework.

Year 1-July 2016-June 2017

CCIC will undertake baseline department strategic plan reviews and evaluation to determine efficacy of strategic priorities

Year 2- July 2017-June 2018

CCIC will undertake evaluation of 2016-2017 accomplishments to determine 2017-2018 priorities, goals, and actions

Year 3-July 2018-June 2019

CCIC will undertake evaluation of 2017-2018 accomplishments to determine 2018-2019 priorities, goals, and actions. CCIC undertakes baseline department strategic plan reviews and evaluation to determine efficacy of strategic priorities.

Action and Implementation Plans

The CCIC will develop initiatives that align with Commission member initiatives and fall within the following priorities:

Strategic Priority Area #1: Commission OperationsGoal: To improve the efficiency of Commission operations and capacity of children’s courts through the CIP grant

Strategic Priority Area #2: System TransitionsGoal: To ensure children transition safely, expeditiously, and fully supported through all segments of the system

Strategic Priority Area #3: ICWA ImplementationGoal: To comply with the adoption and implementation of new federal mandates

15

Strategic Priority Area #4: Educational OutcomesGoal: To improve educational outcomes for all children in state systems

Strategic Priority Area #5: Expedite PermanencyGoal: To shorten the length of time children are pending-trial status, waiting for placement and in a foster care home

Strategic Priority Area #6: Racial EquityGoal: To ensure that all children-regardless of race- have equal access and comparable lengths of stay in children’s court systems

Strategic Priority Area #7: Crossover YouthGoal: To ensure that youth who are involved in more than one system are identified and supported adequately

Ongoing Work

The CCIC concluded 2016 with a reinvigorated Commission, five new subcommittees, and significant areas of focus. In addition, the CCIC continued to share data and analysis through the Courts Judicial Information Division, the Children Youth and Families Department, and the Department of Education.

Focus areas included:

Continued improvement of data entry and quality pertaining to race, ethnicity, age, ICWA compliance, and other areas of federal and state focus;

Alignment of CCIC goals and projects with the Children Youth and Families; Department’s Federal Strategic Plan specifically around expediting time to permanency;

Active engagement with the state legislature regarding policy and data analysis; Continued specialized judicial and attorney training regarding child welfare cases,

policy, and process; Continued information sharing between all child welfare and juvenile justice

improvement efforts within the state; Evaluation of the new contract attorney compensation model;

16

Plans to hold meetings at the end of each year with the Leadership Team to evaluate yearly progress and identify areas in need of improvement and evaluate federal grant requirements;

Address Every Student Succeeds Act and how the CCIC could help to implement and monitor implementation; and

Address behavioral health and other system needs for the crossover youth population.

Conclusion

The challenges faced by Children’s Law professionals are best addressed through the collaborative efforts of the numerous stakeholders. The Commission serves as an important vehicle for system and community participants to jointly discuss and implement evidence-based best practices that enhance outcomes for New Mexico’s children and their families.

The Commission respectfully requests the Supreme Court approve and authorize the continued work of the Commission for the next Federal Fiscal Year.

Prepared by Barbara L. Garcia, MEd

Tandem Consulting, LLC