2010 flango family focused courts

8/14/2019 2010 Flango Family Focused Courts

1/8


2/8


3/8


4/8


5/8


6/8

Family Self-Sufciency Scale

Client Name: Rating: Pre Progress Post Follow-up Date:

Rater (Name/Role):

Circle most descriptive rating words in each area. Use N/R to indicate unable to rate.

Self-Sufciency Self-Sufciency Continuum and RatingsArea 0 1 2 3 4

Program Refusing/resisting Minimal/passive Some Moderate Regular/activeParticipation involvement involvement

Child None Friend/relative/ Noncertied/stable Certied/stable Stable with backupCare unstable

Housing Homeless Unstable/unsafe Friend/family/ Substandard rental Adequate rental/residential program own home

Employment No/poor work Employment Subsidized work/ Part time/seasonal/ Full time*history or job search training/job search Jobs Plus temp*

Partner Current domestic Recent DV Big conict/issues/ Adjusting/single Healthy relationship

Relationship violence/stalking harassment recent sep/divorce or self-sufcient singleParent-Child Founded case Issues of abuse/ Need parent-child Adequate Healthy parent-childRelationship abuse/neglect neglect/poor parent- relationship parent-child relationship

child relationship improvement interaction

Parent Education/ HS dropout/ Educational/ Participating in Finished basic ed/ Career training/Literacy low literacy literacy assessment ABE/GED/ESL functional literacy college

completed literacy program

Youth Risk/ Severe risk A&D/ High risk/multiple Moderate risk/ Low risk/ Successful youthResiliency delinq/drop out Problems some issues few issues development

School Dropped out/ Frequent absences Sporadic attendance/ Moderate absences/ Regular a ttendanceAttendance not enrolled (without good cause) chronic tardiness tardiness

Family Emergent care only/ Neglect of care/ Identied medical Periodic health care Regular/preventativeHealth serious medical prob no health provider provider care

Substance Suspected/denial/ Admitted/conrmed/ Screened/started TX/ In treatment/ Ongoing recovery/Abuse no treatment no treatment little progress making progress functional

Mental Severe or chronic/ Assessed/needed TX; Assessed/started TX In treatment/ Ongoing recovery/Health in crisis/no TX refused making progress functional

Community None/unhealthy Minimal; some Occasional/uses Involved in 1+ Regular volunteerInvolvement community conicts previously community resources community activities

Level of Public Eligible but TANF/ FS/OHP/ERDC Off public Off public assistanceAssistance not participating cash assistance with co-pay retention assistance 6 months

Family Unable to meet Meets basic needs/ Able to meet Able to meet basic Able to pay bills withIncome basic needs debt/unpaid bills basic needs/ needs/some some discretionary

timely debt payment discretionary income income/savings

Criminal In jail Supervised probation Unsupervised Finished probation No recidivism Justice probation for 6 months

Transportation No vehicle and Either no vehicle Unreliable car/ Vehicle OK/ License/insurance/suspended/no license or no license no insurance has license reliable vehicle

Pretest Date: Put a #1 in scale boxes indicating pretest scorePost-test Date: Put a #2 in scale boxes indicating post-test scoreProtocol: s tandard condentiality procedure * Write hourly wage in corner of these boxes

Reprinted,with changes, from Carol R.Flango et al., How Are Courts Coordinating Family Cases? 88 (National Ctr. for State Courts 1999).


7/8


8/8

8. I d . at 18.

9. Jeff rey A. Ku h n , A S e v e n - Y e a r L e ss o n o n U ni e d F a m i l y C o u r t s : Wh a t W e H a v e L e a r n e d S in c e t h e 1990 N a t i o na l F a m i l y C o u r t S y m p o s iu m , 32 FAM . L.Q . 7779 (1998 ).

10. FLAN G O ET AL., s u p r a n ot e 4, at 40.

11. I d . at 43.

12. I d . at 44 ; St eph en N . T ik t in & Ern est J. M azorol III ,F a m i l y C o u r t C oo r d ina t i o n o f H u m an S e r v i c e s , D e s c h u t e s C o un t y , O r e g o n, 35 FAM . & C ON C I LI AT I ON C T S. REV. 344(Ju ly 1997 ).

13. D on ald N . D u qu ett e & Sarah H . Ramsey,R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f C h i l d r e n i n C h i l d Ab u s e a n d N e g l e c t C a s e s : An Em p i r i c a l L oo k a t Wh a t C o n s t i t u t e s E ffe c t i v e R e p r e s e n t a t i o n , 20 U . M I C H . J.L. REFO RM 341 (1987 ).

14. T ik t in & M azorol, s u p r a n ot e 12, at 34445.

15. M I NN ESO T A ST AT E BAR ASSN , C O M BI N ED JU RI SD I C -T I ON C O MM I TT EE REPO RT (1995 ) (u n pu blish ed reportadopt ed by t h e G en eral Assemb ly Ju n e 23, 1995 ).


17. J effe r s o n F a m i l y C o u r t P r o j e c t , in ABA SU MM I T ONU N I FI ED FAM I LY C O U RT S, s u p r a n ot e 5, at T .


19. I n t erview wit h Jim Adams, Jack son C ou n t y C ou rtAdm in ist rat or, in Jack son C ou n t y (Sept . 1998 ).

20. S ee BU REAU O F JU ST I C E ASSI ST AN C E & N AT I O N ALC T R. FO R ST AT E C O U RT S, T RI AL C O U RT PERF O RM AN C EST AN D ARD S (U .S. D ept of Ju st ice 1997 ).

21. A n at ion al con f eren ce on t h e f u t u re of cou rt s su ggest -ed t h at cou rt s ext en d t h eir h ou rs of operat ion an d st ayopen on week en ds. JAM ES D AT O R & W I LLI AM RO G ERS,T H E FU T U RE AND T H E C O U RT S C O N FEREN C E, execu t ivesu mm ary at 17 (N at ion al C t r. f or St at e C ou rt s 1990 ).

22. Pu rsu an t t o f ederal regu lat ion , ju ven ile depen den cycases (an d delin qu en cy cases, if t h e ward is in f ost er eligi-b le placemen t ) m u st adh ere t o a st rict t imelin e regardin gt h e requ ired sch edu lin g of t h e overall process, det en t ion , ju risdict ion , disposit ion , reviews, perman en cy plann in g,an d ot h er issu es. S ee , e . g ., 45 C .F.R. 1356.21 (b)(1)(2),(h ), (i) (2000 ).

23. Robert W . Page, F a m i l y C o u r t s : An E ff e c t i v e J u d i c ia l A pp r o a c h t o t h e R e s o l u t i o n o f F a m i l y D i s p u t e s , 44 FAM . &JU V. C T . J. 157 (W in t er 1993 ).

N O T E S

2010 flango family focused courts

Documents