State Standards and Practices for
Content of Caseworker Visits with
Children in Foster Care
DHHS-OIG Report
OEI-04-03-00351
December 2005
Objectives


Determine written standards States have
implemented for the content of worker-child
visits
Determine practices of States without written
standards
Background





No federal standard for content
ACF considers whether visits are focused on issues
pertinent to case planning, service delivery, and goal
attainment
CFSR: of 35 states reviewed 2002-2004, 14 cited as
needing improvement in content of caseworker visits
OIG focused on children in foster care
Examined State standards for content of visits and
reported activities for States without written
standards
Limitations



Content analysis entails judgments
Reviewed only documents pertaining to visits
with children in foster care
Did not examine county, local or private
agency standards
Findings: Written Standards



41 of 51 States report implementing
standards addressing content of visits
38 States have written standards specific to
caseworker visits
3 States have written documents addressing
content, but as part of broader program
areas
Findings: Visitation Standard Activities

Most commonly cited related to:
– relationships and/or communication
between caseworker and child
– caseworker addressing needs and
services to the child
Findings: Visitation Standard Activities

Most common categories:
– safety of the child
– case planning
– physical health of the child
– private discussions with the child
– adjustment of the child to placement
– addressing the child’s concerns
Findings: Visitation Standard Activities

Most common categories:
– progress of the child
– mental health needs of the child
– educational needs of the child
– child’s relationships or visits with parents,
siblings, and other relatives
– well-being of the child
Findings: States without Written
Standards

10 States did not provide written standards
– 8 of these States reported caseworkers
routinely perform activities during visits
– 2 of these States reported activities
depend on the case or are determined by
local policy
Findings: Activities in States without
Written Standards

Most common activity categories:
– adjustment to the placement
– child safety
– physical health of the child
Findings: Activities in States without
Written Standards

Most common activity categories:
– educational needs of the child
– addressing the child’s concerns
– relationships and/or communication
between caseworker and child
– case planning
Findings: Reasons States Do Not Have
Written Standards



Exploring development of standards (3
States)
Caseworkers are expected to follow best
practice (2 States)
Content addressed in the PIP (3 States)
Findings: Reasons States Do Not Have
Written Standards



Content depends on the case (2 States)
Caseworkers discuss activities with
supervisors (1 State)
Declined to implement standards imposing
additional work on caseworkers (1 State)
Prepared by:
Susan Dougherty
National Resource Center for Family
Centered Practice and Permanency Planning
At the Hunter College School of Social Work
A Service of the Children’s Bureau/ACF/DHHS
www.nrcfcppp.org
susan.dougherty@hunter.cuny.edu