Research & Evaluation
Child Welfare News #28- Summer, 2006
Table of Contents
- Graduation Rates are Low for Teens in Child Protection System
- Early Intervention with Very Young Children in High-Risk, Child
Welfare Families
- Practice Challenges in Child Welfare: Involving Fathers - CASCW's
Seventh Annual Teleconference
- Choosing Motherhood Before Marriage: A Sociological Study of
Low-Income Single Mothers
- Critical Issues in Child Welfare: Title IV-E MSW Alumni Guide CASCW
- Child Welfare Trends, 2000-2004: Family Foster Home Placements
Increase From 2000 to 2004
- University of Minnesota-Duluth's IVE Program Helps Communities Deal
with a Growing Problem
- Alumni News
Graduation Rates are Low for Teens in Child Protection System by Anita Larson and Marcie Jefferys
Anyone who works with teens who come from troubled neighborhoods, families struggling with chemical dependency, poverty, or abuse is aware of the challenges of getting these youth through high school. The problems that these students face can involve chronic relocation, placement in foster homes, mental health issues, and entanglements with the justice system. This context adds even more stress to what is already a time of rapid and profound change for all teens.
Research done in other states has focused on the educational outcomes of older teens who are, or have been, in long-term foster care. Adolescents enter foster care when they have been maltreated or neglected to such an extent that their family of origin can no longer live with them or care for them. The high school graduation rates of long-term foster care adolescents are usually between 45% and 50%.
While Minnesota’s overall high school graduation rate is relatively high, researchers and advocates wanted to know whether the high school graduation rates for teens who had contact with the child protection system in Minnesota were different from those found in other state studies. The Minn-LInK project chose to examine data on a broad group of teens involved with child protection over the period of January 2001 through June 2003, not just those who were in out-of-home placement. The out-of-home placement (foster) rate for the group studies was seven percent.
Teens with recent child protection involvement had much lower high school graduation rates than all 12th graders in 2003. Of the 387 seniors in the study group, 47% successfully graduated from high school. Minnesota’s high school graduation rate is anywhere from 78% to 92%, depending upon the calculation method used. Graduation rates were different depending upon race, geography (metro versus non-metro county) and gifted or talented status.
When comparing the characteristics of 2003 child welfare graduates and non-graduates to all Minnesota 12th grade graduates, child welfare 12th-graders were more likely to have lower incomes (indicated by meal program eligibility), participate in special education, and be a child of color.
The full group of child welfare teens spanned multiple grades and not all students would be expected to graduate by 2003. When examining the status for students in all grade levels, 70% were making educational progress, 21% had experienced set-backs, and 9% had an unknown status.
One of the goals of this descriptive study was to learn about linking two different administrative data sets. The educational records of half of the original child welfare group could not be matched. There were patterns as to whether or not records could be located across both systems, with educational records least likely to be located for Caucasian children and children in non-metro counties.
The complete Minn-LInK report on high school graduation rates of Minnesota adolescents involved in the child protection system is available at: http://cehd.umn.edu/SSW/cascw/research/minnlink/minnlinkpublications. Minn-LInK plans to continue this study. Potential next steps in this analysis include examining the post-high school earnings of the child welfare group, investigating the post-high school use of public assistance programs, and exploring post-high school births for female child welfare adolescents. Minn-LInK is also considering completing this analysis annually as an outcome measure for Minnesota youth.
CASCW’s Minn-LInK project uses state administrative data from multiple agencies to answer questions about the impacts of policies, programs, and practice on the well-being of children and families in Minnesota. purpose of studying child and family well-being.
Early Intervention with Very Young Children in High-Risk, Child Welfare Families by Marcie Jefferys
A growing body of scientific and practice knowledge is demonstrating the need for, and value of, intervening early in the lives of children and families who are at high risk of long-term involvement in the child protection system. On June 21, international and national researchers presented their findings about early intervention and related policies at a CASCW and CURA sponsored forum highlighting cross-disciplinary efforts in child welfare. In the afternoon, state and local experts and practitioners described their efforts to provide early intervention services.
According to Ann Buchanan, Director of the Centre for Research into Parenting and Children at University of Oxford, England, there has been increased attention to the early years in children’s lives under the Blair administration. The issue of children at risk of “social exclusion,” the term used in Britain to children experiencing many environmental risks as well as familial and individual, has been addressed in major legislation, starting with the Children Act of 1998. Among the components of the British law is a universal approach to giving all parents access to advice and support, and helping families with the work/life balance. In 2004, the legislation was updated, in part in response to public outrage regarding the death of a child known to child protection services. The 2004 legislation clarified that family support and child protection cannot be separated, retained the commitment to universal services but with geographic areas of ‘deprivation’ targeted for additional services, and required services to be integrated. So far, there have been some gains under the new policies, although many observers had hoped for more gains in the outcomes for children “looked after” - that is, in foster care. In general, however, “joined up solutions for joined up problems” is a good approach to early intervention services, according to Buchanan.
Rick Barth, Frank Daniels Distinguished Professor in the School of Social Work at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, presented data that underscored the need for policies and programs focused on infants and very young children to reduce the long-term negative consequences of abuse and neglect. Citing a variety of national surveys and data sources, Barth presented charts showing that infants have the highest rates of maltreatment. Compared to older children, infants are also more often removed from their homes, tend to stay longer in out-of-home placement, have higher rates of re-involvement in child welfare services and abuse undetected by the child protection system. Follow-up studies of infants involved in child protection show substantial developmental delays. While there has been some increase in the rate at which infants are referred for assessments and services, more needs to be done, especially in regard to developing parenting programs (some of which have been shown to be effective with infants and their families) and shared family care to reduce the number of children negatively effected by experiences in the earliest years.
Byron Egeland, Irving B. Harris Professor in the University of Minnesota’s Institute of Child Development, reported on the longitudinal child study that he and his colleagues have conducted over a 30-year period. Their research underscores the need to address early issues of attachment in a child’s life to ensure healthy development into adulthood. In order for children to develop cognitive “inner working models” that allow them to function well in relationships, they must have some supportive relationships with adults early in the life. Research conducted in Europe with children who had been institutionalized showed promising results for young children placed in therapeutic foster care. Egeland’s research was critical to the development of Minneapolis’s therapeutic nursery school, Baby’s Space, described by Terrie Rose in the afternoon session. This highly regarded program helps parents to better parent their own children.
The forum also highlighted the work of home visiting nurses. Kellie Teter, with the National Nurse Family Partnership, described the outcomes of the program in which specially trained nurses provide home visits to low income, first-time mothers, beginning early in the pregnancy and staying with the family through the first two years of the child’s life. The program has conducted randomized controlled trials of the partnership and found positive results, including improved prenatal health, fewer childhood injuries, and fewer subsequent pregnancies, increased intervals between births, increased maternal employment, and improved school readiness. Afterward, Jill Simon from Dakota County, Janna Cannon from Stearns County, Shari Kottke from Olmsted County, and Janet Spatafore from Wright County, described their counties’ experience with home visiting programs.
Other conference topics included Erin Sullivan Sutton’s discussion of state-level early intervention initiatives and Antonia Wilcoxen’s presentation on the state’s children’s mental health care system. Both Sutton and Wilcoxen are with Minnesota’s Department of Human Services. Ed Frickson of Ramsey County presented some results of its children’s mental health screening program. Nearly half of that county’s children in child protective services who are screened are referred for further assessment.
Practice Challenges in Child Welfare: Involving Fathers CASCW's Seventh Annual Teleconference
by Karen Moon
The term “fathers’ rights” or the “fathers’ movement” is often associated with custody battles in which biological fathers feel disenfranchised from their children. Media attention tends to focus on fathers’ anti-female/anti-system sentiments that advocate for resources being removed from mothers and shifted to fathers. Neil Tift, Director of Professional Advancement at the National Practitioners Network for Fathers & Families (NPNFF) in Washington D.C. and foster care trainer for the Minnesota Department of Human Services, envisions a different type of fathers’ movement. Tift shared an observation made by anthropologist Margaret Mead that “fathers were a biological accident, not a social necessity.” That observation, he believes, is mirrored in the way social systems perceive family structure and offer support. Growing father involvement in family systems has, therefore, become Tift’s mission. And “gender reconciliation, not gender wars” is the message he wants his fathers’ rights advocacy to convey.
In the context of child welfare services, case managers have told Tift that they don’t often see fathers coming through their doors, so cannot involve them in case plans. Tift acknowledges the absence of fathers, but asks child welfare professionals to examine the social welfare history that has contributed to that absence. Social welfare provisions developed under President Roosevelt’s administration were geared toward war widows with large numbers of children, living in isolated, agricultural settings. Now, despite greater economic opportunities available to women, more families living in metropolitan areas, and the decrease in family size, that maternal focus continues today. By the 1970s, Tift claims that government workers went so far as to deny financial assistance to women and children who shared a household with a man. Fathers associated with such families became identified as “deadbeat dads.” And resources for men have typically been tied to reform schools or prisons – again, meaning exclusion from family, rather than development of employment or parenting skills. Social welfare has focused on “father absence” rather than “father presence.”
Tift is not arguing for a perception of fathers as victims. Rather, he asks that social (and legal) systems examine the interactive branches of policy, practice and research, as well as the models these create in work with families. What models have agencies put in place to welcome fathers? What resources have they developed specific to fathers? Have case managers examined their own family history to determine how that might affect their willingness to involve fathers or explored their bias against families with more than one biological father? Certainly, the mother’s willingness to disclose information will determine the degree to which social workers can involve the father. But, Tift encourages professionals to always request information on the biological father, to explore the mother’s relationship with the father, to note specific reasons – if any – why the father should be limited or excluded in relationship to the child(ren), and, if age appropriate, to investigate the child’s relationship with the father. Then, if violence or other issues are not a factor in the relationship, he advises professionals to contact the father and explore the father’s relationship with the mother and child(ren). Despite interpersonal issues, respect and a mutual desire to work together for the child’s benefit may be possible.
Oliver Williams, Executive Director of the Institute on Domestic Violence in the African American Community (IDVAAC) and a professor in the University of Minnesota’s School of Social Work, discussed his work with fathers within the context of domestic violence research and child welfare case management. Despite the high co-occurrence of domestic violence in child abuse or neglect cases, Williams agreed with the importance of involving fathers. Simply excluding the father and providing services to the mother and children does not address the potential for the father’s negative parenting or violent behavior to impact subsequent individuals. Williams observed that child welfare parents have few “tools” at their disposal. Therefore, if “your only tool is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.” So, it is not enough to confront the father on his behavior. He must be transformed by learning ways to be a better parent and by learning non-violent ways to deal with conflict or stress. Often, these fathers need to learn to build stronger peer relationships with the mother and move away from a family paradigm in which the dominant father must “discipline” the subordinate mother and children. Mothers who are incarcerated or in the child welfare caseloads who need such resources generally get them; negligent or abusive fathers might not. Therefore, Williams argues for systemic change that recognizes men as “co-clients” in receiving resources for abuse, in setting parenting goals, and in developing relationships with the child(ren).
Like other forms of culturally sensitive practice, developing child welfare resources for men and incorporating fathers into case planning will initially create added demands on case managers’ time. However, in the long run, that additional work will enhance the perception of fathers as nurturers and providers, balance the emotional needs of all family members, and improve economic outcomes for families and social support systems.
Oliver Williams’ and Neil Tift’s presentations were part of CASCW’s seventh annual statewide video conference held on April 19. The conference was broadcast to county and tribal services via interactive television in more than 21 Minnesota counties and was available beyond Minnesota via the internet.
Choosing Motherhood Before Marriage: A Sociological Study of Low-Income Single Mothers
by Sara Hastings
Kathryn Edin’s findings from in-home interviews with low-income single mothers challenges what she says “most Americans believe about unwed motherhood and its causes.” Edin spent five years talking with 162 mothers (39% Black, 32% White, and 29% Hispanic) in neighborhoods throughout Philadelphia. And, after analyzing the interviews, she and fellow sociologist Maria Kefalas learned that not only did these single mothers not reject the idea of marriage, they revered it.
Edin and Kefalas, co-authors of Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage, found that the women they interviewed tended to elevate the concept of marriage to the point of refraining from such commitment until the time was “right.” Edin found that many women believed in a “white picket fence” ideal of marriage and home life. Before getting married, they wanted to have saved enough money to buy a nice home and to pay for a “respectable” wedding. Family and cultural pressure encouraged conformity to these standards, despite the disparity between that standard and the economic realities of these individuals, families and neighborhoods.
In terms of world view, motherhood appeared to occupy a different and more attainable place. While these women “saw marriage as a luxury - something aspired to but feared they might never achieve, they judged children to be a necessity.” Children appeared as an essential source of personal identity and contributors to a meaningful life. Despite their youth or marital status, carrying a baby to term and stepping into the role of mother was often considered “the right thing to do” or “living up to their responsibilities.” Many discussed how having a baby had “saved their life” and diverted them from a chaotic past. Their added responsibilities forced them to “straighten up.”
Other issues that emerged from the interviews included the relationship with the baby’s father, life after pregnancy, and the meaning of motherhood. Yet, the most compelling theme, and the primary focus of Edin’s and Kefalas’s research, centered around choosing motherhood as a source of stability and identity within the context of a disadvantaged economic reality. Edin goes so far as to suggest that “until poor young women and men have greater access to jobs that lead to financial security” or opportunities that lead to a rewarding life beyond parenthood, they will “continue to have children far sooner than most Americans think they should, and in less than ideal circumstances.”
On February 9 and 10, Kathryn Edin spoke to a broad audience of social service professionals, faculty, students, and others. Respondents for Thursday’s event on the University of Minnesota’s West Bank campus included Rose Brewer, Associate Professor of Afro-American and African Studies, University of Minnesota; Tené Wells, President of WomenVenture; and Neil Tift, Director of Training at the National Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families. Respondents for Friday’s event at Metropolitan State University (St. Paul) included Joanna Ramirez Barrett from the Council on Crime and Justice and Amy Kodet from Annex Teen Clinic. The Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare cosponsored these presentations along with the Welfare Reform Research and Evaluation Roundtable, Metropolitan State University, the University of Minnesota’s Family Policy Minor, and the Children, Youth and Family Consortium.
Critical Issues in Child Welfare: Title IV-E MSW Alumni Guide CASCW
by Karen Moon
Since its inception in 1992, more than 250 Master’s in Social Work students have completed their training via CASCW’s Title IV-E program and made significant contributions to the field of public child welfare in Minnesota and beyond. In recognition of their expertise, CASCW has initiated an effort toward periodic advisory meetings with small groups of Title IV-E alumni to report on critical issues in the field and guide CASCW’s research and training efforts. On January 30, eight alumni – representative of rural and urban, practice and policy child welfare work – attended our first meeting.
Many of those in attendance are now public child welfare educators or supervisors. Within their current work setting, all have noted that those working at their level received specialized child welfare training. Social work education, but more importantly advanced child welfare training, helped prepare them for the professional and personal demands of the field and create better outcomes for those in their caseloads. Now, as they observe differences between staff members hired without social work or child welfare education, they find that theme to hold true.
Alumni who work in rural areas described the difficulty of finding employees with undergraduate social work degrees, much less child welfare education. One alumna working in rural Wisconsin reported that of the ten people she supervised not one had a BSW, and she had to recruit someone with a MSW degree from outside the state.
Training available through the department of human services, along with increased supervision and in-house seminars, got staff into the appropriate “mindset for child welfare work” and decreased the amount of employee turnover. However, social work training – especially graduate-level social work education – with a child welfare component created the best possible results. Staff members were better able to see the interaction between policy and practice and were more likely to use evidence-based practice. They became better advocates for clients and knew of and offered them a wider range of resources. Workers were better equipped to engage with clients at that critical first meeting, did more in-depth work with adults and children, and were better able to teach clients skills versus sending the client to a class.
Although many human resources units might post job openings for “social work degree or equivalent,” Title IV-E alumni said that variance between the quality of workers was great enough that their preference was always toward applicants with social work degrees. Yet, some alumni expressed concern that the current inundation of paperwork and procedure in county social work versus time spent connecting with clients might steer those interested in working with people to look toward other professional fields.
Given line workers’ tremendous range of responsibility, alumni pondered the impact of human services budget cuts and expressed concern about social work’s narrowing orientation toward clinical practice. The complexity of child welfare cases - in which families demonstrate multiple problems, may have children at various ages and stages of development, and may have specific cultural needs - requires a worker with specialized training and a broad knowledge of resources.
Based on input from these alumni, CASCW will continue developing ways to evaluate the outcomes of providing advanced child welfare training in Minnesota (and other states). We will continue to adapt our curriculum to respond to the needs of the child welfare workforce and to provide additional resources for in-service professionals. We would like to thank Title IV-E MSW alumni Eileen Banks, Joyce Becenti, Jeanne Nutter, Pa Der Vang, Candis Astolfi, Melissa Sherlock, Donald Bibeau, and Tammy Kincaid for participating in our alumni advisory group session. And, we look forward to future input from IV-E alumni.
Child Welfare Trends, 2000-2004: Family Foster Home Placements Increase
by Sara Hastings
From 2000 to 2004, Minnesota’s child welfare data reveal distinct trends in particular areas in the child welfare system. Overall, data in Minnesota show the number of children in out-of-home placement decreasing. In 2000, 18,451 children were in out-of-home placements and by 2004 that number had decreased to 14,359. There are several areas in out-of-home placements data that show positive changes, particularly in relative placements.
Demonstrating a dramatic change over these four years in Minnesota is the number of children placed with relatives in “family foster homes.” Nationally, these placements have shown a decrease; from 26% in 2000 to 23% in 2004. However, in Minnesota the number of children placed in a relative family foster home has been greatly increasing. In 2000, 14.5 % of children spent some time placed in a relative family foster home. By 2004, that number had increased dramatically to 22%.
One reason for this change is said to be from the “considerable effort and support on the part of the Department of Human Services (DHS) to require efforts to place with relatives”. To aid in this effort, statutory language has been added to firm up existing requirements to place children with relatives. Also, the current quality assurance review process by DHS examines practice particularly around relative search and relative placement. Consequently, this process requires underperforming counties to develop a Program Improvement Plan or a “PIP.” PIP TIPS, an informational newsletter that is developed through a collaboration of DHS and county social service agencies, can assist counties in creating their specific Program Improvement Plan. Each issue of PIP TIPS focuses on one aspect of the safety, permanency and well-being of children in Minnesota. Issue Item #15, for example, discusses relative placement and outlines how the Minnesota Child and Family Service Review conducts evaluations.
Increased use of Family Group Decision Making, currently in 72 Minnesota counties, also supports relative placement. Family Group Decision Making gathers family members, child welfare and mental health professionals, and others closely involved in children's lives to discuss a family’s strengths, concerns, and resources in order to develop a family safety plan and to support family preservation - if preserving the family is in the best interest of the child.
The Department of Human Services has also put together specific informational materials for both service providers and foster families. For example, a relative search practice guide was developed and issued early last year to increase the effort of service providers to promote relative placements. Human Services has also completed work on a brochure that is to be provided to relatives who may be considering foster care. All of these efforts help explain the significant increase in the number of children placed in relative family foster homes in Minnesota over this four year period.
Minnesota’s Child Welfare Reports, 2000 – 2004, Minnesota Department of Human Services.
Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System, AFCARS 2000 – 2004, Children’s Bureau, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families.
Children could experience several placement settings during the year. Each child is counted only once under each placement setting but may be counted in several different settings. A child could have many contributing problems, as identified by the county social services worker, so the total of percents will exceed 100%.
Christeen Borsheim, Minnesota Department of Human Services
Improving Outcomes for Children and Families, PIP TIPS: Item 15 Relative Placement
Fact Sheet: Family Group Decision Making: Enabling families to make best decisions for themselves, Minnesota Department of Human Services, http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/groups/publications/documents/pub/dhs_id_005323.hcsp.
University of Minnesota-Duluth's IVE Program Helps Communities Deal with a Growing Problem
by Cheryl Reitan, UMD University Relations
When three members of UMD’s Department of Social Work decided to convene a conference on the impact of methamphetamine, they didn't know how desperate the need for information had become. The deeper they became involved in the issue, the more they saw that resources about methamphetamine abuse were needed by people in a wide range of disciplines: social workers, educators, medical professionals, and law enforcement personnel.
Johanna Garrison, outreach and curriculum development coordinator, Becki Hornung, instructor and child welfare student support coordinator, and Karen Nichols, associate administrator, all in the Department of Social Work, organized the conference, "The Impact of Methamphetamine on Children and Families: Research and Community Response," held in February at UMD. The sessions filled immediately. Garrison said, "We were overwhelmed by the response. Child welfare practitioners, many of whom are our graduates, and other professionals needed research-based information. It was a good fit for UMD to put on the conference."
Since the conference, the Social Work Department has posted and maintained a UMD web page for people seeking resources for dealing with methamphetamine issues. "We realized that one conference was hardly enough," said Garrison. "We had to do more to help, so we started gathering research and posting it on the internet." The web page is: http://www.d.umn.edu/sw/cw/methresources.htm
The problem isn't going away anytime soon. The U.S. President's National Drug Control Strategy for 2006 finds that methamphetamine use is rising: treatment admissions for amphetamines and methamphetamines have increased 500 percent since 1992, and workplace positive drug tests have increased 200 percent since 2001. According to a survey of 500 sheriff's departments in 45 states, methamphetamine abuse has become the nation's leading drug problem affecting local law enforcement agencies. It's packing U.S. jails.
UMD's Social Work Department is especially concerned because arrests have swamped agencies that care for children whose parents have become addicted. The treatment time is long; it's at least a year before the drug is out of an addict's system. Child welfare laws only give a parent six months after an arrest to get their life back on track, before their children are put up for adoption. "Parental methamphetamine use has become a leading cause for the removal of Minnesotan children from their homes," said Hornung. "Social work professionals, many of whom are graduates from our MSW program, are inundated, and they need any help we can offer."
Meth use and production is a significant and complex problem in the Midwest. According to a Drug Enforcement Administration study, over 50 percent of all meth lab incidents in the United States happened in the Midwest. The issue is new and the research is hard to find. UMD brought two prominent researchers to the conference: Wendy Haight, an associate professor at the School of Social Work at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign and James Black, an M.D. and neuroscientist from Southern Illinois University. UMD currently provides information about Haight and Black's studies on child welfare issues on the UMD methamphetamine research web page (see above).
Karen Nichols says that UMD recognizes that agencies such as social services, law enforcement and public health need to work together closely. "The multidisciplinary approach is important when dealing with children impacted by methamphetamine." UMD also provides information about a landmark coalition pioneered in Wright County. Families, neighbors, school personnel, law enforcement, county agencies, faith communities and municipalities have succeeded in educating the public about the dangers of methamphetamine.
The conference was sponsored by the UMD Center for Regional and Tribal Child Welfare Studies, the Center for American Indian and Minority Health at the U of M Medical School Duluth, and the U of M Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment and the Life Sciences.
Alumni News
by Karen Moon
MSW Jae Ran Kim (MSW 06) will be presenting her Friedman Award-winning paper, "Clarifying culture in placement decisions: Conflicting best practice for the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Multi-Ethnic Placement Act," in October 2006 at St. John's University's fourth adoption conference, “Families Without Borders? Adoption Across Culture and Race” (www.stjohns.edu/learnmore/00175). (The School of Social Work’s annual Friedman Award recognizes MSW scholarship on best practices with children and families.) Her work entitled, "Scattered seeds: The Christian influence on the Korean adoption phenomenon," will be featured in, Outsider's within: Racial crossings and adoption politics, published by South End Press in September 2006. She will also have a chapter (tentatively) titled, "Waiting for god: Religion and Korean American adoptee experiences," in Religion and Spirituality in Korean America, University of Illinois Press in summer 2007.
Charissa Bryant (MSW '96) has been promoted from Senior Social Worker in Human Services Public Health Department (formerly Hennepin County Children & Family Services Department) to Social Work Unit Supervisor in Child Foster Care Licensing.
PH.D. Traci Laliberte (Ph.D. ’05) and Sarah Ferguson (Ph.D. ’06) have completed their Title IV-E Ph.D. programs. Traci’s dissertation is entitled, Child welfare workers’ perceived competency in working with parents with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Sarah’s dissertation is, Resolving role conflict in public child welfare supervision. Both dissertations will be added to the CASCW Resource Center library.
Traci Laliberte (Ph.D. ’05) has co-authored the following articles: Lightfoot, E. & Laliberte, T. (2005/06). Serving children with disabilities in the child welfare system: Barriers and strategies. In V. Gaylord (Ed.), Impact (Institute on Community Integration, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 8-9), Minneapolis, MN: College of Education & Human Development, University of Minnesota. Lightfoot, E. & Laliberte, T. (2005/06). Child welfare services: How children with disabilities move through the system. In V. Gaylord (Ed.), Impact (Institute on Community Integration, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 10-11 & 38), Minneapolis, MN: College of Education & Human Development, University of Minnesota.