NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES
Family Assessment
Response (FAR) Practice
Guide
Another Road to Safety
2011
GAIL HAULENBEEK, MSW
AND
MICHELLE HEYWARD-COOPER, MA
Updated 12/2/11
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 4
LIFE OF A FAR CASE ....................................................................................................................................... 6
Intake and Initial Screening....................................................................................................................... 6
Initializing Engagement and Assessment .................................................................................................. 7
Initial Contacts with the Family ............................................................................................................ 7
FAR Safety and Risk Assessment ............................................................................................................. 13
24-Hour Safety .................................................................................................................................... 14
7-Day Safety Assessment .................................................................................................................... 15
Tracking to FAR or Investigation ......................................................................................................... 17
Assessing Family’s Strengths, Needs and Risks....................................................................................... 18
The FLAG ............................................................................................................................................. 19
Helping a Family Meet their Needs ........................................................................................................ 22
Warm Handoff .................................................................................................................................... 23
Supervision.............................................................................................................................................. 24
Ending FAR Involvement ......................................................................................................................... 25
FAR Case Closing and Timeframes ...................................................................................................... 26
Case Opened for Formal Preventive Services ..................................................................................... 27
CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................................... 27
Appendix A: Six Principles of Partnership ................................................................................................... 28
Appendix B: Mapping of Risk Elements to the Family-Led Assessment Guide (FLAG) ............................... 30
Appendix C: Family-Led Assessment Strategies.......................................................................................... 31
Appendix D: New York Family Assessment Response Practice Reflection Tool (PRT) ................................ 36
Appendix E: Tools for Building Solutions with Families .............................................................................. 46
Appendix F: FAR LEGAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ................................................................................. 49
2
Updated 12/2/11
Special thanks to our colleagues at the American Humane Association for much of the source material
used to develop this guide. We’d also like to acknowledge the incredible contribution of our partners in
the participating FAR districts. Their invaluable input and hard work has been instrumental in shaping
FAR practice in New York State.
3
Updated 12/2/11
INTRODUCTION
In 2007, New York State joined 21 other states in the differential response movement in child welfare.
Called Family Assessment Response (FAR) here in New York, differential response allows Child Protective
Services (CPS) to differentiate how they respond to accepted reports of child maltreatment. When
following the FAR approach, you focus on identifying, assessing and addressing a family’s needs. While
safety is still of the utmost concern, it is sought through family engagement and partnerships rather
than by using investigation techniques to identify a victim and a perpetrator. FAR encourages agencies
to provide services without the stigma of formal determination of neglect. FAR practice begins the
transformation of this CPS approach by changing language used when working with families. No longer
is there an “alleged subject,” “perpetrator” or “victim”; instead of labels, families are just that – families.
A combination of federal and state law requires that some action be taken to initiate a protective
response upon the receipt of a CPS report. Historically, this has meant that an investigation is begun by
doing a records check on the family, calling the source of the report or making an unannounced visit to
the home or school. As the volume of child abuse and maltreatment reports have climbed over the last
two decades and agency resources have become more strained, new practice approaches have been
undertaken across the country. Agencies have begun to shift toward family-centered, family-led child
welfare practice as a way to more effectively engage families in assessing their needs and strengths so
that any needed changes are owned by the family and incorporated into their lives, thus providing
better protection and care for children over time. The differential response movement adds another
layer to this shifting philosophy. Differential response provides child protective agencies with the
flexibility to tailor their responses to accepted reports of child neglect based on factors such as the
family’s history, the severity of the alleged maltreatment and the level of the parents’/caretakers’
cooperation with the agency. FAR gives agencies and their child protective caseworkers the opportunity
to respond to a CPS report in one of two ways instead of just one.
How To Use This Guide - The purpose of this guide is to provide you with practical information that will
help you be successful in your FAR practice; however, it is not meant to be a substitute for FAR Process
& Practice Training or other trainings in the FAR series. It can supplement formal training and can be
used as a continuing reference for FAR staff and supervisors regarding key FAR practices. There will be
reminders that point you back to the FAR training you received from the American Humane Association,
documentation tips, appropriate language and terminology, opportunities to expand your practice as
well some of the rationale around the practice.
A Word about FAR Language and Key Principles
We must be clear with families about who we are and what our role is; however, this can be done in a
non-threatening way by using language that is different than what you may have used during CPS
investigations and being mindful of the Key Principles listed below.
4
Updated 12/2/11
Child Safety Achieved Through Family Engagement and
Collaborative Partnerships — Family engagement is one of the
core values within a differential response model. Parents are
seen and engaged as partners in maintaining child safety within
FAR. We want families to be willing to seek help when it is
needed. Given their FAR experience of being engaged and
involved in a collaborative partnership, they will know they can
turn to the child welfare agency for help to prevent or to deal
with conditions that may harm their family. In addition, the
engagement of family social networks and informal support
persons in the collaborative FAR process is strongly encouraged.
Avoid words like:

allegations

interview

perpetrator,

victim

alleged subject.
Instead use:

concerns
Supportive and Encouraging Approaches, Interventions and
 discussion
Services — FAR families are more receptive and engaged in
 meeting
assessments, problem solving and services when they are
 proper names
approached in a non-adversarial way. Through an engaging and
supportive approach to identifying strengths and needs with the
family, FAR caseworkers have reported that families are much more willing and engaged in following
through with problem solving and service referrals. In addition, supports and services that are congruent
with the family’s cultural background and values will increase the likelihood that families become
engaged with services. Discovering what those cultural values are is part of the engagement work that
each worker will need to do to match the families’ choice of resources to those cultural underpinnings.
Comprehensive and Holistic Assessments of Families — Within FAR, the focus is on gaining a holistic
understanding of the family’s functioning, through a comprehensive assessment of safety, risk, strengths
and needs. There is no formal determination that child maltreatment occurred. The identification and
labeling of perpetrators and victims is not part of FAR practice or case documentation. This approach
removes the stigma associated with these terms for both the families and individuals involved.
Collaborative Identification of Strengths, Needs and Solutions — Again, this is an area where we hope
to change the public and family perceptions of the role of CPS. We want families to recognize that our
role will be to help identify, with them, both their strengths and their needs and that the involvement of
the child welfare system is not indicative that they are being punished in any way. Families lead the
process of identifying solutions, appropriate resources and services, both formal and informal, that they
feel will best meet their needs and which are aligned with the family’s identified cultural values.
Flexibility for the System and the Family — With FAR, there is no longer a “one size fits all” approach to
cases that come into contact with CPS. Instead, the CPS response
is based on the level of the threat to the child’s safety, the level
Although both Investigative
and type of risk of maltreatment and the family’s strengths and
needs, thus offering a continuum of response that provides for
workers and FAR workers are
child safety.
CPS caseworkers, this guide will
refer
to
CPS
Investigative
workers as “CPS” and CPS FAR
workers as “FAR.”
5
Updated 12/2/11
LIFE OF A FAR CASE
Ineligible for FAR (Require an
Investigation)
Intake and Initial Screening
A FAR response begins in the same manner as an investigative
response: a report of child abuse or maltreatment is received by
the State Central Register (SCR). Once the report of abuse or
maltreatment is transmitted to the local district, it is screened for
the most appropriate response based on each county’s FAR
criteria. Because the 2007 FAR legislation gave counties flexibility
around how FAR practice could be organized and was not
prescriptive regarding the implementation requirements, during
the pilot period each local district established its own criteria and
process for determining eligibility. While nearly all cases of
alleged abuse are prohibited from inclusion in FAR, the law
provides an opportunity for each district to serve families via FAR
who meet additional criteria set by the county and OCFS. A
thorough and consistent screening process is very important to
the effectiveness and efficiency of both the assessment and
investigative response pathways. Information found in reports
received from the SCR may not be sufficient to get a good picture
of the situation. On the surface, many reports may appear to
straddle the criteria that the district has included in FAR and
those that are excluded from FAR. Without careful screening,
there may be the unintended consequence that many families
who could have benefited from FAR are assigned to the CPS
investigative pathway. While it is possible for an investigation
case to be transferred to FAR during the first seven days, if the
case has not been progressed through the CONNECTIONS system,
as the saying goes “you never get a second chance to make a first
impression.” Thorough, consistent screening is also important so
that every FAR caseworker is asked to respond only to cases for
which they are prepared to respond and the frequency of cases
that are re-tracked to an investigative response is minimized.
sexual abuse or aggravated
sexual abuse
against a child
a controlled substance
tory sexual assault
a child
child
degree that a child’s physical or
mental health has been
substantially endangered
(including a growth delay or
failure to thrive, diagnosed by a
physician and due to parental
neglect)
Eligible for FAR
punishment
Expanding or Changing FAR Screening Criteria
As time progresses and local districts become more comfortable
using the FAR approach, they may change or expand their
screening criteria. Should the local district determine that it is
ready to expand its criteria for cases to be tracked to FAR, it
6
minimum level of care for
children due to the misuse of
alcohol or drugs
-ordered investigations
Updated 12/2/11
needs to inform its community stakeholders of the change so that they’re prepared to support the
expansion to additional types of family issues. OCFS also needs to be consulted on any planned change
in screening criteria.
Initializing Engagement and Assessment
Engaging the family in the FAR process begins with our first contact with them and continues
throughout the life of the FAR case. While there are specific topics to cover and a set of areas of family
functioning we need to explore during our meetings with the family, they should be discussed as part of
an ongoing conversation rather than a checklist that must be completed at a given time. For example,
we need to explain the FAR process to the family and should do so early on in the case. However, it’s
possible that along the way the family will have questions about FAR or we’ll need to re-engage the
family in fully participating in the FAR process as they had agreed to do. The same can be said for
assessing safety. While we’re required to begin the safety assessment within 24 hours from the receipt
of the SCR report and complete it within seven days, we are continuously assessing safety while working
with the family as well as helping them self-assess. While the various steps of the FAR process are
presented linearly in this guide, it won’t be uncommon for them to
be taking place simultaneously throughout our work with the
Try to contact the source
family.
prior to the first meeting
Initial Contacts with the Family
with the family. The
Using the FAR approach, contact with the family is initiated by
source can confirm and
reaching out to them to request an appointment for a face-to-face
expand upon the details
meeting. It’s important to begin our contact with the family in a
manner that is consistent with the respectful, family-led paradigm
of the report and possibly
that is at the core of differential response. Our first contact with
provide impressions of
the family will set the tone for how we will engage with them, how
family
functioning,
they will respond to our needs for information and understanding
of their family and how we are able to mutually determine what
assistance they may need and what they can expect from us.
strengths and resources.
As with an investigative pathway, we are required to initiate a
preliminary safety check within 24 hours of receiving the SCR report and must complete a full safety
assessment within seven (7) days. While face-to-face contact with the family is not required in the first
24 hours, FAR staff is responsible for determining that all the children in the household are safe in their
homes and for taking appropriate action where safety threats are present or emerge.
The 24-hour safety can be initiated in one of the following ways:



Face-to-face contact with the child and/or family
Significant telephone contact with the child and/or family
Significant face-to-face or telephone contact with the source of the report if the source is in a
position to provide information about whether the child is in immediate danger of serious harm
7
Updated 12/2/11

Significant face-to-face or telephone contact with another person who is in the position to
provide information about whether the child is in immediate danger of serious harm
It is recommended that contact be made with the source of the report prior to the first meeting with the
family. This will provide an opportunity to confirm and expand upon the details of the report as well as
get the source’s overall impression of family functioning, strengths and possible resources. As with any
CPS response, the more we know prior to meeting the family helps us to prepare for the first meeting
and to take appropriate steps for our own personal safety.
If it’s not possible for you to
make contact and arrange a
Scheduling the First Meeting
home visit, apologize for
After contacting the source of the report, it’s time to schedule the
coming
unannounced,
first meeting. The purpose of the first meeting is to initiate the
safety assessment and begin engaging the family in the full
explain
what
you’re
assessment process. Ideally, this first contact is done by telephone
required to do, offer to
and should be done prior to interviewing the children. There will be
schedule another time that
times when the report does not provide a telephone number for
the family. In these situations, an unannounced home visit may be
is convenient for the family.
needed to schedule a meeting with the entire family regarding the
concerns detailed in the SCR report. By asking permission for a
meeting with the family, we are immediately engaging the family and setting the stage for a
collaborative approach to addressing their areas of need. Remember the Six Principles of Partnership
and that “everyone desires respect”. Calling to make an appointment is a demonstration of that
principle.
How much information should we provide during the initial phone conversation with the parent? This
will vary depending on the case and how much information we have from other sources regarding child
safety. Remember the Interest Paradigm from the first FAR training and keep in mind:

What will the family want to know?

What does the family need to know?

How can I set the tone for partnering with t h e f a m i l y ?
It’s advisable to give enough information so that the
family knows the purpose of the visit, but not so much
Documentation Tip
The
details
of the initial conversations
as to overwhelm them. We may choose to discuss the
you
have
with
the family, including
specific concerns on the phone or we may decide to
their responses, should be documented
wait until the first face-to-face meeting to fully explain
in progress notes.
them. If we go into too much detail on the phone, we
may miss important opportunities to engage the family
in the FAR process. Be as flexible as possible regarding scheduling the home visit, but we do need to be
clear that the visit needs to be as soon as possible. It often makes sense to ask what time later in the
8
Updated 12/2/11
afternoon or tomorrow they could meet. Also, explain that it is most helpful if everyone in the family be
there at one time, including all adults named in the report and all of the children. An exception to this
would be in a circumstance such as domestic violence when it would be appropriate to speak to the
parents separately. We can encourage the family to invite anyone else (i.e. formal or informal supports)
that they would like to have present for the first family meeting. The details of these conversations,
including the parents’ response, should be documented in progress notes.
History Review
Knowing a family’s history is helpful in many ways. Reviewing previous child welfare involvement is
about gathering information to help you understand the family and how they have functioned in the
past. It’s also a way to determine what services (if any) the family is currently receiving. This also
provides an opportunity to see how the family has handled issues of child safety and well being in the
past. What has worked in the past? What has not worked in the past? Have the parents been
cooperative with service providers? If they have a CPS history, have they been willing and able to take
necessary actions to keep the children safe and to meet their basic needs? The focus of the history
review is broad, and not on centered on information related the allegations.
The family’s history can be reviewed prior to or after the first
contact. The requirements for the scope of the records’ review
the timeframe is the same as with a CPS investigation.
Reviewing the family’s child
welfare history is important;
“Within one business day of the oral report date, the child
protective service must review State Central Register of Child
Abuse and Maltreatment records pertaining to all prior reports
involving members of the family, including legally sealed
unfounded reports where the current report involves a subject of
the unfounded report, a child named in the unfounded report or
a child's sibling named in the unfounded report.”
however, guard against bias
and
“take a
not knowing
stance.”
When reviewing history, as always, we must guard against being biased by information and remain open
to engaging this family as they are now. Remember the solution-focused FAR principle: “take a not
knowing stance.” If the family has a current, open preventive case it is important to look at the
information recorded there and perhaps contact the worker assigned to the case. By talking to someone
who has a relationship with the family, we may be able to gain insight into the family’s strengths and
level of cooperation. Reviewing prior history can also provide us with information we may need to know
for our personal safety.
On Call Reports
Inevitably there will be times when a report is received off-hours that fits the FAR criteria. Depending on
the county’s on-call procedures and how much of the staff is trained in FAR practice, it’s possible that
the worker responding to the report may not be a FAR worker. In this instance, the FAR worker’s contact
with the family may not be the first. It’s good practice to first try to connect with the on-call worker who
spoke with or met with the family, if possible, to discuss what has already been explained to the family.
If this isn’t possible, be sure to read any progress notes that have been recorded. It will be helpful to
9
Updated 12/2/11
know what the family expects to happen next. After
talking to the on-call worker, reach out to the family to
schedule a face-to-face appointment. Some counties see
the benefit of the FAR approach even during off-hours and
are trying a variety of techniques to incorporate the
approach into on call work.
Develop Your Practice
If possible, accompany another FAR
worker to a first meeting as an
observer. You may get ideas about
language and style that you want
to add to your FAR toolkit.
First Meeting and Explaining DSS’ Area(s) of Concern
The first face-to-face meeting with the family will be
unpredictable, but as we have removed the element of
surprise and perhaps some of the perception of intrusion through our previous contact with the parent
and their agreement to receive the FAR worker in their home, we already have laid the first brick in the
path to partnership. The family may or may not have any experience with child welfare agencies, so it
will be up to us to thoroughly explain the FAR process and how it differs from a CPS investigative
pathway. A couple of key points to remember for the first meeting:



While engaging the family in the FAR process in a non-threatening way is imperative, we must
be clear about the concerns that triggered the agency’s involvement and our responsibility to
collaborate with them to assess and support their children’s safety and well being. Establish why
it’s necessary to meet with and understand how the family is doing and establish the children’s
safety and well-being. How we do that can be determined by the family through their choice of
response: FAR or INV.
While the FAR process was likely mentioned to the family during the initial contact to set up the
appointment and initiate the safety assessment, the first face-to-face visit is when we would
explain the CPS response alternatives in detail. We need to provide sufficient information about
the FAR and INV processes to enable the family to make an informed choice about the process
in which they will participate.
“Transparency” is a core FAR value that we demonstrate when we are clear about our role, and
how we will work together should the family chose FAR.
Given the requirements for evidence collection and determination, CPS investigations have an
allegation-focus in addition to the focus on safety and risk. In both CPS responses, we need to guard
against being too focused on allegations or the reported incident and look globally at children and
family's needs and strengths. The FAR process does not focus on determining the allegations, instead
emphasizing a comprehensive assessment to uncover the child(ren)’s and family’s unmet needs that
may be contributing to possible child neglect.
In a FAR case, we should refer to the “allegations” listed on the SCR report as “areas of concern.” Using
this language will provoke less anxiety and anger in the family and help to distinguish the FAR process
from a traditional investigation, should the family have previous experience as the subject of a CPS
investigation. Be concrete when explaining the agency’s concerns with the family, but be clear that we
are not trying to determine whether something did or did not happen nor trying to pin blame on
anyone. Instead, we are trying to be transparent about the reason for being in their home and to give
10
Updated 12/2/11
them the opportunity to share their perceptions of the issues of
The SCR report is only a small
concern and of what might have prompted someone to make a
part of the family’s whole story.
call to the SCR. This also includes their view of their children’s
safety and well being and what, if any, unmet needs they have
that may be impacting their ability to meet their children’s needs.
The SCR report is only a small part of the family’s whole story. We should let them know that we really
want to understand their perceptions of what works well in their family and what strengths and
resources they have for meeting their needs. Explain that part of the role of a FAR worker is to assist
them in addressing issues or needs that are impacting their family and their children’s well-being. Let
the family know that these conversations will probably entail several meetings. Make sure to document
the family’s view and input in progress notes.
Some key points to remember:





Use interpersonal skills to establish an atmosphere of openness, respect and partnership.
Recognize that “resistance” (demonstrated through suspicion, anger or passivity) is normal and
should be expected from families. Validate how families are feeling about CPS being involved in
their life and explore with them how to create a partnership that will allow the family to feel this
relationship/process is helpful.
Guard against the tendency to try to establish partnership by minimizing the full role and
responsibilities of a FAR caseworker. Glossing over the need to assess safety, family functioning
and the Department’s concerns or saying that our role is to “see if they need any help” is not
demonstrating transparency.
FAR entails a full assessment of safety, risk, family functioning, strengths and needs. The
concerns are only what introduce us to this family. They are not the sole focus of our
conversations and explorations with the families. Many families reported to the SCR have not
neglected their children but could use some help in taking a fresh look at how their family is
doing and in meeting the children’s and family’s needs.
Remember the “Interest Paradigm”. It is important to start by identifying and trying to
respo nd to as many of the family’s interests, questions and needs as possible. We can
and will get to our concerns and responsibilities but we must first meet them where they
are and go from there.
If more than one parent or caretaker is named in the report, the areas of concern should be explained to
both of them. This may require us to meet with each one separately, depending on the circumstances of
the case. It is very important that we clearly explain and address the areas of concern that initiated FAR
involvement with the family with all of the involved parents/caretakers. If one is not available at the
time the safety assessment must begin or is not home as was anticipated when setting up the meeting,
it may be necessary to begin engagement with the present parent. We can do this by explaining FAR and
the Department’s concerns and assessing safety and ask to set up another meeting in the very near
future when everyone is present.
11
Updated 12/2/11
A couple of requirements to keep in mind:
As Mandated Reporters


As with all CPS responses, the subject(s) of the report must be
provided with a notice of the report. Should the family choose
FAR, we must provide them with the FAR version of the notice
of the SCR report. Review the notice with them so that they
fully understand it.
Section 427-a(4)(d)(i) of the SSL requires notice of the FAR
report to all other persons named in the report; this includes
providing notice of a report to the non-custodial parent.
we must make a report to
the SCR if the family is
unable
to
regarding
be
helpful
maltreatment
concerns or if possible
abuse is identified.
Clearly document in progress notes any discussion with the family around their concerns and the
agency’s concerns and the provision of the notice of the report.
Explaining FAR and the Choice between FAR and Investigative Response
As part of the initial visit, FAR workers should explain to the family both options that are available to
them: the CPS investigation and the FAR process. The families we work with have different levels of
experience with child welfare agencies and different feelings about working with us. It’s important that
we provide them with as much information as needed for them to make an informed decision. Many
agencies have FAR brochures to pass along to families;
while a brochure is helpful, we should still openly talk to
Documentation Tip
the family about the differences between the two CPS
Be sure to document your conversation
responses.
with the family around the difference
between FAR and CPS investigation
Let them know that in both types of response the FAR
including
their
agreement
to
participate in FAR.
worker or the assigned CPS investigative worker will
need to explore with them any conditions in the home or
the family that might threaten the children’s safety now
or that could harm them in the future. Let them know that if they choose the investigation response
there will be more of a focus on finding out if there is evidence to support the reported concerns and an
official finding will be made, and the implications of that finding. The family should understand that if
they choose FAR, we will be spending more time with them: getting to know their strengths, exploring
the areas of concern and working with them to identify both formal and informal supports that may be
available to them. Part of promoting transparency in our role is being clear that if a serious concern is
identified during our work with them, we are counting on their help to address it. If they are not able to
be helpful regarding maltreatment concerns or if possible abuse is identified, we are required as
mandated reporters to make a report to the SCR and an investigation will be initiated. Be clear that if
they choose the FAR track, we will count on the family’s full and honest participation in the assessment
and in joint efforts to address any serious needs for their children. Be prepared to answer any questions
they have at this point or in the future.
By providing the family with all the information they need to feel comfortable with the FAR process as
well as answering their questions openly, we are putting power back into their hands and helping them
12
Updated 12/2/11
feel heard; both important steps toward engagement. We should revisit discussions about their
agreement to participate in the FAR process throughout our involvement with the family should they
begin to disengage prior to completion of the assessment process. Remember to be patient;
engagement is a process and won’t happen overnight.
FAR Safety and Risk Assessment
As mentioned earlier, child safety remains paramount in the FAR process. Our first responsibility is to
determine the children’s immediate safety from serious harm. We also need to assess the risk of future
maltreatment and harm as we learn more about family functioning. In the course of working with the
family we will likely be gathering information on both safety and risk simultaneously, but will use that
information to reach separate decisions that will inform specific and distinct actions.
In both FAR and CPS investigations, safety decisions should not be made lightly. We must take into
account the threats to the child’s safety, how serious and numerous they are and the degree to which
the child is vulnerable. Research supports the idea that children are safer if we can meaningfully engage
the family at the beginning of the case. Try to develop a partnership with the family to mutually assess
the children’s safety and to assess what if anything is creating risk
of future maltreatment. In FAR, we look for not just at what
When
assessing
safety,
threats might be present but also what strengths and protective
factors are operating in the family. By exploring the strengths of
remember to look past the
the family, their ability to develop and implement solutions to
threats that might be present
problems and their ability to protect the children rather than
to determine what strengths
focusing solely on the agency’s concerns, we’re more likely to
and protective factors are
learn what it is like to be a child in the family. In the end,
operating in the family.
engaging the family and learning their truth is a very effective
way to assess safety and risk.
There are similarities and differences in how and when CPS Investigation staff and CPS FAR staff conduct
safety and risk assessment:




Both must initiate a safety assessment within 24 hours and clearly document what actions are
taken to do that.
Both must conduct a thorough safety assessment and reach a safety decision within 7 days of
the receipt of the report. That assessment and decision must be documented and approved
within 7 days.
CPS investigators continue to work with families throughout the investigation regardless of the
child’s safety status and safety decision and are responsible for implementing a safety plan if
needed.
FAR staff need to transfer a case to CPS investigation before or at the 7 day safety decision point
should there be safety factors present that place the child in immediate or impending
danger(Safety Decision 3, 4 or 5)
13
Updated 12/2/11


Both CPS and FAR staff are responsible for assessing
Seeing children at school
safety for the entire investigation or FAR assessment and
without
prior
permission
for taking appropriate action if danger emerges.
However, currently only CPS investigators are required to
should be the exception and
document a safety assessment at the conclusion of their
not standard practice.
investigation.
Both CPS investigators and CPS FAR staff are required to
conduct a risk assessment. However, only CPS investigators are required to document that risk
assessment in the Risk Assessment Profile at the conclusion of their investigation in order to
make decisions about case opening and needs for services. FAR staff assesses risk using their
knowledge of risk elements and the Family Led Assessment Guide (FLAG). Their assessment
begins early in their work with the family so that current or potential risks can be identified and
addressed with the family during the FAR period.
24-Hour Safety
When making a decision about 24-hour safety and whether immediate or impending danger exists, the
FAR worker should consider case circumstances noted in the SCR report, the information gathered from
the source and a review of any existing case record. As in any CPS investigation, it’s possible that we will
be unable to make contact with someone who is in the position to provide us with information on
immediate/impending danger or be unable to gather sufficient information to assess immediate danger
to all children. If this is the case, document in progress notes all attempts to make these contacts as well
as the information still needed to assess safety for all children. This may or may not be the source of the
report. If initial contact with the source reveals information regarding the immediate or impending
danger to the child or if the parent(s) is unwilling to meet with you
and let you see the child, a CPS investigation would need to be
Documentation Tip
You can record the safety
initiated, as we would not be able to assess safety.
check information in the INV
progress
notes
in
Seeing children at school without first obtaining prior permission
CONNECTIONS.
should be very rare. However, there may be times that we must see
the child or children in school prior to scheduling the first meeting
with the parents. An example of this would be if the concerns listed
in the report are regarding inadequate clothing and guardianship for a 10 year old child who came to
school today without a coat in freezing weather (this happens frequently); it is now snowing. The child
complained to a teacher that sometimes he can’t get into the house after school because his mom
forgets to leave a key a lot as she has “been acting kinda weird” lately and so he is afraid to leave school.
First, the FAR worker would contact the source of the report and try to gather as much information as
possible about the source’s concerns. The source may or may not be able to provide sufficient
information about the current safety status of the child in the home. In either case, the next step is to
make an appointment to meet with the parent. If we’re unable to make contact with the parent (by
phone or in person) and we still don’t have enough information to assess safety, we may need to see the
child in school, assess and address the current situation. We can meet with the child and first try to
locate the parent through any information the child has. When FAR caseworkers are not able to
14
Updated 12/2/11
ascertain child safety any way but to see the child, we should be honest with the parent about the
necessity for meeting with the child first to assess safety and express our regret at not being able to set
that up through her/him. By explaining the need to find out right away that their child was safe, we are
trying to establish common ground in sharing a parent’s concern for their children’s safety. By talking
through the FAR process with the parent(s), we can emphasize our respect for them in their role as a
parent and our desire get to know them and their family. In other words, we try to turn this exception to
our FAR practice into an opportunity to build rapport with them. Remember, in FAR, we don’t want to
see the children before meeting with the parent; we want to see the child in the context of the
conversation with the parent in the home.
7-Day Safety Assessment
As with a CPS investigation, we are still responsible for identifying the presence of any safety factors and
completing a full safety assessment within seven days. The 7-day safety assessment informs FAR
workers and supervisors and families about what action, if any, must be taken to protect the child from
immediate or impending danger. In cases that are initiated through FAR, this includes determining if
there is a need to change the track to a CPS investigation. Reasons would include discovery of case
circumstances that are excluded from FAR by law or by the county’s FAR criteria; a child being in
immediate or impending danger, or maltreatment is apparent and the family is unwilling to participate
in addressing the problems. At times, the decision to transfer the case to investigation may not be that
clear. In all instances the re-tracking decision should be made only upon specific consultation with a
supervisor.
Be open and transparent with the family about the need to ascertain danger to the children and help
the family identify what they do to provide for their child’s safety. The ongoing process of assessing
safety includes gathering specific information from conversations, observing the family interactions and
functioning and reviewing any child welfare history with an eye toward identifying the presence or
absence of safety factors.
From our first meeting with the family the groundwork has been laid for a family-led and transparent
assessment. Start a discussion with the family around “what is safety” and why the safety assessment
process is important, as well as how the assessment itself is done. Use language the family can
understand. Remember that most people think of safety or danger as they relate to harm from people
or circumstance outside of their home. Each family’s behavior and living conditions are what is normal
for them, even though they can pose danger to children. We need to build a common understanding of
what safety concerns are and what, if any, safety concerns are present in the home. To gather
information about safety factors, use the same techniques that we will use to assess risk, family
functioning and identify the family’s need for services. Using scaling questions with both parents and
children is a useful way of identifying safety factors and engaging all family members in the assessment.
Try to ask very specific questions and focus on the present. For example, when talking with older
children about being home on their own when their mother is out late, or when the family argues, you
might ask them to rate how safe they feel on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being “not safe at all” and 10
being “completely safe.” Young children who find it hard to understand the concept of safety can have
15
Updated 12/2/11
their voices heard through the “Three Houses” or “Wizard and Fairy” tools; these tools graphically
portray children’s concerns and their hopes for their family. It’s important for us to have an
understanding of the child’s experience; what is it like to be a member of this family? How does each
child view the family?
Another type of question that can be used is an indirect question. Indirect questions ask the family to
consider how others (those who are not part of the family) might feel about or respond to some aspect
of their life. For example, ask the parents what their neighbors might say needs to happen to keep the
children safe in the home. Questions like these combined with our own observations should enable us
to adequately assess safety throughout the case and partner with the family to explore protecting
factors that are in place or that may need to be put in place. While it is important for the family to tell
their story and to lead the assessment in a way that lets them talk first about what is most important
to them, it is still our responsibility to guide the process so that all of the possible threats to safety
and all of the Department’s areas of concern are adequately explored. This may require us to initiate
discussions that are uncomfortable to the family.
Any information that is
In addition to looking at any existing safety factors, try to focus on the
part of the FAR case
parents’ ability to respond to any dangers facing their family or children.
record (gathered prior
Use solution-focused techniques such as asking how the family has
to changing track to a
managed in the past and how they would respond to an emerging
CPS investigation) can
dangerous situation. Invite the family to tell their story while you
be
used
in
the
withhold judgment. Listening to how they view their situation, their
subsequent
report
experience in protecting their children, and their ability to solve
involving the same
subject or child.
problems and protect against threats to safety provides an opportunity
for us to assess parental and child capabilities. Probe for concrete
examples. Every family has strengths and by working with the family to
identify them, we build a foundation to support the family long after
the FAR case is closed. As there is considerable similarity between
Documentation Tip
safety factors and risk elements, information related to both
Progress notes should
assessments can frequently be gathered simultaneously.
reflect
the
ongoing
safety
and
risk
Engaging the family around safety should ideally include more than
assessments.
just the parents/caretakers and children. Find out how the family
you’re working with defines “family.” What does it mean to them?
Out-of-home parents, other adults living in the home, adult children, extended family and family friends
should all be explored as possible resources for the family. Talk to the parents about who else knows
how their family functions and who they’ve used in the past as supports. As with CPS investigations, any
out-of-home parents and adult siblings (or other adults) living in the home would need to be added to
the stage composition in CONNECTIONS.
Additionally, more information may be needed from a service provider such as a child’s health care
provider in order to be sure that a potentially serious medical condition is being appropriately treated
and therefore not an immediate danger to the child. We need to be open and transparent with the
16
Updated 12/2/11
family about our interest in talking with the child’s healthcare provider and ask their permission to do
so. If possible, contact the provider together to ask the questions necessary to determine safety and to
inform the assessment of risk and the child and family’s needs as well. This transparency is central to
building trust, demonstrating respect and involving the family in assessing and meeting their children’s
needs.
We should arrive at the safety decision in conjunction with the family and the supervisor and then
complete the documentation for the 7-Day Safety Assessment.
Tracking to FAR or Investigation
When we’ve gathered enough information to complete the 7-day Safety Assessment (on or before Day
7) a decision must be made regarding the track assignment for the case. We must consider the following
tracking criteria:




Does it meet the legal criteria to remain on the FAR track or should it be converted to a CPS
investigative response? The law identifies certain types of cases that cannot be tracked into FAR.
And,
Does it meet our agency’s own criteria around what types of cases are eligible for FAR?
What is the decision of the family? If they said they
wanted FAR but have not maintained their agreement to
The
FAR
Checkbox
in
meet with us and participate in assessment, then we may
CONNECTIONS will not be
need to transfer it to investigation.
enabled if the Safety Decision is
If we’ve competed the 7-day Safety Assessment and our
not #1 or #2.
Safety Decision is anything other than #1 (No Safety
Factors) or #2 (Safety Factors exist, but do not rise to the
level of immediate or impending danger of serious harm.
No Safety Plan/Controlling Interventions are necessary at this time. However, identified
Safety Factors have been/will be addressed with the Parent(s)/Caretaker(s) and reassessed),
the track must be changed from FAR to a CPS investigative response and we must jointly
develop and implement a safety plan if the child is in immediate or impending danger. Once a
CPS investigation caseworker has been assigned, we can take this opportunity to set up a joint
meeting with the family to provide a warm handoff to the new worker.
Whenever we make the decision to keep the case FAR or to switch to a CPS investigation, we should
document this decision and our rationale (including details of any supervisory guidance) in progress
notes. Most likely, this will be the point that we open the FSS/FAM stage (where we’ll document our
ongoing work with the family). There may be instances where an open preventive services case already
exists; we will not be able to open a new FSS/FAM if this is the case. Local district procedure will
determine how to handle these cases. In some districts, the FAR track will be precluded for any families
with an open preventive services case. If the district does not preclude open preventive cases from FAR,
we should reach out to the preventive worker or make an appointment to meet jointly with the family
(if you haven’t already). The documentation of any activities that take place prior to the completion of
the 7 Day Safety Assessment (when the track decision is made) should be in the INV stage. Once the
17
Updated 12/2/11
decision has been made to track the case as FAR, our
ongoing FAR work with the family should be
documented in the previously opened preventive FSS.
The FAR worker will need to be assigned a role in the
FSS to enable the recording of progress notes.
Documentation Tip
Your decision to keep the case FAR or
to switch to CPS investigation and
your rationale for doing so should be
documented in progress notes.
Assessing Family’s Strengths, Needs and Risks
While assessing safety in a FAR case, it’s inevitable that this will overlap with the assessment of the
family’s strengths, needs and the presence of risk elements. We need to make the most of our critical
thinking skills to sort through the information we gather and
Explain risk in terms that make
determine what speaks to safety and what to risk. While a formal
Risk Assessment Profile (RAP) is not required to be documented in
sense to the family and that
a FAR case, a risk assessment is required by law and is important
personalize risk.
in our goal of preventing future occurrences and reports of
maltreatment. Come to a conclusion with the family regarding
what, if anything, is posing risk to the children and what can be done to lessen that risk.
We should be continually gathering information on the presence or absence of risk elements in the
home. Much as we did when beginning the conversation about safety, we should create transparency
with the family around the definition of “risk” and the risk assessment process. Explain it in terms that
make sense to the family and that personalize risk to the family. For example, we might say “part of my
responsibility is to talk with you - and any anyone else who we think might be helpful - about the things
that might harm or not be good for Dion and Tanya in the future, such as Dion missing more school or
Tanya continuing to be so sad because she is picked on at school for having soiled clothes. We’ll do this
together so that we can figure out ways to keep that from happening.”
We have various tools at our disposal to assess risk:




Use the list of risk elements that are captured in the RAP to guide conversations with the family
about areas of strength or need;
Direct the conversation with the family using the Family
Led Assessment Guide (FLAG).
A formal RAP is not required in
Try encouraging the family to tell their story.
FAR;
however,
a
risk
o What do they see as their successes?
o What do they feel good about as a family?
assessment is required by law.
o What parts of their lives are not feeling so good to
them right now?
Try using family-led assessment strategies such as asking each family member what pushes their
buttons or what pushes the buttons of others in the family.
o What do they do when the buttons are pushed?
18
Updated 12/2/11
o

If they had a magic wand, what would each of them have the other family members do
instead?
For younger children, use the Three Houses Activity by drawing three houses to fill: the House of
Good Things, the House of Worries and the House of Wishes. Share with the child that you will
discuss those drawings with the parents.
If some of the risk factors in our time with the family have not arisen naturally in our conversations with
them, using the list of risk elements or the FLAG might be helpful in engaging the family in these areas.
Appendix B breaks out those risk elements that aren’t part of the FLAG.
The FLAG
The Family Led Assessment Guide (FLAG) is the assessment guide that is used with families in New York
who are participating in the FAR process. Like any assessment tool, the FLAG helps the caseworker and
the family draw conclusions and make decisions that inform actions:










How well is this family working?
What are their areas of strength and areas of need?
Are they able to meet the needs of the children without risk of harm?
Is change needed in this family to meet their needs and to minimize risk?
Do they have the abilities, willingness and resources to meet their needs?
Do they need assistance to be able to meet their needs now and in the future?
What type of assistance makes sense to them?
What resources do they think will fit with their need and their family?
How can I help them connect to resources they wish to access?
What role might the culture of the family play in their strengths, needs, resources, and ways of
addressing concerns?
19
Updated 12/2/11
The FLAG informs our and the family’s decisions regarding what
If the family composition or
needs there are, what may be contributing to risk to the children
situation changes dramatically,
and how pressing the need for change or support is. In order to
put a plan of action into place (if there is a need for one), we
revisit the FLAG with the family
should complete the assessment with the family within the first 30
to reassess current conditions.
days of our involvement. While there is no rule dictating this time
period, best practice is complete the assessment earlier in the
case and revisit it whenever necessary. Currently, most counties have a 60-90 day FAR assessment and
service period; however, there is significant variation in use of the FLAG. Fairly early in the process we
want to reach agreement with the family about what, if anything, needs to change or improve and what
supports are wanted and needed. That will allow everyone time to advocate for what they need,
connect to needed services and to form linkages to social network and community support within each
district’s time frames for FAR. We may be able to complete the FLAG with the family much sooner than
30 days if our relationship with them and caseload size allows. Remember, the FLAG is an assessment
guide - it is not a case closing document.
We can use the FLAG in various ways. At the most basic level, it should be our guide to facilitating
discussions with the family about their strengths, risks and needs.
While the FLAG can be printed and each question explored with
Ideally the FLAG should be
the family if the FAR worker is more comfortable using it this way,
completed within the first 30 of
this may be off-putting to those families that are fully engaged
and willing to share information with little prompting. If we do
our involvement with the
decide to print the FLAG and fill it out with the family, try to keep
family.
it in the form of a dialogue and not a question and answer
session. By using open-ended questions, the information we get
may be more accurate and complete.
Remember, an assessment is a mutual process. The FLAG provides the FAR worker and the family with
an opportunity to compare the parent’s view with the children’s view, our view with the family’s view.
Explore the rationales behind their ratings and be specific and concrete in how we support or disagree
with their rating. For example:
 Mom and her resident boyfriend rate their alcohol and drug use as a “1”, but through meetings
with them and in reviewing the children’s 3 Houses and “wizard” drawings, it’s clear that the
children are experiencing concern about the level of yelling in the home, wish there wasn’t so
much drinking and that Mom would get them up in time to catch the bus and make breakfast all
the time like she used to. Bring this discrepancy into the open. Ask circular questions about what
Mom’s sister or mother would say about the increase in drinking. By asking solution-focused
questions, we can explore with the family when it was different and what was happening then,
what is different now and what it would take to get the children fed and on the bus every
morning and to make the House of Wishes a reality.
20
Updated 12/2/11
The children’s safety and well-being are the center of the assessment. “Family Led Assessment” and
engagement do not mean ignoring difficult topics or confronting discrepancies in views. Family-led
means the family is encouraged to tell their story about who they are in total. It means that they are the
experts on their family and that their positive experiences and capabilities can be supported and built
upon. It means that their ideas about what would help them to better meet the needs of their children
are honored as much as possible. It does not mean that they can lead assessment only into areas with
which they are comfortable or that their assessment of their functioning and of any danger or risk to the
children is accepted without additional exploration.
There is no expectation that the FLAG will be completed after one meeting or conversation with the
family. It will likely take several conversations to flesh
out the assessment. Encourage the family to give their
Documentation Tip
oral history to place them in the position as the “expert.”
On the FLAG, include comments for all
Although the family is telling the story, we can facilitate
ratings. Document what is working for
the family and resources they’ve used
this and encourage the flow of the story by asking openin the past. Also, record in progress
ended questions. Appendix C: Family-Led Assessment
notes how you achieved partnership
Strategies outlines strategies or approaches to engaging
with the family around completing the
families in discussing the four major areas of the FLAG.
FLAG.
While the FLAG may be completed early in your work
with the family it needs to be updated as you gather
more information, as situations evolve and as progress is made. When we’re completing the FLAG, it’s
good practice to include concrete comments for all ratings, not just those areas where the family
struggles. We want to capture what is currently working for the family and what resources they’ve
successfully drawn upon in the past. Also, an updated FLAG can be a concrete tool for assessing progress
and accomplishments with the family and for forging agreement about future needs or case closing. We
should also include in progress notes how we achieved partnership with the family around completing
the FLAG.
Collateral Contacts
Collateral contacts continue to be valuable for assessing safety and risk as well as determining needs.
However, the primary purpose for contacting collaterals is different from why it’s typically done in a CPS
investigation. In an investigation, caseworkers often use collateral contacts to gather information for the
safety and risk assessments, to check up on families’ past or current activities, to verify the information
provided to them by parents and to support or refute the allegation listed on the report. In a FAR case,
collaterals are identified by the family as possible supports to the assessment of strengths and areas of
need and to assist in the problem solving process. Ideally, contact with these individuals should be done
21
Updated 12/2/11
by the caseworker and the family after the family identifies them.
It is also acceptable for the caseworker to contact the collaterals
alone, but this contact should be transparent to the family and
ideally done after getting the family’s permission.
In FAR cases, the FAMILY (not
the
caseworker)
identifies
collaterals as possible supports
to the assessment of strengths/
In CPS investigations, some local districts have a policy of
needs and to assist in the
contacting certain collaterals in every case. For example,
caseworkers might be expected to get the children’s school
problem-solving process.
grades and medical information even if this information is not
germane to the case. In a FAR case where you are striving for
transparency and unobtrusiveness, these types of generic, one-size-fits-all collateral contacts may be
counter-productive to family engagement and empowerment. If your agency does require school
records, for example, be transparent about this and explain how this information helps you better
understand the children’s strengths and needs. Be sure to review that information with the family as
part of the comprehensive FLAG process.
Helping a Family Meet their Needs
As with all good social work practice, it’s important to meet the family’s most immediate needs first and
then move on to their long-term needs. The identification of these needs should begin from your
earliest contact with the family and come into focus through your engagement with them. Until the
family’s most immediate needs are addressed, it is difficult for them and for us to thoughtfully assess
less pressing areas of family functioning. If the family doesn’t have the money to pay the utility bill and
are about to have their lights turned off, it’s unreasonable to expect them to engage with us around our
concerns with their children’s school attendance.
FAR is a child protective service that truly emphasizes “service” as well as “child protection”. While there
is currently no formal service plan document for a family who is receiving FAR only, the concepts and
values of effective family/child centered service planning still apply. Your work with the family assessing
safety and identifying their strengths, needs and risks should provide you with good insight into what
their most pressing needs are. By assessing all areas of the FLAG with a family, the family’s needs should
be uncovered including identifying what needs are currently impacting the child’s well-being. We might
begin by asking each family member what she or he perceives as the most immediate needs and using a
solution focused question regarding what might help make that situation better. Once these needs are
identified, we can begin working with them to identify and access resources that exist in their social
network and community that fit with their culture and are accessible. The needs they identify may be
met with concrete resources (e.g. bus tokens, a new car seat, money for the Laundromat), informal
supports (a relative or close friend brought in to take the child a few hours after school) or formal
services (e.g. a referral to a drug treatment program). Often they need an advocate, and as FAR workers
we can be the ones who help them negotiate services application processes, meetings with schools,
issues with landlords, etc.
Probably the largest category of services a FAR worker provides will concern basic needs – household
supplies, transportation, rent and house payments, emergency food, and housing. This may also include
22
Updated 12/2/11
child care, respite care, mental health services, and parenting support. By providing these types of
services, we can help support and stabilize families in a timely and cost-effective manner. Each district
should have a clear process regarding how to quickly access funds for these purposes.
Once we identify and help the family to meet their immediate needs, we should engage them in
conversations to explore the behaviors, dynamics and conditions that may underlie current or chronic
needs. Simply meeting a concrete need while the FAR case is open is unlikely to help many families
address the behaviors and needs that led to a report once FAR involvement has ended. If the family is
still at risk for child abuse or maltreatment, strong linkages to informal supports and services are needed
to sustain needed changes. Part of being transparent with a family is addressing remaining concerns for
the children’s well-being, developing ways for their children’s needs to be met in the future and
discussing the need for and benefits of more formal services.
Should evidence of maltreatment be very clear to you and the family isn’t willing to take the necessary
steps to change the behavior or situation (e.g. accepting services or support), we must let the family
know the case will be referred for investigation. On the other hand, many families will continue to have
some needs but they are providing for the basic safety and well being of their children. We need to
know when to close the FAR case. FAR is not designed to be an on-going
preventive service. Before the end of the FAR service period (currently 60The family and the
90 days as determined by each county) the FAR worker and the family need
caseworker
will
to decide if anything more is needed, if the informal supports that were
jointly decide when
identified are sufficient to meet needs or if formal preventive services are
needed. If the children are safe and the risk of future maltreatment is not
to close the FAR
high, we need to respect the family’s decision to decline further services.
case.
The family and the FAR worker will jointly decide when a case can be closed.
Typically this happens when the FAR worker and the family have worked
together to identify solutions the family feels will work well for them and the worker has followed
through on helping connect the family to formal and informal supports and services. When the family is
empowered to connect with resources on their own, they can continue to do so in the future should
additional needs arise.
Warm Handoff
A warm handoff takes place when the FAR worker personally introduces the family to the service
provider, ideally during a joint home visit. The warm handoff serves multiple purposes: it provides the
opportunity for the initial face-to-face meeting with the service provider as well as hopefully awarding
the trust and rapport that has been built with the FAR worker to the service provider. Additionally, it
provides an opportunity for the worker and the family to jointly share the identified strengths, supports,
resources, risks and needs with the new service provider, building off the comprehensive assessment
that has been completed in FAR. By using a warm handoff, we are facilitating the new service provider in
continuing to engage with the family in a way that builds off the family-led assessment and engagement
work that we’ve done with them thus far.
23
Updated 12/2/11
Usually, just providing a phone number is not enough. We need to assess how well the family has been
able to reach out in the past. Ask the family to share what has worked well for them in the past when it
comes to following through with referrals and what has been challenging for them. Maybe they are
uncomfortable “cold calling” a service provider or perhaps they aren’t sure what to say when they call.
Or they don’t want to start all over again telling their story to someone else. The family’s cultural
background may contribute to a reluctance to reach out to certain service providers. To help alleviate
some of the apprehension the family might have about meeting and working with a new service
provider, start by explaining as thoroughly as possible the reason for the referral and let them know that
we’ll be involved in the handoff process. We can set up an introductory meeting for the family, us and
the service provider. Actually accompanying the family to
the first appointment can significantly increase the odds
Documentation Tip
of follow through. This will give the family the
Information pertaining to warm
opportunity to learn about the services they’ll be
handoffs to services providers should
receiving and ask any questions they may have.
be documented in progress notes.
Indicate if a joint visit took place and
Supervision
how receptive the family was.
An effective way to develop and provide supervision to
FAR workers is to use a process with them that is parallel
to their work with families. Supervision should be solution-focused and goal-directed. This will not only
provide workers with support and direction, but will model for them techniques they should be using
with families. As FAR supervisors, we must be transparent with staff about our roles, responsibilities and
concerns and our goal to build on their strengths to continue to develop their capacities to be effective
in their jobs. Many of us will be learning FAR together so it is very important that we create an
atmosphere of safety that supports learning, recognizes efforts to try new techniques and uses mistakes
as learning opportunities. As FAR work is family-led, FAR supervision should encourage staff to tell their
story of their efforts to engage the family, to assess safety, risk, strength and needs, including which
techniques were effective and which were less so. FAR supervisors should allow workers to direct the
focus of supervision and define their problems and concerns. However, just as workers do with families,
supervisors are responsible for raising any apparent performance concerns or issues with case practice,
legal or administrative requirements even if a worker is reluctant to discuss them.
As supervisor, we need to be asking the right questions and evaluating the quality of the caseworker’s
assessment. We should be as concerned with the “how” of their actions as well as with “what” they did.
As FAR is a significant departure from how many CPS staff used to conduct their practice, exploring,
assessing and modeling the specific language and behaviors of staff is part of the FAR supervisor’s job.
Below are a few potential question types that may assist with supervision:


How did the family react to the worker’s initial contact and request for an appointment? What
was effective? What might we do differently the next time to better address their interests?
How did the caseworker address all the agency’s areas of concern? What was the family’s
response, including that of the children?
24
Updated 12/2/11




Has the family been sufficiently engaged in assessing safety and risk
to the children? Has the family shared their story with the
caseworker? How can we tell that they are engaged?
What techniques did the caseworker use to get past the parent’s
statements that minimized any of the worker’s expressed concerns
so there could be an honest exploration of how the children are
supervised, (for example)? What might they try on the next visit?
Is it clear what it’s like to be a child in this family and are those
children’s voices heard in the case assessment as well as
documentation?
What tools were used to elicit the children’s experience? How did it
go? What might the caseworker do to prepare for the next time
you want to use the tool so you feel more confident in explaining
the use of the Three Houses to the mom and the children?
For
additional
information on FAR
supervision, see the
handouts from the
Supervising
a
Practice Shift to
Family Assessment
Response
(FAR)
Training.
FAR supervision can take the form of individual or group supervision and should be solution-focused.
Supervisors can help workers think through how they are handling tasks and processes, including the
perception of FAR by others in the agency. Group consultation is valuable around case planning and this
process should be shared among all CPS staff (FAR and INV) in order to create mutual respect for each
other’s processes and to share experiences and skills across all of CPS.
Ending FAR Involvement
The decision to close the FAR case or open it for formal
preventive services should be made in conjunction with
the family – ideally with them leading the process of self
assessment of current needs and their ability to meet
them and us acting more as facilitators. While it’s
important for the family to lead the discussion, there are
still several factors to take into consideration when ending
our involvement with them. First and foremost, are the
children safe? Throughout our work with the family, we
should be assessing the safety of the children and helping
the family to self-assess; we should be in agreement with
the family that the children are safe at case closure.
Documentation Tip
The details of the decision to close
the case, the family’s involvement
in making this decision and any
reasons the case was kept open
longer
than
the
timeframe
determined by the county should be
documented in progress notes.
Another consideration is the level of risk of future maltreatment. Along with safety, ongoing risk
assessments should take place throughout the FAR case. The respectful, transparent and familycentered relationship we’ve developed with the family should encourage ongoing conversations about
risk elements and how the family can offset them. While there will always be some level of risk when
our involvement with the family ends, it’s important that we leave them with a greater ability to meet
25
Updated 12/2/11
their children’s needs. We should be leaving the family with more information regarding community
resources and they should be more aware of their strengths. The family should be left knowing who to
contact with problems. Link them to their community.
We should document in progress notes our conversations with the family and with our supervisors
about the decision to end our FAR involvement with the family. The documentation should make it clear
whether the decision was family-led and the rationale for ending involvement at that time.
FAR Case Closing and Timeframes
There are several different ways a FAR case may end. First, there
will be situation where the family was assessed as providing
adequate care to their children, the children are safe and the
family has no requests for services or supports. At times, the FAR
caseworker and the family may not agree about the level of their
needs in providing for their children’s well-being. The worker may
have assessed the family as having unmet needs and
recommended services, however the family declined the services.
If, after participating in the full assessment of family strengths,
needs, risks and child safety, the family decides that they want no
further involvement with the FAR process, we must respect their
decision as long as there are no safety factors that place the
children in immediate danger of serious harm and the children
are not currently being maltreated.
Types of FAR Closings

Assessments done, family
and worker don’t identify
any needs the family
cannot meet on its own

Assessments done,
children safe, needs
identified and worker
helped family meet
needs/connect with
community resources
Hopefully our work with the family will end when we have helped
 Assessments done, family
them to take some actions and they are linked to the resources
needs formal services to
they need. If their needs were very specific and concrete (e.g.
adequately meet needs of
they needed funds to get their car repaired so the child could
children and reduce risk;
make all his medical appointments), the FAR case may only need
to be open for a short time. If the family’s needs are more
therefore, a formal
extensive, our involvement with them may last a few months.
preventive services case is
While there is no hard, fast rule at this time for how long a FAR
opened.
should remain open, most counties have deemed 60-90 days
sufficient to complete FAR work with the family. Should the FAR
case need to stay open a bit longer for a need to be met or a situation to resolve, it is important that we
maintain sufficient contacts with the family and document those contacts. If the family has ongoing
service needs that extend beyond your local district’s FAR timeframe, we should engage with the family
around how to best meet these needs. If a decision is made to provide services well past the FAR
timeframe (and these services aren’t going to be provided by a community-based provider), a formal
preventive case must be opened in CONNECTIONS. FAR is a service, not a placeholder for services.
No matter how long the FAR case is open, the family should be provided with information about
community resources for any future needs. This information could be anything from a list of food
26
Updated 12/2/11
pantries the family can visit when financial resources are strained to a referral to community-based
services to address any ongoing needs. Our goal is to leave the family better off than they were prior to
our involvement, even if that only means having more connections to services in their community. In
addition, there can be a specific discussion around what the family might do should another report be
made to the SCR. This will support a family’s preparation for and response to additional concerns being
shared about them and their children and may aid in preventing future reports. For example, if the
family anticipates that Grandma might start worrying about them again, their plan may include keeping
Grandma in the loop about what’s going on with the children, even though they wish she would stay out
of their business. Their transparency with the people in their lives who might be concerned on their
behalf (e.g. school personnel, family members, neighbors) could prevent a new report from being made.
Case Opened for Formal Preventive Services
Not every FAR case will be closed at the end of the FAR period. There will be some families whose needs
cannot be sufficiently met in the FAR timeframes or whose challenges are so great that they need formal
preventive services. As always, this is a decision that should be made in conjunction with the family. Ask
them how they perceive their ability to keep the children safe and minimize risk once FAR involvement
ends. If we come to the decision to open a preventive services case, make sure to explain to them how it
will differ from a FAR case, e.g. application process, formal case plan, etc. Be transparent about the
agency’s process for transferring cases. This provides another opportunity for a warm handoff as we
transition the family into formal preventive services. As may have been done with other services
providers during the FAR case, we should set up a joint meeting with the family, the new worker and us.
Together the FAR worker and the preventive worker can talk to the family about the services that will be
provided to them and answer any questions they have from the start. Introducing the family to the new
worker this way gives us the opportunity to demonstrate the family’s progress and to talk about what
happens moving forward. By using the warm handoff, the family will be less likely to feel deserted by us
and more likely to view the formal preventive case as a continuation of FAR work they’ve already done
with you.
CONCLUSION
Our knowledge of FAR implementation, supervision and case practice continues to evolve as FAR
spreads across New York. Only by sharing our challenges and successes, by reflecting on our practice
and by soliciting feedback from the families we serve will we be able to strengthen the effectiveness of
Family Assessment Response. FAR is now a permanent part of New York’s child protective services
system and we are transitioning from a pilot to making FAR available to as many families as possible and
appropriate. Your experiences will continue to inform our statewide practice and how we support that
practice. We look forward to continue to learn from you and to incorporating your growing expertise in
future editions of this Guide.
27
Updated 12/2/11
Appendix A: Six Principles of Partnership
1. Everyone Desires Respect
We all want to be respected. We want respect for who we are and for our uniqueness in the world. We
want respect for our experience and perspective, for how we’ve come to be who we are and how we’ve
developed our way of seeing things. And we want respect for what we do, for doing the very best we
can in the situations in which we find ourselves. The most effective way for us to get respect from others
is to offer it to them. As workers and professionals, you are models for families. If you embody respect
in all of your interactions with others, you set a respectful tone that will find its way into all parts of the
system. Respect does not mean agreement. We can disagree in respectful ways. Nor does respect look
the same to everyone. It’s important to explore with families what feels respectful to them and try to
operate in ways that they feel valued.
2. Everyone Needs to Be Heard (and Understood)
Everyone’s voice is important. When we silence someone (by ignoring them, shutting them down or
invalidating their contribution) we send a message that his or her voice is irrelevant. Usually we don’t
really succeed in “silencing” anyone; we simply send their voices out of the room. Their ideas and
opinions will be expressed to others in the neighborhood, at work, at meal times — just not to us. By
inviting families to freely share their ideas and concerns, we bring those resources out of hiding and into
the open. We create more options for families when we seek a diversity of opinions. We (workers) want
to be heard too. Sometimes we want to be heard so badly that we put our ideas out first. We try to help
families understand our viewpoint. We listen to what they say with half attention, as inside our heads
we prepare our response. Families feel heard when we listen with full attention, when we try to
understand them before we attempt to be understood ourselves.
3. Everyone Has Strengths
Child welfare is a complex and dynamic field. Just when we think we’ve got it, things change and we
have to learn new policies and practices. As employees, we have to stay on top of the changes. The best
way for everyone to adapt is to learn on top of what you already know and what you already do. Think
about what strengths you have as a worker and challenge yourself with new practice ideas. The same
goes with working with families. Start where the family is. Identify strengths with the family and use the
strengths as a foundation for new learning and new ideas. You need to value what the family brings to
the table but you also need to challenge them to think outside of the box. Acknowledging and building
on strengths doesn’t mean we ignore problems or gloss over concerns. On the contrary, strengths-based
practice sees the problem and the strengths and clearly links them together to support the family.
4. Judgments Can Wait
Most child welfare systems are set up to be reactionary. Workers have to make judgments every day
and most of the time are reinforced for making judgments quickly. Unfortunately, we’ve all had the
experience of wishing we could turn back the clock and rethink a decision. Holding back judgment
doesn’t mean you are avoiding making decisions. Rather, it means staying open to all the information,
especially the information that doesn’t fit our expectations, and allowing that information to inform our
understanding. Once we think we understand a situation, we tend to look at it as if our understanding
were the truth. Not surprisingly, we usually find evidence to support our understanding. However, if we
had a different understanding we would also find evidence to support that perspective. It is important
that as workers, we seek other ways of understanding things. This is more than simply being open to
28
Updated 12/2/11
new ideas — we need to seek out disproving evidence to our “truths.” Ask yourself, what can I discover
in this scenario that would challenge my current understanding of the situation? How can I prove my
initial ideas wrong? Even if your initial ideas hold, you are less likely to be surprised down the road if
you’ve taken the time to challenge your thinking.
5. Partners Share Power
When we feel powerless, we feel helpless. When we feel helpless, we feel victimized. When we feel
victimized, we may resist, give up, lash out or sink into depression. This is not something we wish for
families. The most effective antidote to this syndrome is to share power: not give it up or deny we have
it, but share it. Workers walk into families’ lives with a lot of power. Think about yesterday’s activity in
which you made play dough symbol to represent your family and then others came in and changed it.
The power (and perceived power) that child welfare workers hold makes an impact on the relationship
with the family. Sharing power also means sharing responsibility. Of course, families are ultimately
responsible for what happens in their homes, but when that power can be shared among families,
workers and supervisors, we can help families make good decisions. And when some of those decisions
don’t work as planned, the worker and the family work together to move forward. When power is
shared, setbacks become opportunities to learn and rethink situations rather than place blame.
6. Partnership Is a Process
Like any relationship, partnership with a family is a process. It will be more successful at some times
than at others. It will be more successful with some families than with others. You may find yourself
progressing nicely and then suddenly you seem to be back where you started. This is to be expected and
anticipated. Setbacks are part of the learning process and should be treated as such. (“If at first you
don’t succeed, try, try again.”) Try to learn from what does and doesn’t work well. Involve families in
evaluating your efforts to work well together. Be transparent with the family about what you are trying
to achieve through partnership. Transparency will help the partnership process.
29
Updated 12/2/11
Appendix B: Mapping of Risk Elements to the Family-Led Assessment
Guide (FLAG)
FLAG
Risk assessment
Section 1 The
Family
Together
1. Housing stability
2. Physical condition of the home
3. Financial resources and self-sufficiency
4. Relationships among siblings
5. Communication and conflict resolution between
parents and child(ren)
Section 2
Children
6. Relationship with parents
7. Health status & medical or dental care
8. Educational & service status
9. Developmental & service status
10. Interpersonal skills & service status
11. High-risk behaviors & service status
12. Mental health & service status
Section 3
Caregivers
13. Primary caregiver’s partner relationship
14. Vocational functioning
15. Mental health & service status
16. Alcohol & other drug use & service status
17. Supervision of children
18. Caregiver’s boundaries
19. Disciplinary practices with children
7. The caretaker has been a victim or perpetrator of abusive or
threatening incidents with partners or other adults in the
family or neighborhood.
8. The caretaker’s alcohol use has had negative effects on
child care, family relationships or jobs, or has led to arrests
within the past two years.
9. The caretaker’s drug use has had negative effects on child
care, family relationships or jobs, or has led to arrests within
the past two years.
10. The caretaker’s behavior suggests mental health problems
exist and/or the caretaker has a diagnosed mental illness.
11. The caretaker has very limited cognitive skills.
13. The caretaker demonstrates developmentally appropriate
expectations of all children.
14. The caretaker attends to the needs of all the children and
prioritizes the children’s needs above his or her own needs or
desires.
Section 4
Caregiver
Advocacy
Status
20. Caregiver’s knowledge & attention to
family/child needs & service status
21. Family’s natural supports
22. Caregiver’s problem solving ability
23. Family’s knowledge of service options &
ability to access services
6. The caretaker has, and uses, reliable and constructive
support and assistance from extended family, friends or
neighbors.
13. The caretaker demonstrates developmentally appropriate
expectations of all children.
14. The caretaker attends to the needs of all the children and
prioritizes the children’s needs above his or her own needs or
desires.
30
4. There is a current or recent history of housing with serious
health or safety hazards, extreme overcrowding, unstable
housing or no housing.
5. Financial resources are mismanaged or limited to the
degree that one or more basic family needs are intermittently
or chronically unmet.
Updated 12/2/11
Appendix C: Family-Led Assessment Strategies
There are four major areas of assessment in the New York Family-Led Assessment Guide (FLAG), which
include 23 different assessment items. Listed below are some questions, tools and techniques for
engaging families in a family-led assessment process to learn about the family and to learn their “story.”
Section 1 –The Family Together (Items 1-5)
Every family is different, and some family members may not all live in the same place and some may not
be blood relatives or legally related.
Conversation Starters













How did your family come to live where you are living today? Where were you living before you
were living here? Where were you born and where did you grow up?
Do you wish you lived somewhere else? If so, where would it be?
Tell me what you like most about your house. What do you like least about your house?
Have there ever been times when you have struggled to make “ends meet”?
Tell me a little bit about those times. How did you get through them? What was (would have
been) helpful to you? Who was helpful to you?
Describe the personalities of your family members (i.e., funniest, calmest, most athletic, best
storyteller, most relaxed, most social, most creative, etc).
What are some of the hardest choices you have ever had to make for your family?
As a parent, how do you handle conflict within your family? Between the children?
When you get frustrated with your family, what do you do? What happens when someone gets
frustrated with you?
If you had to do it all over again, would you change the way you are raising your family? If so,
how?
In working with your family, what would be helpful for me to know about your family’s culture?
Tell me about your family’s traditions.
Describe a typical family dinner. Do you all eat together? Who does the cooking? What are your
favorite meals to make?
Family-Led Activities


Pushing Buttons – Have each family member talk about what “pushes their buttons” or have
family members share what pushes one another’s buttons.
Tour Guide – Have someone in the family serve as a “tour guide” of their home.
31
Updated 12/2/11


Family Portrait – Have each family member draw a picture of their family and share it with
everyone; ask follow-up questions about family dynamics based on what you see in each
drawing.
Family Favorites – Ask the family to identify their favorite things about their family, for
example: favorite tradition, favorite holiday or event, favorite time of the day, favorite meal to
cook together, favorite pastime or activity to do as a family, favorite family memory, favorite
thing about their home, etc. Be sure to facilitate this activity so that all family members are
sharing their thoughts.
Section 2 – Children (Items 6-12)
Assess all children; score the child with the highest need.
Conversation Starters










What does your family do to have fun? What kinds of things do you do just with your mom (or
dad or sister or brother)?
What do you like about your family? What would you change about your family?
If you are having a bad day, what do you do to feel better? What gets you through a bad day?
What does your family see you doing when you are happy? . . . angry? . . . sad? . . .worried?
Tell me about what you do to take care of your body. What does your mom (or dad or parents)
do to help keep you healthy?
Tell me about school. What do you like best about school? What do you like least about school?
What do you wish was different about school?
Tell me about your friends. Who are the most important people in your life?
Who are your “real life” heroes?
Parents/Caregivers: Do you remember anything that your children did when they were small
that really amazed you? Tell me more about that.
Parents/Caregivers: What does your child do well? What is challenging for your child?
Family-Led Activities


Three Houses – On a sheet of paper, draw three houses and label each differently (e.g., “House
of Good Things,” “House of Worries” and “House of Wishes”). Have the children write or draw
things to fit the category in each house.
Self-Portrait – Have each member of the family draw a picture of him- or herself. Ask follow-up
questions to each of them related to how they take care of or help grow each part of their body:
o Their brain (education/learning abilities/employment)
o Their heart (feelings/coping skills and mechanisms)
32
Updated 12/2/11
o
o
Their bones/teeth/muscles (medical care/dental care/exercise/use of drugs and alcohol)
Their mouth and ears (listening to one another/communication and relationships among
family members)
o
Their hands (caring for pets or family members/affection or physical touch)r&
Practice Training Handout 21
Section 3 – Caregivers (Items 13-19)
If there is more than one caregiver, score the caregiver with the highest need.
Conversation Starters
















How is your family different from the family you grew up in as a child (e.g., home, make-up,
discipline, etc.)? How is it the same? What were your parents like?
How is the world now different from what it was like when you were a child? How is it the
same?
How did you meet the person who you are/were in a relationship with? How would you
describe him/her? What do/did you admire most about him/her? What challenges you about
him/her?
As a child, what did you want to be when you grew up? What kinds of jobs have you had? How
did you decide on your job now?
If you could have any job, what would it be? How come you would choose that job?
What do you like to do when you are not working? Do you have any hobbies?
What do you do to take care of yourself? How do you cope when you are stressed out?
What does it look like to your partner when you are under stress? What does it look like to your
children?
If you could change something about yourself, what would it be?
Describe your general health. Do you have any health concerns that are considered hereditary
(or that ‘run in the family’)? If so, what are they?
How did you feel when you found out you were going to be a parent for the first time?
What do you find most rewarding about being a parent and raising children? What do you find
most difficult?
How do you make decisions in your family? Are your children involved in the decision-making
process?
How do you manage conflicts with your children?
What do you find works best in disciplining your children? What have you found to not work in
disciplining your children? Tell me more about that.
What advice would you (or do you) give your grandchildren based on your life experience?
33
Updated 12/2/11
Family-Led Activities



Five Facts – Have the caregivers write down four important facts about themselves, plus one
fact about their childhood relationships, their family, their friendships, their jobs, etc.
Life Mapping – Have the caregivers draw a life map of the major events that have happened in
their lives and then have them share it with you.
Survival Stories – Have the caregivers answer the following questions:
o If you were stranded on an island, what five people or things would you want there with
you?
o If you were lost at sea, what kind of people would you want on your raft to help you get
back to land?
Process & Practice Training Handout 21
Section 4 – Caregiver Advocacy Status (Items 20-23)
This section provides an opportunity for the caregiver to assess his or her current ability to advocate for
individual family members or for the family in general.
Conversation Starters













Who do you consider family? What family members are you close to?
What about your family makes you the most proud?
Tell me about the people who you consider to be your closest friends. How long have you
known them? What about them makes them special to you?
Who has had the most positive influence on your life? What did he/she do?
Who do you rely on in times of need?
Tell me about any groups or communities that you belong to. Are you part of a faith
community?
Are you part of a particular cultural community? Tell me more about those communities.
How long have you lived in this community? What do you like most about this community?
What do you like least about this community?
What is the most stressful or challenging experience that you have ever lived through?
What helped you get through it?
What is the most amazing thing that has ever happened to you?
Are you involved with any resources, services or supports in the community? Tell me about
them. Have they been of help to your family? If so, how? If not, what would have been more
helpful?
Family-Led Activities

Family Circles Assessment – This activity can be completed with the entire family to
understand who their natural and social supports are.
34
Updated 12/2/11

Scaling Questions – Ask questions related to:
o Connection to their neighbors/community
o Knowledge of resources in the community
o Problem-solving abilities in the context of the family’s issues
o Understanding the needs of the family/child
35
Appendix D: New York Family Assessment Response Practice Reflection Tool
(PRT)
This Practice Reflection Tool (PRT) has multiple uses. Workers may use the PRT tool to self-assess the use and
incorporation of New York’s Family Assessment practice principles and protocols in individual cases and overall
practice. Supervisors also may use the PRT tool, FAR Quality Assurance Tool, other case review instruments
and/or worker self-assessments in both individual cases and overall practice. The PRT can help workers,
supervisors and peers (via team meetings that parallel respect and strengths-based and solution-focused
processes) to recognize and reward worker strengths, provide suggestions and guidance to enhance practices and
minimize gaps, and discuss alternative strategies and creative solutions for challenges or roadblocks.
Basic Instructions
For assessing practice in individual cases, the worker (or worker and supervisor) should complete Part 1 following the worker’s first
contact with the family. Part 2 may be completed several times during a case to continuously assess and strengthen practices; at a
minimum, the worker should complete this part following his or her final formal contact with the family and discuss the results in
consultation with his or her supervisor.
For assessing overall practice, the worker, supervisor or both may complete the PRT and discuss the results either via one-on-one
consultation or via a team meeting, recognizing that the goal of the PRT process is to continuously find ways to strengthen practices
and help families in need.
Updated 12/2/11
PART 1 – FIRST CONTACT
Worker Self-Assessment Instructions: These questions are designed for you to assess how well you did in applying the guiding principles of FAR
and to help you identify areas where you can improve or strengthen your practice skills. Please complete questions 1-10 and 1-4 following the
first contact with the family.
Date of First Contact ___/___/________
How Contacted ________________________
Date Questions Completed ___/___/________
Guiding Principle 1 – Safety is always the first priority. Families screened into the child welfare system and identified as eligible for
family assessment response have the opportunity to make an informed decision to participate in FAR or an investigation.
Marker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
(Check One)
Yes
No
Contacted the family (by telephone or other method) within 24
hours and scheduled a visit to the home (where children will be
present and included).
Attended initial visit with the family in the home (children
included).
Explained the family assessment response process to the family
in jargon-free language.
Elicited questions and feedback from the family on the
description of family assessment response in order to gauge
their understanding. Provided answers and additional
explanation if required.
Began safety assessment and kept safety at forefront of my
contact.
Offered the family the choice of whether to participate in the
family assessment response process or be referred for an
investigation (if FAR eligible).
Listened to what the parent/caregiver and family had to say
(including their response to DSS expressed safety, risk or other
child well-being concerns, family strengths, needs identification
and cultural considerations).
37
Comment(s)
Updated 12/2/11
8
Honored the family’s response decision and made track
assignment accordingly.
9
Scheduled next contact before leaving first home visit, if FAR
was appropriate and family chose FAR track.
10
Reviewed referral information, case history, information shared
by family, contact (home visit) experience and track assignment
with supervisor.
38
Updated 12/2/11
Guiding Principle 2 – Families are more easily engaged when you demonstrate respect, listen,
incorporate discussion about family culture and actively engage them in a meaningful partnership.
Marker
1
2
3
4
(Check One)
Yes
No
Sought to understand the family’s communication or ideas by
asking respectful questions and seeking clarity and
understanding.
Demonstrated respect for the family’s culture, voice and
partnership by listening, engaging and responding to questions
openly and transparently.
Engaged children and youth throughout the process so they felt
like they were part of identifying concerns and solutions within
FAR and that their voices were heard and considered.
Tactfully addressed the safety or child maltreatment and wellbeing concerns that resulted in the family being screened into
FAR and integrated any concerns the family identified into the
conversation and beginning assessment process.
39
Comment(s)
Updated 12/2/11
PART 2 – ONGOING FAR STRENGTHS-BASED AND SOLUTION-FOCUSED PRACTICES
Worker Self-Assessment Instructions: These questions are designed for you to assess how well you did in applying the guiding principles of FAR
to practice with families and to help you identify areas where you can improve or strengthen your practice skills as a FAR case progresses. Please
rate your skills for each marker. This part should be completed at least once during or immediately after the life of the case. This self-assessment
may be used more often by making additional copies.
Today’s Date __________________
For individual cases, check the appropriate box to indicate at what stage of the case the assessment is being completed:
FAR assessment completion (completed on ___/___/______ )
________________________
Case Closure (closed on ___/___/______)
Other
Guiding Principle 3 – Family assessment response is designed to identify family needs and find creative solutions,
including informal supports and formal services.
Marker
Outstanding
1
2
Very
Good
(Check One)
Competent
Needs
Improvement
Worked with all members of
family to identify and address
safety, risk or child well-being
concerns.
Worked with all members of
family to identify strengths,
needs, and potential solutions
and resources regarding all
areas of family functioning
included in the FLAG.
40
Comments/Demonstrated by:
Not
Demonstrated
Not
Applicable
Updated 12/2/11
3
4
Explored the possible
connection and use of informal
supports and resources in the
assessment and planning
process.
Supported the family in
identifying their cultural needs
and strengths in the
assessment process.
41
Updated 12/2/11
Marker
Outstanding
5
6
7
8
9
10
Very
Good
(Check One)
Competent
Needs
Improvement
Supported the family in
identifying and accessing
culturally relevant supports
(informal and formal) and
services.
Used solution-focused
questions to help the family
identify their preferred
alternatives, exceptions to
problem areas and areas of
strength.
Gathered all the information
necessary to complete a
thorough assessment and
documented it in the FLAG.
Was able to reach mutual
understanding with the family
about areas of strength and
need.
Collaborated with the family
to develop a family service
plan relevant to the family’s
identified needs.
Followed through on my role
and responsibilities identified
in the plan (e.g., made timely
referrals, accessed available
resources, etc.).
Included the family in all
decision-making processes.
42
Comments/Demonstrated by:
Not
Demonstrated
Not
Applicable
Updated 12/2/11
11
Had frequent, quality contacts
that were meaningful to the
family.
43
Updated 12/2/11
Marker
Outstanding
12
13
14
15
16
17
Very
Good
(Check One)
Competent
Needs
Improvement
Kept the family informed of all
case developments
(e.g., discussed new options
with the family as they
became available).
Met with provider and family
together when case
transitioned to community
provider(s).
Provided seamless transition
of services (e.g., “warm
handoff”; well-coordinated
transition to preventive or
other services if continued
support needed).
Was personally open,
transparent and informative
about any need to make a
report for an investigation and
next steps (only if required).
Met with family and
investigative worker to
transition case if FAR case was
being closed and reopened in
investigation (only if required).
Provided seamless case closing
(e.g., continued safety plan,
family support plan, referrals
to community resources, faceto-face FAR closing meeting
with family).
44
Comments/Demonstrated by:
Not
Demonstrated
Not
Applicable
Updated 12/2/11
Guiding Principle 4 -- Child protective agencies and staff representatives provide higher quality services
if they are willing to individually and collectively reflect on the quality of practice demonstrated.
Marker
Outstanding
1
2
3
4
5
Very
Good
(Check One)
Competent
Needs
Improvement
Met with supervisor and/or
peers when I had questions
about case direction, FAR
practice or individual practice.
Used individual case
consultation with my
supervisor.
Used group case consultation
with my team.
Identified additional coaching
or individual learning needs
and sought to address them.
Took personal responsibility in
educating about and
advocating for FAR with
relevant providers and
community members.
Additional comments (optional):
45
Comments/Demonstrated by:
Not
Demonstrated
Not
Applicable
Appendix E: Tools for Building Solutions with Families
EXCEPTION QUESTIONS
Exceptions are those occasions in a family’s life when their problems could have occurred but did not, or
at least were less severe. Exception questions focus on who, what, when and where (the conditions that
helped the exception occur) — NOT WHY. The exceptions should be related to the family’s goals for
improving their situation.
 Are there times when the problem does not happen or is less serious? When? How does this
happen?
 Have there been times in the last couple of weeks when the problem did not happen or was
less severe?
 How was it that you were able to make this exception happen? What was different about
that day?
 Tell me about the times, in recent days, when you could have left the children home alone,
but somehow managed to handle it differently?
 If your (mother, sister, spouse, friend, etc.) were here and I asked her what she noticed you
doing differently on that day, what would she say? What else?
 I imagine you’ve thought a great deal about how to keep you and your children safe. How
have you done this in the past?
 So, if you were not using the belt to discipline your daughter, what would you be doing
instead?
 Tell me about the times when you have been able to care for your children even though
you’ve been dealing with these other difficult things in your life.
COPING QUESTIONS
Coping questions attempt to help the family shift its focus away from the problem elements and toward
what it is doing to survive the painful or stressful circumstances. In a way, they are related to exploring
for exceptions.
 What have you found that is helpful in managing this situation?
 Considering how (depressed, anxious, overwhelmed, stressed, etc.) you feel, how is it that
you were able to get out of bed this morning and make it to (work, school, the kids’ rooms
to wake them up)?
 You say that you’re not sure that you want to continue (working at your job, living like this,
dealing with your son, etc.). What is it that has helped you continue (working, living here,
dealing with your son, etc.) up to now?
 How come you are doing as well as you are doing with all that stuff going on in your life?
Most people would have given up a long time ago, but you keep hanging in there. Amazing.
Have you always been this strong?
 What do you think would be helpful in keeping your children safe right now? What needs to
change to make that happen?
Updated 12/2/11
INDIRECT QUESTIONS or RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONS
Indirect questions or relationship questions invite the family to consider how others might feel or
respond to some aspect of their lives, behavior or future changes. Indirect questions can be useful in
asking the family to reflect on narrow or faulty perceptions without the worker directly challenging
those perceptions or behaviors.
 Have your parents or friends ever commented on your family’s situation?
 If your mom was here, what might she say about how you parent your children?
 What do you suppose your children would say they like best about your being sober?
 What would your children say about how they can tell that you love them?
 If your baby could talk, using grown-up words, what would he say about how safe he feels in
the home?
 What would your neighbor say needs to happen for her to feel confident that the children
will always be safe in your home and that I did not need to be involved in your life?
 What would your children say needs to change at home (or continue to happen at home) for
them to feel confident that they will always feel safe here?
 Given what we have talked about so far, what concerns do you think I have (or my agency
has) for your son?
 What behavior do you think I (or my agency) would need to see to be confident that your
children are safe?
SCALING QUESTIONS
Scaling questions invite the family to put their observations, impressions and predictions on a scale from
0 to 10, with 0 representing a negative perception and 10 representing a positive perception. Questions
need to be specific, citing specific times and circumstances. Scaling questions can be used to gauge
almost anything, including hopefulness, confidence, safety concerns and willingness to make changes.
Both adults and young children respond well to scaling questions.
 On a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being the most serious and 10 being not serious at all, how
serious do you think the problem is now?
 On a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being not at all solved and 10 being completely solved, what
number would it take for you to consider the problem to be solved?
 On a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being no confidence and 10 being very confident, how
confident are you that this problem can be solved?
 You said you are at a 5 for your confidence in solving this problem. What would it take for
you to go from a 5 to a 6?
 If I were to ask your children how safe they feel they are right now, on a scale of 0 to 10,
with 0 being the least safe and 10 being the most safe, what would they say? What would
they say it would take to get from a 6 to a 7?
Scales that can be used in scaling questions:
 On a scale of 0 to 10. . .
 Picture of a ladder
 Steps in a home
 Simple drawings of faces that range from a frown to a smile

Standing along an imaginary line
47
Updated 12/2/11
THE MIRACLE QUESTION
The “Miracle Question” can be the opening piece of the process of developing well-formed goals. It
gives families permission to think about an unlimited range of possibilities for change. It begins to move
the focus away from their current and past problems and toward a more satisfying life. “Now, I want to
ask you kind of a weird question. Let’s imagine that when you all get home from work or school today,
you find that a miracle has happened. The miracle is that the problems your family has been facing are
solved. But, since you were gone, you don’t know the miracle has happened. What is different that tells
you that a miracle has happened and your problems are solved?” The worker further extends and
amplifies the impact of the miracle by asking a series of follow-up questions designed to guide the family
in exploring the implication of the miracle in the family’s life.





What will be the first thing you notice that would tell you that this miracle has happened
and that things are different?
What might others (e.g., friends, family, etc.) notice about you that would tell them that the
miracle has happened and that things are different or better?
Have there been times when you have seen pieces of this miracle happen?
What’s the first step that you can take to begin to make this miracle happen?
When you wake up next Monday, Wednesday and Friday, what if you were to imagine that
the miracle has happened and then try to respond by letting your feelings and behavior
reflect that the miracle has happened? Would that be something you might be interested in
doing? We can then talk about this in my visit with you all next Friday.
Adapted from The Pennsylvania Child Welfare Training Program. (2008). 301 engaging clients from a strength-based, solutionfocused perspective. Retrieved September 22, 2009, from http://www.pacwcbt.pitt.edu/Curriculum/
301EnggngClntsFrmAStrngthBsdSltnFcsdPrspctv.html
Kim Berg, I., & Kelly, S. (2000). Building solutions in child protective services. New York: W.W. Norton.
48
Updated 12/2/11
Appendix F: FAR LEGAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Question: Who has access to FAR records and under what circumstances?
Answer: Section 427-a(5)(d) of the Social Services Law provides that all records created as
part of a FAR case are confidential and are available only to:
OCFS staff and persons designated by OCFS;
Local social services district staff responsible for the FAR case;
Community-based agencies that have contracts with the local social services district to carry out
activities for the district in FAR cases;
Providers of services in FAR cases;
Local social services districts investigating a subsequent report of child abuse or maltreatment
involving the same subject or child named in the FAR report;
Courts, under certain circumstances; and
The subject of the FAR report
Question: What access do courts have to FAR records?
Answer: Section 427-a(5)(d)(vi) of the Social Services Law gives courts access to FAR records
while the family is receiving services under the FAR case, but only where the court has issued
an order or a judicial subpoena (i.e., a subpoena signed by a judge), which has been issued
based on a finding that the FAR report, records and information are necessary for determination
of an issue before the court. Such a finding can be made only after notice has been provided to
the subject and all parties to the present proceeding, giving them an opportunity to be heard.
The FAR report, records and information must then be submitted to the court for inspection, and
the court may issue directions to protect the confidentiality of the information, including requiring
redaction of portions of the record and/or prohibitions on redisclosure. Once the provision of
services to the family under the FAR cases concludes, the court has no right of access.
Section 427-a(5)(e)(iii) of the Social Services Law provides that where there is a subsequent
report that is handled as a traditional child protective services (CPS) investigation and CPS
brings an Article 10 proceeding, the local social services district CPS would be required to
include in the information made available to the court any relevant information from the prior
FAR record. The information from the FAR report would then be subject to the confidentiality
standards applicable to traditional CPS reports, as it would then be part of the CPS record for
the subsequent report.
49
Updated 12/2/11
Section 427-a(d)(5)(e)(iv) of the Social Services Law provides that the subject of a FAR report
may, at his or her discretion, present the FAR report, records or information, in whole or in part,
in any court proceeding, including an Article 10 proceeding, custody proceeding or visitation
proceeding. The subject may decide what portions of the FAR record to provide to the court,
and the court is bound by the subject’s decision. The court has no authority to order the
disclosure of additional portions of the FAR record beyond the portions disclosed by the subject.
Question: Does the attorney for the child have access to FAR reports or records?
Answer: No, the attorney for the child has no statutory right of access to the FAR report or
information from the FAR case record. Access to FAR records is governed by Section 427a(5)(d) of the SSL, which does not afford the child or the attorney for the child access to such
records. Therefore, the attorney for the child would have access only through a court order.
Question: May a court order a FAR investigation?
Answer: Section 1034(1) of the Family Court Act permits the family court to order that a “child
protective investigation” be conducted. The statutory authorization for FAR is in Section 427-a
of the Social Services Law, which is part of Title 6 of Article 6 of the Social Services Law. Title 6
of the Social Services Law sets forth requirements for child protective services; so FAR cases
are a type of child protective service. However, Section 427-a(2) of the Social Services Law
requires that a social services district that is interested in implementing a FAR program must
apply to, and be approved by, OCFS in order to use FAR. Section 427-a(2)(a) requires that the
social services district set forth in its application for approval the types of cases that would be
subject to FAR. Therefore, a court could order a FAR “investigation” only if (a) the district is
approved for FAR and (b) the “investigation” at issue (meaning here the allegations) fall within
the types for which the district is approved to use FAR.
Question: If a court orders an investigation under Section 1034 of the Family Court Act (i.e.,
there’s a court-ordered investigation) in a social services district that is approved for FAR, may
the district address the case under FAR rather than conduct a traditional child protective
services investigation?
Answer: If the allegations in the court ordered investigation (COI) fall within the types of reports
which the district may address as FAR reports, there is no legal prohibition to handling the case
under FAR. However, we strongly recommend that the court be consulted before doing so. If
the court is not amenable to use of the FAR approach for the investigation at issue, it would
obviously be best to know that before addressing the case under FAR.
50
Updated 12/2/11
Question: How long are FAR reports retained?
Answer: Pursuant to Section 427-a(5)(c) of the Social Services Law, records of FAR reports
are sealed and retained for a period of ten years from the date of the report to the SCR.
Question: May the subject of a FAR report request expungement of the FAR report prior to the
end of the ten year retention period?
Answer: No. The authority to request expungement of a sealed report is found in Section
422(5)(c) of the Social Services Law and applies only to unfounded and sealed reports. Since
no determination is made in FAR reports, they are sealed pursuant to Section 427-a(4)(c)(i) of
the Social Services Law, but are not unfounded. Therefore, there is no legal basis to expunge a
FAR report prior to the end of the ten year retention period.
Question: Who is entitled to notice of the existence of a FAR report?
Answer: Pursuant to Section 427-a(4)(d)(i) of the Social Services Law, notice must be
provided to each parent, guardian or other person legally responsible for the child or children
named in the FAR report.
Question: Are non-custodial parents entitled to notice of the existence of the report?
Answer: Yes, if the name and location of the non-custodial parent is known. If this information
is not known from the report, the FAR worker should make an effort to obtain that information
from the custodial parent. If, however, the custodial parent resists providing this information to
the FAR worker, and the non-custodial parent does not appear to be a significant presence in
the life of the child(ren), the OCFS view is that the basic purpose of FAR, which is to establish a
cooperative working relationship with the family so as to effectively address the family issues,
takes precedence over the need to notify the non-custodial parent, and notification of the noncustodial parent is not necessary in that circumstance. If that is the case, the FAR worker
should document the decision to not notify the non-custodial parent and the reason for that
decision. If the non-custodial parent is significantly involved in the life of the child(ren), then the
FAR worker must assess whether the FAR intervention can be effective without the participation
of the non-custodial parent, and make efforts to identify, notify and involve the non-custodial if
necessary.
Question: When, if ever, should persons be added to a FAR report?
Answer: Just as with a traditional child protective services case, the social services district
CPS worker should add to the CONNECTIONS record information on subjects and other
51
Updated 12/2/11
persons named in the report. This would include any parent, guardian or other person legally
responsible for the child (but see the previous question on non-custodial parents). Any children
in the household who were allegedly maltreated, but who were not named in the report, should
be added. Adult siblings living in the household should be added, as they would be other
persons legally responsible for the child by virtue of living in the same household (because they
are regularly or continually found in the same household as the child).
Question: Who must be notified of the closing of a FAR case?
Answer: There is no legal requirement for notification of the closing of a FAR case. The social
services district may, as a courtesy and in the spirit of partnership with families that is part of
FAR, want to send a notification to the parents, guardian or other persons legally responsible
who received notification of the report that the case has been closed, but this is not legally
required.
Question: Can FAR records be used in support of a neglect petition?
Answer: If there is a report handled as a traditional child protective services (CPS) case that
involves a subject or child named in a prior FAR case, and there is information in the prior FAR
case record that is relevant to the new report, then CPS may use that information in conducting
their investigation of the current report. If CPS commences an Article 10 proceeding for that
subsequent report and has determined that there is relevant information from the prior FAR
record, they are required to make that information available to the family court and other party to
the Article 10 proceeding, pursuant to Section 427-a(5)(e)(iii) of the Social Services Law.
Question: In a FAR case, is a home visit required to be made within 24 hours of receipt of the
report?
Answer: Section 427-a(4)(c) of the Social Services Law requires that the safety assessment
commence within 24 hours of receipt of the report and be completed within seven days, but the
statute does not specify how the safety check must be commenced, nor does it require a home
visit within the 24 hour period.
52
Updated 12/2/11
References:
Ferguson, J., & Morley, L. (2010, July). Assessing safety and risk in a family assessment response training
curriculum. Englewood, CO: American Humane Association.
Minnesota Department of Human Services, Family Centered Practice Guide, 2004.
Morley, L., Wilmot, L., Bruce, L., & Rohm, A. (2010, March). New York family assessment response (FAR)
process & practice training curriculum. Englewood, CO: American Humane Association.
Wilmot, L., & Ferguson, J. (2010, March). Supervising a practice shift to family assessment response
training curriculum. Englewood, CO: American Humane Association.
53