Nothing Changes And Children Are Still Dying

There is another heartbreaking story of a baby that died needlessly, due to the incompetence of the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare. This time, the child was named Dekia Mattox. Dekia was the daughter of a fifteen year old girl who was herself a part of the foster care system. Both Dekia and her mother lived with the teen's aunt, who was a licensed foster parent.

The child, through a series of poor decision making, was left alone with a drug-addled man who is charged with killing the baby.

All that is bad enough, but the news coming out now makes it as intolerable as the Christopher Thomas story. According to the latest story in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the BMCW investigated a report of abuse and neglect, but cleared the case:

A social worker from the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare investigated an abuse complaint about baby Dekia Mattox just seven weeks before authorities say she was killed by a homeless drug addict in a filthy, cold home, according to a statement released Wednesday by the state Department of Children and Families.

The bureau's Nov. 4 investigation - which stated "the home was in order," contained food, had a well-heated bedroom for the baby and contained no evidence of drug use - stands in sharp contrast to the medical examiner's report, filed shortly after the baby's death Dec. 26.

According to the medical examiner, the dilapidated cottage in the 2700 block of N. Richards St. had two broken windows and was heated by three space heaters. Knives were found on the floor of nearly every room. The bathroom contained a leaking toilet and a broken sink. Dirty dishes filled the kitchen sink. Investigators found empty liquor bottles and beer cans, piles of dirty clothes, discarded baby bottles and little food.

Unfortunately, the article does not make it clear who the worker worked for. Normally, these types of referrals are done by state workers. However, as that it appears that the mother was a foster child herself, unless the case had gone into Kinship Care, there should have been an ongoing case manager assigned to the teen. That means this worker would have had to have regular visits with the teen and her baby.

Either way, the problem remains the same. The system that BMCW uses to determine the risk to a child is the same whether it is a public or private agency worker. The bad part of it is that it tries to determine everything on a rigid formula, and takes away the worker's ability to use common sense and independent thought in determining if a child is at risk.

I've said it so many times, that I am reluctant to keep pointing it out. But I will anyway.

Until there are real substantial changes, such as what paradigm the BMCW uses to determine risk factors, these stories are going to keep happening again and again. Unfortunately, politicians like Senator Alberta Darling, who has been one of the key players in creating and monitoring this abomination of a system, are too busy talking the talk, and then slinking back off to the golf course, to actual correct one of their biggest and most outrageous blunders. Meanwhile, children will continue to die.

Another major problem with the BMCW is that that it is so disjointed. You have a number of agencies doing different parts of the same job, with very little, if any, communication between them. To make matters worse, this also removes any accountability and you just have a series of these various agencies finger pointing at each other without really accomplishing anything constructive. Meanwhile, children will continue to die.

Along with the disjointedness of the system, the multiple agencies cause another problem. The money and other resources are spread out amongst each agency, which each have their own administration and bureaucracy that sucks up the money that should be going to hire enough workers to make the job manageable and enough services to help families in distress. Meanwhile, children will continue to die.

Governor Jim Doyle's failure to lead on correcting this system is one of my greatest disappointments in his time in office. I also certainly hope that the BMCW becomes a factor in the upcoming governor's race.

It will be another chance for Tom Barrett to shine, if he plays it correctly. His willingness to take on difficult situations, like he did with MPS, whether it is popular or not, will stand out against his potential Republican rival. Whether he is correct or not on the MPS take over (I, for one, am not convinced that this would be the best solution) shows at least he is willing and able to lead, whether it is politically popular or not, and whether or not it ticks off his usual supporters.

Scott Walker has shown all too often an unwillingness to take on any responsibilities and a wont to abdicate difficult situations, dumping the problem on someone else. That combines with all together disturbing embrace to privatize and profiteer all things, whether they should be, or even legally could be privatized does not bode well for him on this topic.

Likewise, Mark Neumann will only stumble on this issue, since his extreme social conservatism will not allow him to do what is necessary to fix the system, and he will probably put his foot into his mouth in trying to explain his bigoted approach to the problem.

But regardless of who gets elected next November, one thing is certain. If whoever is the next governor does not take the lead in fixing the child welfare system in Milwaukee, our children will continue to die.

How To Fix Child Welfare, From An Expert

There is a must read column in the editorial section in this morning's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. The piece was written by John B. Mattingly, who is the commissioner of the New York City Administration for Children's Services (emphasis mine):

Public child welfare systems in crisis and political bodies typically react by taking these additional steps:

• Someone will be blamed and disciplined.

•  Task forces will issue reports that yet again express shock over the quality of decisions made by the agency and place increased pressure on staff and managers to make fewer mistakes.

•  Legislative committees will call for increased or improved training, with the assumption that staff are making the same mistakes over and over because they simply don't know what to do.

•  Rules will be tightened; levels of case monitoring will be added. The latitude for independent judgment by the only staff with knowledge of the family will be decreased yet again.

Even more typical, however, are the pressures that Wisconsin already has felt to fix the problem and fix it now, in one of two contradictory ways: 1) Make child protection the "No. 1" response and err more on the side of child safety; or 2) as some advocates suggest, somewhat counterintuitively, remove children far less frequently.

Unfortunately, experience across the country indicates that there is no quick fix (such as more or fewer removals); there is no silver bullet (such as privatization); there is no free lunch (caseload sizes always matter); there is no knight in shining armor (a new and better leader from out of town).

There is only the work: building a large public agency with all of its weaknesses that will focus on making the right decision for each and every family, time after time after time.

The highlighted part describes the approach Milwaukee County had used when it still had control over its own system, before Tommy Thompson, Scott Walker, Alberta Darling and Margaret Farrow decided it would be a great idea to take the system over and privatize it.

Their idea is still not working too well.

Was Justice Served?

Crystal Keith, the aunt of the late Christopher L. Thomas (pictured on left), had already been convicted of murdering him and of torturing his sister. Yesterday, she received her sentence, which was the full sentence allowed by the law, 50 tears in prison and another 25 years on extended supervision.

But was justice done?

In the metaphysical sense, justice could never be done, since no amount of punishment would bring Christopher back to life and restore all wrongs done to him and his sister.

Since Christopher and his sister cannot be made whole again, the question turns to does the punishment fit the crime? Some people would say that it does. I'm not so sure.

The defense had argued that Keith suffered from mental illnesses, specifically depression and schizophrenia. This is plausible, although I don't know if any psychological evaluations were done and what the results of any evaluations might have been. Many accounts that I have read include people commenting about Keith's flat affect (failure to show any emotions on her face). This is a common feature of people receiving treatment for schizophrenia.

Maybe I find the defense of mental illness plausible just because I find it hard to believe that any normal person would be able to do this willingly against two small children.

So, giving Keith the benefit of the doubt, if she was indeed truly insane, how responsible should she be held for her crime? Obviously, if she was truly insane, she would not be aware of the wrongness of her deeds and she would not have tried to hide them from social workers and from family members. If she was not aware, it would be another crime to punish her for something she had no rational control over.

However, if she was truly insane, that should have been held into account during the sentencing. Apparently, based on the reported court proceedings, any mental illnesses were found not to be a significant factor that would offer themselves to be a mitigating cause to her behavior. Not being privy to any reports, I cannot nor would not argue in favor or in opposition of such findings.

In other words, the court found Keith to be aware of the difference between right and wrong, and sentenced her appropriately. This is especially true considering the severity and brutality of her crimes.

So, one can argue, the sentencing was fitting for the crime. But the question still remains: Was justice served?

I would have to say no.

The situation that allowed this tragedy to occur still remains the same. The child welfare system in Milwaukee County has not changed. Oh sure, there are some new names and faces, but the system overall remains unchanged.

This is despite several politicians, like State Senator Alberta Darling, promising to "fix things" and bring forth several new laws to improve the system. Yet nothing has changed.

I had hopes that since Milwaukee County's child welfare system was ruined in a budget proposal in 1996, that they state would use the most recent budget proposal process to put in a fix. I should have know better. Neither Governor Doyle nor any single member of the state legislature offered one piece that would have changed the broken system that our children are still being exposed to.

There has been no changes to Kinship Care. There have been no changes to the child welfare system or how it operates. All remains in its dysfunctional splendor.

Until the significant, positive changes are made to the foster care system, Christopher Thomas, I am sad to say, just might have died in vain. And for him and his sister to suffer such pain, such torture, and such a nightmare, and have nothing change to prevent further incidents like this from happening, is simply an injustice.

Milwaukee Child Welfare System Still Broken

I have the unfortunate opportunity to see my fears and skepticism come to pass regarding the Milwaukee County Child Welfare System.

Regarding the child abuse charges against Milwaukee Alderman Ashanti Hamilton, I warned the gentle reader that too many times, these charges are plea bargained down. Unfortunately, the same thing happened in this case, with Hamilton getting treated with kid gloves:

Milwaukee County prosecutors would drop a felony child abuse charge against Ald. Ashanti Hamilton if he completes counseling and keeps a clean record for the next year, according to a tentative deal reached Thursday.

"It would wipe the slate clean," said Hamilton's lawyer, Michael Chernin. "The charges would be dismissed."

Under the deal, the north side alderman would enter a no-contest plea at a court hearing May 11. Hamilton then would be given a deferred prosecution agreement for the next 12 months.

In covering the case of Christopher L. Thomas, the little baby boy that was brutally murdered by his aunt, I pointed out that until they revamp the entire system, the child welfare system in Milwaukee is going to stay dysfunctional. Again, I was unfortunately proven accurate this past weekend, when the local paper reported that the new agency taking over La Causa would be hiring 104 of the 107 of the same workers that work for La Causa. This number includes the incompetent supervisor that oversaw the case regarding at least two of the children that died in foster care in that area, but now they will make her an administrator, so she can oversee the deaths of even more children:

Integrated Family Services, the agency that will replace La Causa this month and provide services for abused or neglected children and their families in the southern third of Milwaukee County, has hired virtually the entire La Causa staff, including the supervisor who was in charge of the Christopher Thomas case, agency officials said Friday.

That supervisor, however, will be in an administrative position and will not work directly with children or families, said Ann Umhoefer, chief administrative officer for St. Aemilian-Lakeside.

Unbelievable.

And for you tax and spend haters out there, please note that Integrated Family Services will have a $12.1 million dollar contract. That is a whole million dollars more than what La Causa received. And of course, this whole system is a lot more expensive than what the public sector could have been doing it for.

State Senator Alberta Darling, who promised to fix child welfare, apparently forgot her promise while she was playing golf and has done nothing regarding keeping her campaign promises. Again, this does not surprise me.

Governor Jim Doyle, an adoptive father himself, also has failed to fix this monstrosity. To add insult to injury, he then goes ahead and proclaims May to be Foster Care month. Perhaps if he really wanted to give meaning to this otherwise hypocritical proclamation, he would take immediate actions to start fixing this broken system.

But all is not bad news. The Milwaukee Child Welfare Philanthropy Group has granted a $50,000 gift to the Department of Children and Families to retain the services of a foster care expert and to help start a program to recruit and retain quality foster parents. If this person is a true expert, hopefully they will tell the state to fix the whole thing and get a new foster care plan in place, including starting to treat and to pay foster parents what they are worth. I know that they would appreciate that a lot more than the current system when their requests for services are denied and they get paid a pittance that doesn't even cover the expenses.

BMCW: Fails To Protect Children And The Truth

Crocker Stephenson of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has a story in today's paper regarding the latest report on the progress of the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare. Even though his reporting is incomplete, it still tells a damning story regarding the BMCW and the extremes they will go to to protect themselves. MJS was kind enough to provide us with a copy of the actual report from the BMCW, in pdf format.

Mr. Stephenson's reporting is incomplete when he gives a version of the history that created the BMCW:

By all accounts, Milwaukee County in the early 1990s had one of the worst foster care programs in the nation. Many children languished in the system for years without a coherent plan that would enable them to either reunify with their parents or be adopted.

Children's Rights Inc., then the American Civil Liberties Union's Children's Rights Project, filed a suit in federal court in 1993 on behalf of 5,000 children receiving welfare services in Milwaukee County.

In response to the lawsuit, the state took over the county system in 1998, creating the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare, which is part of the state Department of Children and Families. The DCF, headed by Secretary Reggie Bicha, is itself not quite a year old.

What is not being reported is that the system was struggling due to severe underfunding from the State. Take it from someone who was there during that mess, when it would not be unusual for one worker to be responsible for over a hundred cases. Even now, they are receiving tens of millions of dollars more, and despite their claims, things have actually gotten worse. And that is still not enough. In Doyle's most recent budget proposal, there is a request for 15 more State workers, three more State supervisors and more money to increase the number of foster homes and Kinship homes and to pay the foster/Kinship parents better.

It is also interesting to note that some of the "improvement" that the BMCW is claiming is things that the County had done when they were in charge, but were deemed to be too expensive by the state, like nurses going out to check on medically fragile children and newborns.

Despite these lapses in the reporting, the bulk of the story matches what has been happening for the past ten years. The state is fudging the numbers around to protect their own butts with a complete disregard to the children they are supposed to be serving.

On a side note, does anyone know of any agency, public or private, that has ever honestly reported on itself? Why does the State think that the BMCW would be any different?

They claim that the number of children in alternative care is within the "acceptable range." However, they do not include the children that are placed in Kinship Care homes, that are being abused. The most noted in recent history is the murder of Christopher L. Thomas and the torture of his little sister. It is mind-boggling that the BMCW, which had just undergone a major shake up due to this one story, now chooses to ignore it in their semi-annual report. I am sure that it just the tip of the iceberg as well.

The BMCW also has a problem being forthright about the staff turnover rate. The BMCW manipulates the statistics in such a way as to make it seem like the turnover rate is much less than it really is. While the Bureau is reporting a turnover rate of ongoing case managers (that's the private agencies) is about 35%, the real number is almost double that and is close to 60%.

This is significant because it can disrupt the services that the children, the parents, and the foster parents are receiving. This can hinder, disrupt, or even completely sabotage any long range planning that is in place for the child. It also serves to make the entire Bureau more expensive to operate since there is a continuous need to train new workers.

It should be noted that the private agency workers who do the ongoing are getting paid amounts similar to the State workers. This would indicate that that the problem is with the system itself, which is something that I've repeatedly pointed out.

I've been out of the child welfare system for over seven years, but even then, the amount of redundant paperwork was incredible. This bureaucratic nightmare does nothing to help the children, and actually impedes the ability of the worker to actually do their job, like seeing the children to make sure they aren't being abused, or that progress is being made in the permanency planning for the child.

As I have repeatedly stated, the system is broken. No matter how much money they throw at it, it will not be fixed until they change the entire paradigm and approach that they are taking regarding child welfare. There is a reason why case workers are leaving at alarmingly high rates. There is a reason why a majority of foster parents have quit. There is a reason that, despite the larger amount of workers and money being pumped into the system, children are still being hurt.

Until the State gets rid of that broken and ineffective paradigm, and replaces it with a functional program, nothing will change. And more kids will be hurt and/or killed. And that is unacceptable.

Child Welfare To Change To Stay The Same

Earlier in the day, the Business Journal reported that LaCausa was planning on laying off 87 workers. These are the people that were involved in the child welfare program when Christopher Thomas was murdered by his own aunt.

It was reported this afternoon by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that most of the workers would probably be rehired by whichever agency the Bureau contracts with to take over for La Causa. MJS also reports that the two agencies under consideration is the Children's Hospital offspring or St. Aemelian's-Lakeside. My money is still with the Children's Hospital group.

Despite State Senator Alberta Darling and the bureaucrats at the head of the BMCW claiming that they will do so much to change and fix the BMCW, nothing will. The workers will be the same. The training program will be the same. The business model will be the same. The only thing that will change is the new round of alligator tears that and the will shed when the next foster kid dies.

Unfortunately, I can't say that I'm surprised.

The Problem Is The System

During the intense coverage related to the death of Christopher Thomas, I kept iterating that the problem with child welfare in Milwaukee County was systematic, and that cases like Christopher's was only a symptom of the bigger underlying problem.

More tragic stories of babies dying because of the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare have recently surfaced that strengthen my position on this issue.

One is the story of Vera Morehouse, who allowed her infant son to starve to death. The BMCW had received previous referrals on this family, but did not take any action. And this is despite having earlier charges filed against her. Didn't the worker think of checking CCAP first? That used to be standard procedure. While not to be used as a basis for removing children, the history used to be considered while making decisions based on the current referral and conditions. And that was a state worker handling that case.

Even more outrageous is the story of Melody Cole, who starved her 7 month old daughter, Layunnia Lewis , to death. What makes this story so outrageous is the way it was handled (emphasis mine):

According to the complaint, investigative reports and a 16-page report by the panel:

The Aurora Visiting Nurse Association made at least 12 attempts to see Layunnia after she was sent home. A visiting nurse saw the baby once, on Aug. 14. On Sept. 12, because of the parents' lack of cooperation, the association discharged the child from its services.

On April 5, while Layunnia was still in the hospital, the parents agreed to a voluntary in-home safety program run by the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare.

Although the hospital workers reported to child welfare authorities that Cole was heard threatening to beat her other children, and that both parents showed up at the hospital drunk, the safety services were terminated at the parents' request about two weeks after Layunnia was released from the hospital.

Meanwhile, in the months leading up to Layunnia's death, child welfare caseworkers and a therapist made regular visits to her home to check on her 9-year-old brother, who was being monitored under a court order.

The brother's caseworker last visited the home Oct. 30. One month later, Layunnia was dead.

"For reasons not clear to the panel," the independent review panel wrote, "for some portion of time that the safety services case was open, neither the ongoing worker nor the safety service worker knew of their co-worker's involvement with the family."

There was clearly a lack of communication between all of these agencies, and no one wanted to step up and do the right thing. As a result, another baby had to suffer a painful death that was entirely avoidable. There was sufficient cause to detain the baby when the parents refused safety services, but they did not do anything about it. I can't help but wonder if the intake worker that referred the case to safety services was even notified that they dropped out of the family's life.

Then there was this pdf which was released last week. It is a report by BMCW that involves a baby that also was allowed to starve to death. This was even while a case was open with the BMCW, who was supposed to be doing an active investigation at the time.

If you take these three cases, plus the case of Christopher Thomas, you will find only one commonality. The different cases involved different agencies, both public and private. They also involved different levels of involvement with the system, from initial investigation to having an active ongoing caseworker involved.

The only commonality is the system in general. I remember, when the new system was being installed, arguing with the instructors on the effectiveness of the system. It would try to overgeneralize the people involved, trying to put people into convenient categories that never covered all of the intricacies and variables that are involved whenever you are dealing with people. No one person can ever be neatly fitted into a box, and any system that tries to do so is inherently going to fail.

I remember cases in which the worker's experience and knowledge said that a child should be removed due to unsafe conditions, but the systems format said otherwise and the child was not removed. That is until two months later when the kid showed up at the hospital due to being abused. Then the system finally agreed with what the worker said two months earlier. Fortunately, she had noted her concerns at the time and was not in trouble for the failure of the system.

However, this is the system that Denise Revels Robinson and Susan Dreyfus chose, and this is what we are stuck with until it gets changed to a more effective system. That is where the state legislature and Governor Doyle can help. They can order the system be properly staffed and that an effective program be put into place. It will mean another transition period for an already tumultuous program, but to do otherwise is just to allow more children to die needlessly.

The Business Of Child Welfare

When it comes to issues regarding child welfare, I admit I am a bit of an idealist.

When I first started in child welfare, I was exposed to things I couldn't believe. How could people do such things to other people, much less their own children? When I first started I went through several weeks of classroom training, learning the signs of abuse, learning all of the laws regarding child welfare and learning all the necessary safety measures that are required and how to document them. After that I went through several more weeks of shadowing workers, learning the practical skills that I would need to be an effective worker.

As I progressed through the years, I never lost appreciation of the sense of teamwork that I shared with my coworkers. If someone had an emergency happen late in the day, everyone would chip in with trying to find a new foster home that was available and appropriate, helping in transporting kids, making sure all the documents were done, etc.

I was also aware of the stubborn determinism that I learned from my mentors and my colleagues. Money was always tight, due to the sheer number of children in need of protection and services, and due to the fact that the State was always shorting Milwaukee County in funding. But even though money was tight, and we usually didn't get paid for the extra hours we put in, we had our priorities straight.

That is why I was dismayed, although not surprised, when I saw yesterday's article about the "looming overhaul" of the child welfare system. The article was for the most part a rehash of a previous article, which I have already addressed.

The part that dismayed me the most was the report from Mark Lyday, the director of child advocacy and protection services, Children's Hospital and Health System*:

"Workers appeared to have their priorities confused," Lyday reported.

"It was obvious that in multiple situations the safety of the child(ren) was not a primary concern," he read.

"Issues related to workers' priorities and the lack of primary concern for child safety was extremely troubling," he said.

"The panel had no specific recommendations on this issue other than to strongly urge the BMCW and state leadership to look closely at this issue. Expert consultation may be necessary to change the culture of the agency that permits this lack of primary concern on safety.

"Creating change that will more adequately provide for the protection of children in the future will not be as simple as changing the rules or writing new policy. Evidence points to a problem of a fundamental confusion in the primary purpose of child protection services.

"The agencywide culture will need to change to make the safety and protection of children the clear first priority."

When the Bureau took over ten years ago, they contracted for a program, whose name escapes me at the moment. Anyway, their focus was supposed to be streamlining the system, but as we were learning the new paradigm, we could see that it wasn't going to work. We would express our concerns, and give specific examples where it would fail, but we were rebuffed without a second thought.

As the system was implemented, and the forewarned problems arose, their only answer was to throw more paperwork at it, to the point that it was a purely paper-driven program, or a perfect example of a bureaucracy gone wrong (excuse the redundancy).

I also still have major problems with the thought of putting something like the life of a child against an agency's bottom line. That is just asking for disasters like the death of Christopher Thomas.

Until I hear that the Bureau is going to change to a working paradigm, or they plan on overhauling the current one, I will not share the enthusiasm shown by some, like the editorial board at MJS. But at least they acknowledged that there is some cause for my skepticism.

*It should be noted that CHHS, is the most likely agency to take over for La Causa and already own a major portion of the system now.

Child Welfare: The Fix Is In - Or Is It?

In this morning's paper, Crocker Stephenson keeps up his diligent and excellent reporting on the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare.

Today's story deals with an agreement between the BMCW and Children's Rights, the advocacy group that had filed the federal lawsuit against the state regarding the Milwaukee County Child Welfare System.

On the surface, it looks wonderful. It would make one think that after the horrific murder of Christopher L. Thomas, Jr., the BMCW has finally recognized the error of their ways and mean to fix the system. That's how it appears anyway.

Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view), JSOnline also includes this pdf of the actual agreement. When compared to the article, and using my knowledge of the system based on the years I used to work there, it becomes depressingly apparent that my previous cynicism was not in vain.

Mr. Stephenson first points out some of the statistics regarding BMCW's performance versus the expectations, noting that the Bureau has failed in most of these benchmarks.

Mr. Stephenson also correctly notes that the numbers regarding children being abused in foster care don't apply to the kids that are in relative care, under Kinship Care, like Christopher and his sister were. This is significant as that most of the children that are under the Bureau's supervision are in Kinship Care, and the relatives are not licensed, and thus are not under the same kind of scrutiny as a licensed home. If the BMCW is failing to meet their goal in protecting the safety of kids in the homes that they watch, how much worse is in the homes that they don't keep an eye on as closely?

The article then has a list of bullet points that are supposed to be key stipulations by the BMCW. But are they really that much of a change?

The first point is to increase the number of foster homes from less than 700 to 875. Even if the BMCW manages to meet that goal, it is still about 40% of the homes that they had inherited from Milwaukee County ten years ago. And even then, we were running into shortages of homes.

The second bullet is:

Assess placements and services needed by children in state custody and develop a foster home recruitment and retention plan.

This plan, according to Children's Rights, must include specific strategies to increase support for foster parents at all stages of recruitment, licensing and placement of children in their homes.

Two things on this one. One is that the BMCW was supposed to be doing the assessments all along. That is a prerequisite to writing a court report, so that the court would know what conditions to set on the parents before a return home of the child would even be considered. I don't want to know how the BMCW were making recommendations if they did not know what the needs were int he first place. The other thing about this is that according to the pdf, the plan includes hiring an outside consultant, agreed upon by both parties of the lawsuit, to come in and do a study with recommendations. There is no word on how this will be paid for. Will they raise taxes, or will they cut services somewhere else in the system?

The next point is:

Add staff to help quicken placement of children in permanent families.

The bureau must create new "relative coordinator" positions to support unlicensed providers of kinship care and create new "permanency consultant" positions to expedite the placement of children with families. A total of 11 new positions would be created.

Again, this is something we had under the old system. Each unit had a long term case planner and the licensing unit also checked on the relative placements, whether they were licensed or not. But I doubt the addition of 11 workers for 2600+ children is going to make that much of a difference. And again, there is no word on how these extra workers are going to be funded.

The fourth point is:

Improve mental health assessment and crisis services for children.

The bureau must make sure that all children entering foster care receive initial health screenings, including mental health assessments and follow-up services.

See what I wrote under the second point. The same thing applies to this. It should have been done even before a Court Order was issued.

The last point was to improve training, but no specifics were given.

I also noticed in the pdf of the agreement that there are actually going to be two different consultants hired to improve different sections of the Bureau, one on how to do assessments and another on how to recruit and keep foster homes. This along with the dozen or so new workers will need to be paid for somehow, but no word on how. I am concerned that they will cut services back even further, which will defeat whatever gains they were trying to make.

But the most alarming thing about the actual agreement is that the language contained in it. There is a lot of phrases to the effect of "The Bureau will continue to do this," or "The Bureau will continue to do that." To continue does not mean changing anything, which means that the entire system will continue to be dysfunctional.

If they really were intent on making improvements, they should start with a top to bottom analysis of the system, and finding ways to streamline it. This would make it less cumbersome on the case workers, which in turn would allow them to go out into the field and actually do their jobs. Furthermore, there is no detail on how they will work on enhancing the monitoring of the private agencies that are contracted to the Bureau to provide case management.

The Bureau already has Program Evaluation Managers, or PEMs that are supposed to be monitoring these cases on a consistent basis. Christopher Thomas and his sister had one, but we know what happened there, don't we? So did the other 20 children that have died while under the BMCW's supervision. If that doesn't set off alarms and red flags to these people, I don't know what would.

One can only hope that with the removal of Denise Revels Robinson, and the actions of certain state legislators (this does not include Alberta Darling, who is as much of the problem as anyone) that real change will be coming to the foster care system. But based on what I've seen so far, I won't be holding my breath.

Alberta Darling Does The Right Thing For The Wrong Reasons

The other day, State Senator Alberta Darling (R-The 19th Hole) announced that she has asked that there be an audit of the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare. I fully and whole-heartedly commend her on her action. This request comes on the heels of the public outrage created by the death of Christopher L. Thomas, Jr.

The last audit was done in 2005, and had disturbing results:

A 2005 audit of Milwaukee County's child welfare program, released in early 2006, found private agencies spending thousands of dollars on gifts for employees, as well as delays in services to children in foster care and to their families, glacial child abuse investigations and an overwhelming level of caseworker turnover.

Unfortunately, Darling seems unable to do the right thing without screwing things up.

First, she tells us that there was this:

"More than 20 children have died in 2006, 2007 and 2008 that were known to the BMCW," Darling (R-River Hills) wrote in a letter to the co-chairs of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, Sen. Kathleen Vinehout (D-Alma) and Rep. Peter Barca (D-Kenosha).

"We need this audit to determine if our kids are safe and if so, why children are dying," she wrote.

Let us look past the completely asinine remark of "if the children are safe, why are they dying." Hello? Alberta? If the kids were safe, they wouldn't be dying. Duh!

My question, and one that I hope Mr. Stephenson asks her someday, is this: Why did 20 children have to die before she finally decided to take action?

She keeps priding herself on her involvement in the foster care system that she created and oversaw for the last 10 years. She meets every three months with the oversight committee. At these meetings, they are informed of these deaths. It took her three years and 20 lost lives before she figured out something was wrong? If that is the case, she then needs to immediately step down from the committee and let someone who is both committed and competent to attend these meetings and monitor the system.

But that's not all. She goes on with this:

"We are spending more than $100 million each budget cycle on Milwaukee child welfare and we are serving fewer and fewer kids," Darling wrote.

"Yet significant issues persist like access to dental care, caseworker turnover, and re-entry into the system by children who have been re-unified with their parents."

So she says that she knows that there are ongoing problems, yet she waits until now to do something? They are serving about one half of the number of kids when I was in the system, yet they are spending tens of millions of dollars more each year. Where is all that money going, besides into the pockets of the administration of all of the private agencies? It sure as hell doesn't appear to be going to providing services to the children or their families.

Darling also goes on to question if the state is "approaching child welfare from the perspective of what is in the best interest of the child or if we are placing too much emphasis on supporting the needs of biological family members who neither want nor should be caring for children."

I shouldn't have to remind the Senator that there are federal and state regulations that require that due and diligent services be provided in an effort to reunite the family, without endangering the children. I also shouldn't have to remind her that the system that she created and that she oversaw, had a lot of incentives for the private agencies to close cases as quickly as possible. The agencies were paid a fixed amount of dollars for every case they managed, whether it lasted ten years, one year, one months or a couple of days. Obviously, the faster they moved a case on, the bigger amount of profit they made.

While it is not the most egregious of Darling's mistakes, one other thing is worth noting. Basically, it is when she wrote this:

Darling wrote that a new audit was needed "to determine if the evaluation conducted in 2005 has led to shifts in policy that better protect the taxpayers of our state."

No, Senator Darling. What you should be worried about is if the best interest of the children are being protected, not the taxpayer. That would be a pleasant change of pace for both you and the BMCW.

A Tombstone For Christopher Thomas

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is reporting that a group of people are trying to raise money to give Christopher Thomas, the baby boy killed while in the care of the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare, a tombstone:

Christopher's maternal grandfather, Kenny McClellan, said he and his wife have already made a down payment on a $1,000 marker. McClellan, who lives in Georgia, said he and his wife are grateful for the group's support.

A memorial fund has been set up through TCF Bank. Checks, which should be made out to Citizens Protecting Abused Children, can be dropped off at any TCF branch or mailed to: TCF National Bank. 4375 S. 76th St., Greenfield, WI, 53220.

If donations exceed the cost of Christopher's headstone, the money will benefit his sister - who is in a foster home - and to help other foster children or their families, Welk said.

A graveside candlelight vigil in memory of Christopher is scheduled for Jan. 10 at Graceland Cemetery, 6401 N. 43rd St. The vigil, which begins at 5 p.m., is sponsored by Citizens Protecting Abused Children.

The More Things Change...

There is an old saying that goes "The more things change, the more they stay the same." This seems to be especially true when it comes to the child welfare system in Milwaukee County.

Earlier this week, as the controversy surrounding the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare and the death of Christopher L. Thomas, Jr. continued, Denise Revels Robinson, the director of the BMCW stepped down from that position, I pointed out that this would not solve the problem.

Then a couple of days ago, the local paper reported that the private agency that was supposed to be providing case management and supervision to Christopher and his sister, was also the agency that was supposed to be providing services to Will Johnson, a five month old baby that was drowned by his mother during an unsupervised visit.

In the wake of these two deaths, said agency, La Causa, announced that they were going to terminate their contract with BMCW and get out of child welfare.

Charlie Sykes thought that this was finally a move to hold someone accountable for these tragic deaths. Likewise, the editorial board at the local paper also thought this was a good idea, but at least stated that the investigation on how this happened should continue, as well as the follow through on some meaningless changes.

What Sykes and the editorial board are either unable or unwilling to understand is that all of this means very little, if anything at all. La Causa pulling out of their contract won't fix the entire system. All that will happen is that yet another agency, probably that Children's Hospital group, will be plugged into that spot, and the same problems will continue.

It's a bit like watching a football game. If the coach has drawn up a bad game plan, it doesn't matter who is on the field, and pulling one player for the other isn't going to change the fact that it is the game plan that is faulty.

It doesn't matter who the case managing agency is, if the whole paradigm of the system is faulty. The same problems will arise, and children will continue to be murdered. This is evidenced by the fact that the BMCW has already gone through a number of private agencies over the past decade, and yet the problems, and the deaths, remain constant.

It also does not hold the ones that are truly responsible for this ongoing calamity accountable for the role that they played in adapting such a idiotic paradigm that has failed in every other state that it's been tried in. It is well beyond time for the state legislature and the governor to get off their collective duffs and actually do something substantial to fix the system.

What good are twice a month visits if the worker still doesn't know what he or she should be looking for? There is a need to streamline the system so that workers can actually do what they are supposed to do, provide services to the child and to the family, as opposed to endless, redundant paperwork. There is a need for the BMCW to actually provide comprehensive training BEFORE the worker is assigned a caseload. And if there weren't so many administrations sucking money up, there would be more money for actual caseworkers and for services. Then maybe some of these tragedies could be prevented.

The only glimmer of hope is that there are some people that do see the problem, and are trying to fix it. From the article announcing La Causa's decision to pull out of child welfare, there is this:

"It makes you wonder if this model (private child welfare services) can work here," said Susan Conwell, executive director of the child welfare advocacy group Kids Matter Inc. She said community leaders should be involved with the transition of La Causa's responsibilities elsewhere.

Marcia Robinson Lowry, executive director of Children's Rights, the organization that filed the lawsuit, said: "Regardless of whether services are run by a private agency or directly by the county or state, the state remains responsible for the children in its custody.

"The fact that La Causa is getting out of the child welfare business is not a judgment, pro or con, on privatization. It is a judgment, however, on how Wisconsin is fulfilling its obligations to the children who depend on its child welfare system and the degree to which the state is ensuring adequate care for them.

Obviously, I agree more with Ms. Conwell, but at least Ms. Lowry is demanding real accountability and not just some whitewashing of the real issues. That is more than I can say for Sykes or the editorial board.

Another sign of hope comes from this press release from State Representative Tamara Grigsby (emphasis mine):

Today, State Representative Tamara Grigsby (D-Milwaukee) called on fellow Milwaukee legislators to join together and confront problems related to the death of Christopher Thomas.

"In the wake of Christopher Thomas' tragic death, it is essential we come together and take stronger action to prevent the senseless suffering of Wisconsin's children," Grigsby said. "Following the death of young Christopher, we learned that the mechanisms put in place to protect Wisconsin's children are inadequate. Now more than ever, we must eliminate the deficiencies in our child welfare system."

Grigsby, ranking member on the Assembly Committee on Children and Family Law in the current legislative session, member of the Milwaukee Child Welfare Partnership Council, and a passionate advocate for children in need, has asked Milwaukee legislators to meet with social workers and other public employees serving the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare to hear their perspective on the current crisis.

"This meeting will provide legislators with an understanding of the barriers and challenges that hinder Wisconsin's child welfare system on a daily basis," Grigsby stated. "Immediate action is needed to correct the shortcomings that have threatened the lives of innocent children for far, far too long."

I don't know much about Representative Grigsby, but I certainly hope she is a woman of her word, unlike State Senator Alberta "Do Nothing" Darling, who only gives out false promises.

But I would make a couple of suggestions to Rep. Grigsby. Meeting with the front line workers is fine, given that it is done correctly. The case managers for the private agencies are non-union, and will probably be coached, intimidated and threatened by their employers on what to say. These interviews would have to be done with complete confidentiality of the worker, if you want an honest answer.

Secondly, don't just ask the case managers. Many, heck, even most of them are relatively new to the job. They might not know how dysfunctional the system is, if that is the only system that they are familiar with. You also need to speak to other people that work with the system. People like foster parents, both current and former. Same with the social workers. There is a reason why these people no longer want to have dealings with the Bureau. They would be the ones to tell you what the real problems are.

Also talk to the attorneys and the judges out at Children's Court. They would also be invaluable to their insight of what is happening in the BMCW, especially the untenably high turn over rate. I am still in contact with some of the judges and attorneys out there. When I ask them about the BMCW and of any news, almost each and every one of them will start out with the complaint that there is never the same worker on a case from one month to another. That only serves to delay the process and bog down the courts. Meanwhile, the children would continue to languish in limbo, with no efforts being made to get them into a permanent home.

Until real, substantial changes are put into effect, we cannot allow ourselves to be beguiled by the false promises of the bureaucrats until the next tragedy strikes. We have had that for too long now, and too many kids have paid the price for our apathy and indifference and our all too willingness to take the easy or cheap way to fix the problem, which aren't fixes at all.

A Question For The MJS Editorial Board

The Editorial Board for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has a piece up about the recent developments at the BMCW.

For the most part, I agree with their position, although I would have demanded more sweeping and meaningful changes in the child welfare system.

But one line in their editorial bothers me (emphasis mine):

La Causa's lapses motivated state officials to institute changes, including having a nurse evaluate every child age 3 and under in foster care during home visits and changing the way evaluations are conducted. To prevent such tragedies, the state also will conduct more thorough reviews of La Causa and other agencies that place children. These are good ideas, but why couldn't they have been implemented years ago?

While I full-heartedly agree with their question, my question to them would be:

Considering that tragedies like the one that befell Christopher and his sister have been going on for such a long time (I've been writing about it for a year and half, and that is no where near the beginning of the problems), why weren't you raising the red flag and questioning the Bureau years ago?

BMCW: So Much Too Little, Too Late

It appears that Christopher Thomas, the little boy who was killed while under the auspices of the Bureau of Child Welfare, did something that none of the other children who were severely abused and/or killed while in the system had been able to do. It appears that his tragic death did finally bring about a modicum of change to the system.

Crocker Stephenson, the reporter from the local daily newspaper, has a report of a stunning development:

Denise Revels Robinson is stepping down from her position as director of the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has learned.

I never thought I'd see the day that Revels Robinson would finally be forced to step down. Unfortunately, it comes about ten years and several innocent lives too late.

Revels Robinson's departure from the BMCW isn't without controversy, either:

In a letter to the state Department of Children and Families and to bureau staff, Robinson, 62, wrote: "I have requested a transfer to another position in the Department of Children and Families.

"The details of my new position are being finalized; however I expect to begin my duties in January 2009."

It is indeed a miscarriage of justice to all those innocent children, like Christopher, who died due to her apathy and incompetence. There is no way that she should be allowed to stay employed by the State. She should have been fired and lost her pension benefits.

While I am disappointed in this maneuvering, I cannot say that I am all that surprised. While some other bloggers, some more respectable than others, express their dismay and outrage at this travesty, they are not seeing the bigger picture.

Obviously, Revels Robinson did not want to get fired, because she is bringing in an over six digit income. Secondly, she does not want to lose her pension, which she would if she were fired.

The state also does not necessarily want to fire her. First of all, if they were to fire her, that would basically be an admission of guilt on the part of the BMCW, and you know that there will be civil lawsuits regarding the death of Christopher and the torture of his sister. Secondly, if they keep her gainfully employed, she is less likely to turn witness against the State in said inevitable lawsuit.

SIDENOTE: This must be a benefit of being connected to the top of the food chain. There are many examples of similar things happening. One example would be Renee Booker. Booker was the director of Milwaukee County Child Welfare, when the county was still providing at least some services to its foster children. Despite being lambasted repeatedly by the State for his poor management skills during his tenure as the Director of Child Welfare for the County, he did a short stint in a made up position at the House of Correction, before being hired by the State, as Deputy Secretary for the Board of Commissioners of Public Lands.

Odds are that given the fact that she is already 62 years old, Revels Robinson will only work a year, maybe two, and then quietly retire.

Even though Revels Robinson is getting off the hook without any real consequences, the fact that she is no longer in charge means a lot. Maybe. Then again, maybe not.

With Revels Robinson no longer holding the reins of her reign of terror, the new director will have a lot of work to do. Besides having to try to restore the public's trust, the new director should take a long and hard look at the Bureau from top to bottom and try to streamline it. They could start with removing some of the redundancy in the multiple forms that must be completed. They would need to set up policies and procedures that are both effective and realistic.

But even with a compassionate, energetic, invested and competent person to direct the BMCW, there will be limits to the good that he or she could accomplish. This is due to some of the inherent flaws in the way the Bureau is structured. I still cannot fathom how anyone sane person could argue that having an agency whose focus is on their bottom line can do this type of work.

If the gentle reader thinks that I am off base saying that there are inherent systematic flaws to the Bureau, let me suggest they think about this: Despite having the state legislature increase the private agencies' social workers pay range to equal those of the state workers (which were much higher than the County was paying its workers, BTW), there is still an alarmingly high level of staff turnover at these agencies. Many of the workers for the private agencies are fresh out of college and have no experience to speak of. How bad is a job that a recently graduated person will walk away from a job that is starting out with a relatively high pay scale?

One thing that needs to be addressed immediately is training. The training has to be up front and comprehensive, before the employee is even allowed to look at a case file. DCF Director Bicha said that he wants to implement a policy that workers visit a child three years old or younger at least twice a month. But what good would it do if the worker did a visit every day if he or she didn't know what to look for?

Unfortunately, even if the new director would be the most competent administrator ever to walk the Earth, the fact is that it is the state legislature and the governor that would have to make sure that there is sufficient resources and staff to do the job properly.

Revels Robinson isn't the only one getting away with murder either. There are those that are above her, like the people that helped create this monstrosity and the people who sit on the board that allegedly oversees it. People like Alberta Darling.

There is also the question of what will happen to the agency operated by Children's Hospital, that is supposed to oversee the licensing of foster homes. They were supposed to have done a review of the aunt before allowing her to take the children. They were also the ones that forced Christopher's former foster mother in taking a psychological evaluation for wanting to adopt the boy, and are still messing around with her and her husband's license, all because they had the nerve to care for and love Christopher. When will this agency be held responsible?

My biggest fear regarding all this is that with Revels Robinson out of the way, and the nice sounding rhetoric by people like Reggie Bachi, people will think that the problem has been solved, when in fact this has been nothing more than the equivalent of a bandage on a wound that require suturing.

I hope I'm wrong, but I have a sick feeling that more children will have to be seriously hurt and, heaven forbid, killed before substantial changes are made to correct child welfare in Milwaukee County.

ADDENDUM I: The MJS now has a more complete report on their site. It is worth the read, especially the latter part when the advocacy groups give their reactions to the news.

ADDENDUM II: I saw on the Channel 58 News an interview with Senator Alberta Darling. She did not hesitate to throw her friend, Revels Robinson, under the bus. Why am I not surprised?

Pray For The Children

Just over two weeks ago, on the Thanksgiving Day evening, I wrote a post about what I thought would be needed to fix the foster care system in Milwaukee County. I mentioned things like firing Denise Revels Robinson, bringing the system back to local control and de-privatizing the system.

At the end of the same post, I wrote this:

The way the news is playing out, I have two suspicions. One, the worker(s) responsible are employees of a private agency, else they would have been named already. Secondly, giving my more than passing familiarity with the system and the games they like to play, I would not be at all surprised to find out that the case was assigned to a vacant work zone, and the name of the worker is someone that had already left the agency, or had just been hired but wasn't really on the job yet. The BMCW and its subcontractors like to administratively fudge things like this to keep costs down and still remain in compliance with state and federal regulations.

Unfortunately, today I was proven to be right on the money with those suspicions.

Today, the director the state's Department of Children and Families, Reggie Bicha, issued a press release and held a press conference regarding the death of Christopher L. Thomas Jr., a little baby boy that was severely abuse and tortured and eventually murdered by his aunt/foster mother. From his press release:

In violation of BMCW policy, La Causa gave a new ongoing case manager on a training team primary case worker responsibility and did not provide sufficient supervision or mentoring. The investigation found that the case manager failed to conduct effective face-to-face visits with the children and caregivers and did not effectively assess the safety of the home where both Baby Christopher and his sister were placed.

La Causa is one of the two private agencies that are contracted to the BMCW. They provide ongoing case management for the neighborhoods on the city's near south side. The rest of the county as well as foster home licensing and adoptions are contracted out to a subsidiary of Children's Hospital.

Crocker Stephenson, the reporter that has been doing a most excellent job at covering this case for the local paper, also covered the press conference. He also spoke to the head of La Causa, who told Mr. Stephenson this:

He said the case worker is still with the agency and seeing cases but under a different supervisor. He said she's been given additional training and "everything she needs to succeed."

He added: "Just because the public is saying she should be crucified, I can't do that. We have rules, regulations and policies. These people are killing themselves day in and day out in one of the hardest jobs you can imagine."

Cardona said the case worker involved was hired in June and that this was her first job in the business. He would not say anything else about her.

As you can see, I was right on target. It was a private agency, and the worker was brand new to the job and wasn't even trained sufficiently to do full case management, but had a full, active caseload assigned to her anyway.

I don't know the woman that is being referred to, but if past practice is any indication, she is probably a young kid just out of college and just entering the profession. There is nothing wrong with that, but then the BMCW should have made damn sure she was trained fully and that she was properly supervised before giving her a full caseload. But then, that would cost money. And when you have multiple administrations to pay for, you can't be worried about making sure the front line staff is properly trained.

And it only goes downhill from here. Bicha blames La Causa for not following Bureau policies and threatens to end their contract in three months unless they can show sufficient improvement in their performance. Now where did I see that before? Oh yeah, I wrote that as well, nine days ago, in this post.

Bicha also stated that workers are now going to have to double their visits on children three years old or younger. What he doesn't say is that he is going to give them the extra resources or workers to do double the work.

The system is already plagued with the problems of being understaffed, too high caseloads, unrealistic expectations and an unacceptably high level of employee turnover. He just proposed to make it worse. Whenever they get around to actually fixing foster care and firing Revels Robinson, they should fire this guy as well.

Then there's this tidbit from the press release:

DCF also plans to work with Children’s Hospital and Health System to conduct a health and safety review of all children age three and younger in out-of-home care.

So Children's Hospital has something like 75 or 80% of ongoing case management, foster home licensing, adoption AND health care provision. That raises some red flags for me. Who are they paying off to get an almost complete monopoly on child welfare? It seems to me like that there may be more to the story than meets the eye. And then there's my inherent distrust of having any private agency in a position where they are balancing their bottom line to the safety of children.

I hate to say this, but I am starting to think that little Christopher, like all of the others that died before him, has died in vain. The state has announced that not only are they not going to fix the broken system that allowed this sort of thing to happen over and over, they are actually going to make it worse.

Even if La Causa were to lose their contract, it would only be another private agency that would take their place, most likely Children's Hospital, which would give them the entire system that they legally could administer. And the same problems would keep recurring.

Folks, I don't know how else to say it. The system is broke. And due to the short-sightedness and/or apathy of or elected misleaders, it won't be fixed for a long, long time, if ever. I only see two possible outcomes from the current situation.

One is that we, the voters and taxpayers and citizens, start holding the governor and the state legislature responsible for doing their jobs to put into place real solutions. All we are getting now are meaningless statements and cover ups.

If we don't hold our elected misleaders' collective feet to the fire, the other only possibility will happen. The system will fall into federal receivership. And for my friends on the right, if you think your taxes are too high now, you've seen nothing like when the feds take over.

And for now, I don't care if you're a Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Wiccan, Pagan or even an atheist, pray to whatever God or Higher Power you pray to for the sake of the children. It may be the only service that they receive.

Unions Ask For Action, Pols Remain Useless

In the wake of the tragic death of Christopher Thomas, AFSCME, the union representing government workers, have asked the state legislature to listen to their concerns in an effort to improve the child welfare system:

"We are writing today to ask for an opportunity to share with you our concerns about the dysfunctional environment that has existed at the bureau for a long time," Marty Beil, the union's executive director, and Susan McMurray, a lobbyist, wrote in a letter to the Milwaukee delegation to the Wisconsin legislature.

The letter ticks off a list of concerns - a shortage of social workers, high staff turnover, lack of support, insufficient training, inadequate oversight, lack of coordination between the Milwaukee bureau and private child welfare agencies - "all of which make it extremely difficult for social workers to provide the vital child protection services the workers were hired to provide."

Owen Robinson thinks that they are all wrong, and are trying to take advantage of this tragedy:

Christopher’s death could have been prevented if the bureaucrats on staff DID THEIR JOB? We don’t need more social workers or training or whatever. We need government bureaucrats to take their jobs seriously.

Presuming that Owen was referring to people like Denise Revels Robinson, he only gets very partial credit for that comment. Revels Robinson needs to be fired. She actually should have been fired years ago. But even if she were to be fired, it wouldn't go far to fix they child welfare system.

When I worked in the system, before the state took over, we also had federal and state guidelines we had to meet. But the system was much more streamlined then.

For example, we, as workers, would have to prepare and present a report to the courts in order to get an order to keep the child(ren) in foster care. Another report would have to be submitted every year in order to have the order extended. In the pre-takeover days, these reports would be about seven to ten pages, depending on how many kids there were, the history of the case, other influences in the matter, etc. After the state took over, the new reports would be three times as long, and would say less. So they invented supplemental forms to the reports. Then they would invent supplement forms to the supplement forms that would reiterate what was said in the other documents. You get the drift.

To make things even worse, all of these reports had to be completed via a special state computer program invented by the state and only with that program. The problem was the computer program didn't work very well, and saved information would often be lost, required the worker to start all over again.

And that was just one aspect of the job. Despite the increase in documentation, and the subsequent increase in time needed to complete all of the required forms, case loads either stayed the same or actually went up to the point that it was nearly physically impossible to meet all of the guidelines.

And yes, it was bureaucrats like Revels Robinson that kept coming up with these duplicative and cumbersome forms.

What Owen fails to understand is that the creation of the Bureau and its bureaucrats and multiple, redundant forms did nothing to solve the original problem, which is that the child welfare system was being underfunded and that caseloads were too high. Those problems still remain.

Meanwhile, our elected leaders continue to fail the foster kids and their foster parents.

Mayor Tom Barrett has been completely mute on the subject. Is he even still the mayor?

Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker has also said nothing about the matter. He is probably trying to pick out the colors for the yard signs as he prepares for the next phase in his perpetual run for governor.

Speaking of governors, Jim Doyle has been disappointingly quiet on this. He is probably too busy going to Washington to ask Santa Congress for all the goodies he wants for Christmas.

The entire state legislature is also eerily silent on the matter, except for Representative Zepnick, who has called for an investigation, and Senator Alberta Darling who said she would present a bill to make the system more transparent. I would think it would be better to present a bill to actually fix the system, but what do I know. I only worked on the front line, and saw what worked and what didn't.

Isn't it past time that we start holding these elected officials accountable for doing the job that we elected them to do? Or do we only do that with the workers who are being kept from doing their jobs the way their supposed to?

Oops, They Did It Again

Last night, I posted about the disappointing editorial in yesterday's newspaper. This did not go unnoticed by the editorial board, who posted something on their blog, mentioning my post.

Unfortunately, they missed the mark again. They provide a link to the stories regarding the death of Christopher L. Thomas, Jr., but that wasn't the point of my post. Yeah, well I've got my own archive as well. Two of them in fact. One from here, and one from there.

First of all, it is not the editorial board that does the reporting.

Secondly, I had congratulated Mr. Stephenson in my post on the work he has been doing.

Thirdly, my complaint was on how they gave a pass to State Senator Alberta Darling. They still didn't address that issue.

However, I will wait until I can view their promised video of their discussion on said editorial, before I go further in that regard. However, it would be nice to know why I'm still banned.

In other developments, the steering committee held a special meeting today. Denise Revels Robinson once again promised to do a thorough investigation and make changes to improve the system. Of course, she says this every time a child is killed or severely harmed while under the Bureau's supervision.

Also, playing the same drum beat, Darling promised to introduce legislation to make the system more transparent. Too bad she didn't think of doing in this at any time in the last ten years. At least it seems she's dropped the pretense that she is going to fix the system. I don't think people were buying that story anymore.

I still hold that to start to seriously work on fixing the system, one of the first things is that they need to fire Revels Robinson. The state legislature and Governor Doyle then need to take a serious look at the system, and start passing laws that actually mean something constructive.

But even more alarming than Revels Robinson and Darling playing the same old song, is the news that the case worker that was supposed to be managing he case for Christopher and his sister, is STILL assigned to the little girl's case! Now maybe you understand my skepticism regarding what anyone from the Bureau or the State says about this. There is no reason in the world why that case was not transferred to another worker.

Well, there is one. Sheer incompetence by the Bureau.

BMCW: Screw The Public!

I've written an ongoing series of posts of the tragic story of Christopher L. Thomas, Jr., the little baby boy whose short life was filled with being taken from his mother, bounced from home to home to home in his short life, only to end up with his aunt who would become his murderer. Tragedy even follow Christopher into death, with a fight at his funeral.

To make matters worse, those that cared about Christopher are now being punished.

Crocker Stephenson, of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, reported this morning on how Robert and Darlene Logan, the couple that had been former foster parents to Christopher, and wanted to adopt him, are now being punished, harassed and maligned by the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare. The Logans only crime, as far as I can tell, is that they wanted to help with Christopher's funeral. Since they didn't get any response from the BMCW, they contacted the paper. The BMCW apparently finds that to be intolerable.

The article tells of how the Bureau wouldn't let the Logans adopt Christopher, but not the reason why the Bureau said that they couldn't. To be fair, the investigation into a potential foster home is rather intensive and intrusive. They look into the past of every person in the home. They look at their financial situation, their demeanor, their health, their room space, and everything else. The Bureau may have found something way in their past, or a financial concern, or some health concern that made them think that the Logans were not fit to be an adoptive resource.

I can give the BMCW that much of the benefit of the doubt.

What comes after that is unforgivable.

When Darlene Logan continued to press her case, the worker started to question her mental health and ordered her to take a psychological evaluation (which was paid for by the tax payers). They also suspended their license, pending the results of the evaluation.

The psychologist found no reason for the Logans not to be foster parents.

Despite of this, the Bureau still hasn't reinstated their license. To make things worse, the Bureau is trying to recoup almost $2,500. That would be about the entire amount that they were paid for taking care of Christopher.

From the article:

"All I wanted was for Christopher to be honored, to have a decent funeral," Darlene Logan said Monday.

The Logans' situation grew more complicated this weekend, when they received a letter from the bureau stating the couple had been overpaid while caring for a foster child placed in their home from late June to early September. The letter demanded repayment of $2,474.38.

The Logans said Monday that they believe they were paid the correct amount for taking care of the infant girl. Calls to the bureau to straighten out the matter have not been returned, Bob Logan said.

Early Monday, Bob Logan said he did not want to believe the bill was in retribution for speaking to the newspaper about Christopher.

But Monday afternoon, as the Logans were trying to talk to somebody about the alleged overpayment, their caseworker's supervisor called to say their license remained on hold while the bureau reviewed the psychologist's 4 1/2 -page report and while bureau lawyers reviewed the Logans' contact with the news media.

"They are so vindictive," Darlene Logan said.

"I think they should be more concerned about the care they provide than what people say about them," she said.

Phone calls on Monday by the Journal Sentinel to the caseworker, her supervisor and the supervisor's supervisor were not returned.

This is completely inexcusable. It also shows the lack of accountability that happens when something like this gets privatized.

After reading the article this morning, I emailed Mr. Stephenson with some questions, including which worker was the one who order the psych eval and the fines, why were the Logans denied the chance to adopt and the rationale for the recoupment letter.

He was kind enough to tell me that it was the licensing worker who ordered the eval, and that no reasons were given for the denial and the recoupment.

I feel I need to point out that both the foster worker and the licensing worker work for the same private agency, which is a subsidiary of Children's Hospital. It is unclear if the private agency has undertaken these punitive actions on their own, or if it was under the directions of Denise Revels Robinson, director of the BMCW, who still hasn't spoken to the public or the media about this case, as she has done in the past on other cases. It is really beyond me why this woman hasn't been fired yet.

What is equally alarming is the deafening silence from the elected officials. State Representative Josh Zepnick has started an investigation. State Senator Alberta "Do Nothing" Darling has used the tragedy as a chance to grandstand and do some publicity seeking. Governor Jim Doyle has been silent, as has been Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker. Of course, I don't expect anything from Walker, who is too busy running for governor - again - and wouldn't want to alienate any potential campaign contributors by bad mouthing a private agency.

It will be interesting to see if anything develops from the protest that is being planned for tomorrow morning.