DRAFT
CHILD DEATH, NEAR DEATH AND STILLBIRTH COMMISSION
AND
CHILD PROTECTION ACCOUNTABILITY COMMISSION
3rd JOINT MEETING
October 6, 2006
New CastleCounty Courthouse
12th Floor Conference Room
MINUTES
Those in attendance:
Members of the Child Death, Near Death & Stillbirth Commission (“CDNDSC”):
Dr. Garrett H.C. Colmorgen (Chair)
*Tania Culley, Esq. (proxy for C. Malcolm Cochran, IV, Esq.)
Karen DeRasmo
*Secretary Cari DeSantis
Marjorie L. Hershberger
The Honorable Joelle Hitch (proxy for Chief Judge Chandlee Johnson Kuhn)
Dr. Kathy Janiver
*Janice Mink
*Mariann Kenville Moore (proxy for The Honorable Carl Danberg)
Marie Renzi
Lisa Schieffert (proxy for Secretary Meconi)
Dr. Phillip Schlossman
Deputy Secretary Nancy Wilson
Randy Williams
Staff to CDNDSC:
Michael Brown
Kristen Joyce
Anne Pedrick, Executive Director
Meena Ramakrishnan
Shereen Williams
Members of the Child Protection Accountability Commission (“CPAC”):
Statutory Role:
*Tania Culley, Esq. (proxy for C. Malcolm Cochran, IV, Esq.)
Child Protection Comm. 16 Del. C. § 912 (a)(10)
Susan CycykDir. of Child Mental Health 16 Del. C. §912(a)(9)
*Secretary Cari DeSantisChildren’s Department 16 Del. C. § 912(a)(1)
Pete FeliceangeliAttorney General’s Office 16 Del. C. § 912 (a)(3)
Carlyse A. GiddinsDir. of Div. of Family Servs. 16 Del. C. § 912 (a)(2)
The Honorable Pamela MaierMember, House of Reps. 16 Del. C. § 912 (a)(5)
The Honorable Jennifer MayoFamily Court 16 Del. C. § 912(a)(4)
(for herself and as proxy for Chief Judge Kuhn)
*Janice MinkChild Protection Comm. 16 Del. C. § 912 (a)(10)
Joanne MiroDept. of Education 16 Del. C. § 912 (a)(8)
(proxy for Sec. Valerie Woodruff)
Mariann Kenville-Moore Attorney General’s Office 16 Del. C. § 912 (a)(3)
(proxy for Attorney General Danberg)
Randall WilliamsChild Protection Comm. 16 Del. C. § 912 (a)(10)
* indicates members of both commissions
Staff to CPAC:
Tania M. Culley, Esq. Executive Director
Molly Dunson
Lorin H. Hurst, Esq.
Allison McDowell
Guests:
Mary Ball Morton
Phyllis Sculley, Esq.
- Welcome/Introductions
Dr. Colmorgen called the meeting to order.
- Approval of Minutes
The minutes were approved without changes.
- Delaware Child Protection Recommendations
Anne Pedrick gave directions for the binder inserts which are the latest edition of the Office of the Child Advocate’s compilation of recommendations and the latest round of letters from March-June that have gone to the Governor.
- Subcommittee Reports
- Caseloads/Workloads.
Tania Culley provided a report to the group, sharing that at the last meeting, the group determined that they had no money to conduct a work study in Delaware but would instead look at data from other workload studies in other states and apply that information to Delaware. The group would be looking at the work done in Virginia, Arizona, Nevada and Alabama. The group planned to contact a representative in each of those states and ask a number of questions of them to assess their comparability to Delaware. They hoped to have this information for their next meeting which will be October 23, 2006 at 2:00 in the Supreme Court Conference room. Ms. Culley noted that it will be critical for the group to have facts and figures to support requests for change that will eventually be made to the General Assembly.
The Office of the Child Advocate will also look into the next step of the charge from the joint commissions which is to examine the portal of entry, looking at what cases are coming into the hotline and which should be accepted. The plan is to look at what other states are doing. The goal is to be sure they can justify the cases they are accepting since there is no way to avoid a fiscal note if workloads are reduced.
Finally, Ms. Culley thanked Ms. Giddinsfor appointing two frontline workers to the committee.
B.Delaware Code Changes/Standardized Definitions of Neglect
Lorin Hurst reported that the group will not be bringing anything to CPAC at the October meeting but hoped to have something in January. The group was working with a draft definition of abuse and within that, further working to define the terms within that definition. Ms. Culley added that the draft definitions of neglect had been circulated and commended all those who came to the table to formulate those two definitions, including public defenders and prosecutors. The hope is that when they are done there will be one definition of neglect, abuse and dependency to be used throughout the Delaware Code. Ms. Culley offered to work with Anne Pedrick to circulate the draft definitions to Child Death Commission members when they are ready.
C.Multi-Disciplinary Use of History in Decision Making
Ms. Giddins reported that the subcommittee has met twice since the last joint commission meeting. She noted the wide range of people who participated in the subcommittee and asked for a representative from the Department of Education, Law Enforcement and the New CastleCountyHospitals to join them. At the initial meeting, the group set out to conduct a review of the federal statutes (such as HIPPA and CAPTA) related to sharing of information as it pertains to medical and substance abuse. They also discussed the draft memorandum of understanding (“MOU”) between the Department of Services for Children, Youth and their Families (the “Department”) and the Department of Education. Additionally, the law enforcement MOU has had a broad review and they hope to have a final draft by November. The next step is to develop subcommittees to look at a few issues, including establishing protocol for how to review history, developing guidelines around information sharing (distinguishing between need to know and would like to know). The next meeting is October 17, 2006, at Faulkland Road and the group hopes to have something to present at the next joint meeting in the spring.
D.Safe Sleeping Practices/ Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (“SIDS”)
Lisa Schieffert told the group that the subcommittee had 5 or 6 meetings over the summer and that their recommendations are in the commissioners packets behind the meeting minutes. The group’s discussion centered around 3 basic questions: What agencies address the issue?; What kinds of programs do they have?; Based on those answers, where are the holes and what can be done differently? The recommendations provided to the group are what the subcommittee thinks is a reasonable attempt to fill the holes. Ms. Schieffert invited questions from the group.
Following discussion, it was agreed that the subcommittee would be reconvened, that they would develop action steps for each of the recommendations and report back to the joint commission. Additionally, there was a request made that before each of the recommendations, the subcommittee provide the context of each recommendation, and describe how it came about. There was also discussion that the goal is not for this to be a permanent subcommittee. Finally, it was agreed that the subcommittee not disband until the recommendations come back to the joint commissions.
- Other Business
Ms. DeRasmo raised a concern from the child death panels, telling the group that the panels make recommendations and work hard forming subcommittees etc. and that there needs to be better communication about those recommendations. She explained that it is not productive to make a recommendation and get a response she cited as an example, like the one received on June 28 from Secretary DeSantisthat said: the agency is unable to fully respond without more specific information. In her opinion, rather than responding this way, better communication could help the agency get the information they need in order to respond to the request from the panel. Ms. DeRasmo felt recommendations are being made about the same issues over and over because there is no communication about them. Further, she thought that it would be helpful for the panels to be educated around what best practices are. Her point is not that the agency should act on every recommendation, but that there be better communication about therecommendationsso that the best recommendations can be made. Ms. Morton responded, telling the group that they are working on improving communication within the Department and with outside entities.
Ms. Mink asked about the June 28 letter which Ms. Culley pointed out was not shared with the joint commissions, but instead was addressed to the CDNDSC.
Ms. Mink also asked raised an inquiry that arose from a DFS response to a recommendation from the Davis Near Death report which indicated that DFS policy did not require workers to see a new child born to a family with an open treatment case. Several members agreed to meet and discuss the issue and Ms. Giddins offered to report back to the group at the next meeting.
- Public Comment
There was no public comment.
- Next meeting
The next meeting is May 4, 2007.
- Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m.
1