| BRYCS:
What prompted this collaboration?
Ilze Earner: Two things stand out. First,
there were several high-profile child welfare cases involving
immigrants, including the placement of children into foster
care despite the presence of undocumented local relatives
willing and able to care for the children. I became involved
in one case at the request of the Mexican consulate, prompting
me to initiate the “Immigrants and Child Welfare Project”[1]
at the Hunter School of Social Work. Sometime after that,
I organized the conference, “Struggling in Silence:
Immigrants and Child Welfare System,” in which a representative
of the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS)
participated as a panel member. During her presentation the
level of tension in the room was very high, such that she
could not finish her talk. Immigrant parents, in particular,
were very hostile to the agency. It went so badly that I thought
I might lose my job. Instead, to her credit, the ACS representative
contacted me several days later and agreed that ACS and immigrant
advocates needed to talk. That was the beginning of our task
force, which laid out a roadmap for change.[2]
BRYCS: Describe the evolution
of the relationship between child welfare and refugee [immigrant]
services in your area? What steps have been taken to develop/nurture
this collaboration?
Ilze Earner: The relationship between ACS
and immigrant advocates was very polarized in the late 1990’s-early
2000. Our taskforce first met in September 2001 with eight
representatives from various ethnic groups, and we continued
meeting regularly every couple of months after that. This
relationship was aided by some other changes going on at the
same time. ACS was undergoing huge changes, evolving to a
more community based model that fostered more sensitivity
and openness to dialogue with advisory groups. In addition,
the passage of the New York City Local Law 73 mandated that
certain City agencies develop a plan for making services available
to non-English speakers. This timing was very helpful.
BRYCS: What successes/progress
have you seen?
Ilze Earner: From the beginning, our goals
have been to develop an advisory committee, a caseworker handbook
and training curriculum, and to improve language access, and
that is what we’ve done.
- Advisory committee and Director of Immigrant Services:
Our task force was formalized in April 2003 as the ACS Immigrant
Advisory Subcommittee. With support from the Annie E. Casey
Foundation, ACS created a new position in 2005 for a Director
of Immigrant Services, to whom the Immigrant Advisory Subcommittee
reports.
- Training: The advisory committee worked with ACS to develop
the handbook and training guide, “Immigrant and Language
Guidelines for Child Welfare Staff”[3]
which is given out to all incoming caseworkers as part of
their 10-week training. It is also distributed to staff
through ACS field offices. So far, it is not given out to
contract agencies providing prevention and foster care services,
but it should be.
- Language access: The passage in 2004 of NYC Local Law
73 was very significant. It applies to other city services,
not just child welfare, and requires that city agencies
phase in language services. ACS caseworkers now have access
to 143 languages through 24-hour interpreter services. This
is far better than the previous practice of finding a child
or a neighbor to translate.
- Improved data collection: Initially when immigrant advocates
started asking ACS to improve services for newcomer families,
the response was “Where are the numbers?” At
that time there was no data category on Asian families in
the child welfare system, only Caucasians, African Americans
and Native Americans. There was no differentiation between
various ethnic groups (such as Vietnamese and Chinese.)
Now data collection has been vastly improved. The number
of ethnic group categories has been greatly expanded.
BRYCS: What challenges/bumps
in the road have there been?
Ilze Earner:
- This has been a significant time commitment for people
who are overworked already.
- Continuity of relationships is sometimes an issue, with
regular staff turnover both at ACS and the community based
organizations.
- Communication between the public and private sector is
a challenge. ACS contracts with many private agencies to
provide prevention and foster care services, but they can
be left out of the information loop. This is an issue of
how systems communicate and maintain accountability. If
we depend on the trickle down of knowledge, it will evaporate
before it gets to the bottom.
- Determining priorities can be a challenge, such as differentiating
between short-term and long-term goals.
BRYCS: What advice would you
have for other agencies embarking on a similar collaboration?
Ilze Earner:
- The creation of a task force to look at immigrant issues
is critical, including representatives from both public
child welfare and the community.
- Getting the two sides together—from public child
welfare and the immigrant services agencies—and involving
people who can talk to each other is critical. I have heard
many people say, “When I have a problem, I just want
to know who to call.” We need to start a dialogue
between child welfare workers and immigrant service providers.
- Statewide recognition makes a significant difference.
Some local communities, particularly those near the border,
have developed child welfare responses to newcomer populations.
But the tipping point comes when these needs are recognized
as a systems issue and implemented statewide.
BRYCS: What future developments
would you like to see?
Ilze Earner:
- Regarding data collection, we are capturing language services
used, but we are not yet capturing data on the ethnicities
of families coming into the system. We would like to see
“drop-down fields” on the computerized intake
forms that capture either place of birth or language spoken
in the home.
- Regarding training, we would like to see improved communication
and training on immigrant issues with the private service
providers, particularly those providing foster care and
prevention services. They should receive the same handbook
and training as the ACS staff.
- It would be great to have refugee representation on the
Advisory Subcommittee, but so far, immigrant groups have
been more active in this effort than refugee groups. Perhaps
this is because there are more immigrants in New York City
than refugees; however the refugee voice has been missing.
BRYCS: Do you have case examples
that illustrate this collaboration’s benefits that you
can share with me?
Ilze Earner:
- A report of educational neglect was made regarding a
foreign-born child. An ACS investigation found that a school-age
daughter was staying at home to care for her younger siblings
and that the family of six was living in one room. The children
were removed from the home and placed into foster care.
Within days of the removal, the Immigrant Advisory Subcommittee
was contacted by another parent from the children’s
school, concerned about the children’s separation
from their parents. The father had been hospitalized and
unable to work, so the mother was out of the home seeking
employment while the eldest daughter stayed home to care
for the pre-school age children. The children’s school
was organizing a fundraiser to help the family financially
until the father could return to work. The Advisory Committee
advocated on the family’s behalf that the family needed
emergency shelter. The children were ultimately returned
to their parents’ care, and the family was moved into
emergency housing.
- An immigrant family became involved with ACS and it was
soon discovered that the family spoke an indigenous, relatively
uncommon, language. The new Director of Immigrant Affairs
put out a call through the network of community based organizations
for an interpreter. An interpreter was located, which enabled
ACS to begin putting services in place for the family. Before
this collaboration, such a network did not exist for ACS,
which shows that the process is working.
|
