Youth in View

A foster parent and a 17-year-old in care admitted that the 17-year-old would babysit multiple other children in care. This was not approved by Child Placement Management Staff.

A child's service plan that was due on 8/26/24 has not been completed.

The agency is utilizing a checklist for conducting the monthly contacts. Two of two monthly contacts reviewed were not accurately addressed on the questions related to psychotropic medication, serious incidents/restaints, and discipline concerns. These questions are marked "yes" on the form instead of "no".

Two of two monthly contacts reviewed did not have a management signature.

A caregiver did not provide adequate supervision to children in care, who were able to engage in actions of a sexual nature on multiple occasions.

The agency failed to ensure that adequate supervision, per a child's safety plan, was being implemented and followed within the foster home.

This standard was found deficient as part of a DFPS investigation.

During a review conducted on March 25, 2024, it was determined that: (1) the Administrator failed to ensure compliance with the current HM Plan; and (2) 12 months had elapsed since the effective date of the plan. The heightened monitoring plan for this operation included a specific ?planned end date? at the 12-month mark by which the operation was expected to meet all heightened monitoring criteria necessary to move out of active heightened monitoring to a phase of ?post plan monitoring?. As a direct result of the administrator?s failure to ensure timely compliance with the heightened monitoring plan, this operation is now unable to successfully move to post-plan monitoring. Furthermore, the operation?s ?planned end date? must now be revised, and the period of heightened monitoring must be extended. Further details of the administrator?s failure to ensure compliance include the following: - Operation was unable to meet compliance with Medium-High or High weighted licensing citations, including having an open investigation.

There are 7 children residing in the foster home when the verified capacity is 6 children.

It was determined by video footage that a caregiver grabbed the arm of a child in care.

The agency failed to complete Foster Family Home Capacity Exception form 4003 prior to the birth of a seventh child in a verified foster home.

During the investigation, it was determined that there was a verbal argument between a child and an unauthorized caregiver.

Two children in the home were threatened with the loss of placement by an unauthorized caregiver.

During the investigation, it was determined that children were subjected to profane language in the home.

A seventeen-year-old child in care had her belongings searched by the caregivers without the child's knowledge.

Inspector arrived at 10:30 AM and did not have all records requested by 1:30 PM.

The verification of the home in CLASS does not match the verification recommendation in the home screening.

One training certificate did not include the trainer's qualifications.

During the course of the investigation, the child stated that caregiver spanked him on his leg with a belt. Two collaterals stated that the child told them he was spanked on his leg by caregiver.

Two homes did not conduct severe weather drills within the last year.

During a review conducted on September 22, 2023, it was determined that: (1) the Administrator failed to ensure compliance with the current HM Plan; and (2) 12 months had elapsed since the effective date of the plan. The heightened monitoring plan for this operation included a specific ?planned end date? at the 12-month mark by which the operation was expected to meet all heightened monitoring criteria necessary to move out of active heightened monitoring to a phase of ?post plan monitoring?. As a direct result of the administrator?s failure to ensure timely compliance with the heightened monitoring plan, this operation is now unable to successfully move to post-plan monitoring. Furthermore, the operation?s ?planned end date? must now be revised, and the period of heightened monitoring must be extended. Further details of the administrator?s failure to ensure compliance include the following: - Operation was unable to meet compliance with Medium-High or High weighted licensing citations, including having an open investigation.

The supervisory visit states that both FPs are available, but has one FP signature.

The 2 of 3 medication logs reviewed did not have the reason medication was prescribed.

Of the 14 CPR/First Aid documents reviewed, seven were missing the length of training hours.

Of the nine foster home training records reviewed, five homes had normalcy training that was not completed annually.

Of the nine foster parent training logs reviewed, five homes had training that was conducted late.

Of the nine foster home training records reviewed, five homes had psychotropic medication training that was not completed annually.

Of the 15 child files reviewed, five files contained monthly contacts that were not approved by management.

The agency was not able to provide full access to foster home files or children's files.

A household member did not have a cleared background check.

One of two children's medication logs reviewed did not have a signature of the foster parent administering the medication.

A supervisory visit for had both parents present but one parent's signature.

There is no assessment of the foster parent?s criminal history by the home study writer in the home study. The foster parent?s account of what led to the criminal charge is provided, but the home study writer did not assess the information.

On page 9 of the home screening, it states the foster mother's boyfriend, is not a frequent visitor and will not be involved in the fostering process. The foster mother reported that he has his own address, but he is at her home every weekend as he works out of town during the week. She stated that she is not sure why the home screening mentions that he will not be a frequent visitor to her home as they have been dating for over one year. His background check was not returned as eligible until 03/15/23. On 3/20/2023 HM Supervisor contacted the operations and inquired to why the boyfriend?s background wasn?t run until 3/14/2023. The operation stated is background was run on 3/9/2023 but received an error. HM Supervisor asked what prompted his background check and why wasn?t it run during verification. The operation stated they wasn?t sure; and believes the CM was given directives to run his background at that time. There was not a clear response to why the boyfriend?s background check was entered on 3/14/2023, given the operation had the same information when the home was verified. The boyfriend had already been at the foster home for four weekends in a row from the official placement date (2/16/2023) to the date of the MAH (3/15/2023). His background check was not returned as eligible until 03/15/2023.

During a review conducted on March 17, 2023, it was determined that: (1) the Administrator failed to ensure compliance with the current HM Plan; and (2) 12 months had elapsed since the effective date of the plan. The heightened monitoring plan for this operation included a specific ?planned end date? at the 12-month mark by which the operation was expected to meet all heightened monitoring criteria necessary to move out of active heightened monitoring to a phase of ?post plan monitoring?. As a direct result of the administrator?s failure to ensure timely compliance with the heightened monitoring plan, this operation is now unable to successfully move to post-plan monitoring. Furthermore, the operation?s ?planned end date? must now be revised, and the period of heightened monitoring must be extended. Further details of the administrator?s failure to ensure compliance include the following: - Operation was unable to meet compliance with Medium-High or High weighted licensing citations, including having an open investigation.

Condition 1 - Met Condition 2- Met. Condition 3 - Met. Condition 4 - Not Met. February 2023 monthly meeting notes were no in the binder. Condition 5 - Met Condition 6 - Met

The children in care indicated that the foster parents yell at them as a form of discipline.

The medication log did not reflect a child receiving medication. Agency's staff said the foster parent did not accurately document the medication provided to a child.

A child was prescribed medication (Escitalopram and Prazosin). The child did not receive the medication. The agency stated the foster parent did not administer or provide the medication.

Condition 1 - Met Condition 2 - Not Met: Home History and audit for foster homes was observed in binder #2. Operation provided sign in sheets to show foster parents history was reviewed with them in acknowledgment. 3 out of the 18 active-foster homes, had no signatures. 2 foster homes didn?t have a signature page at all in the binder. A foster home was reopened 9/2022. The home was not observed in binder #2 as being audited (on the audit sheet) or acknowledged (signed document), before returning to active status. Condition 3 - Met Condition 4 - Met Condition 5 - Met Condition 6 - Met

Agency did not have up to date background check validation since 12/2021. Agency validated during inspection. Corrected at inspection.

During a review conducted on 9.16.2022 it was determined that: (1) the Administrator failed to ensure compliance with the current HM Plans; and (2) 12 months had elapsed since the effective date of the plan. The heightened monitoring plans for this operation included a specific ?planned end date? at the 12-month mark by which the operation was expected to meet all heightened monitoring criteria necessary to move out of active heightened monitoring to a phase of ?post plan monitoring?. As a direct result of the administrator?s failure to ensure timely compliance with heightened monitoring plans, this operation is now unable to successfully move to post-plan monitoring. Furthermore, the operation?s ?planned end date? must now be revised, and the period of heightened monitoring must be extended. Further details of the administrator?s failure to ensure compliance include the following: - Operation failed to demonstrate 6 months of successive compliance with the standard and contract requirements that led to heightened monitoring.

SIR did not have the role of the adult involved.

SIR does not have the gender of the child identified of the subject of the SIR.

1 of the 2 quarterly/supervisories did not have a listing of household members present during the visit.

Prescription medication was not stored in a locked storage container and was sitting on a dresser accessible to children in care.

Ammunition was observed to be in an unlocked storage container.

The agency failed to evaluate a foster home for compliance after the home was cited for two discipline related deficiencies. This home has been closed.

One staff record reviewed did not have a notarized Affidavit of Employment.

Caregiver is supervising from inside the home when two nine year old foster children are playing outside on the trampoline.

The child in the foster home did not have a monthly contact for September or October and when asked about the contact visit Inspector was told that she would have to ask the Admin about that. There was no supported reason why there wasn't a contact for the child for the two months. Also, the the monthly contact for October for the foster home was docusigned by the foster parent. Therefore, there is no way to verify that a visit was actully conduted at the foster home for the month of October.

A 3 year child residing in a foster home at the time of the home screening was not interviewed.

One staff file reviewed did not contain their job description. The agency added the job description as of 10/28/2021

The homescreening did not address that a home was previously verified by same agency in 2013 to February 2014 in addition to a verification in December 2014 to 2016. The home's status as a kinship home for children was not indicated or assessed in the home screening.

The home screening did not assess for treatment services/emotional disorders. The home is verified for treatment services/emotional disorders.

Two of three Initial Services Plans reviewed to not include the children's signatures.

One of two home screenings reviewed did not include the foster home's previous verficiation with a different child placing agency.

Foster child with history of self-harm and previous suicidal attempts was able to acquire a large knife and attempt suicide.

A 15 year old child in care with known self harm history was able to self-harm with a knife resulting injuries, because a caregiver did not immediately intervene and take the knife away.

Caregiver hit a foster child on the head in response to the child's behavior.

After a child in care presented a knife, held it to their own throat and began to self-harm in the presence of the caregiver, the caregiver turned their back to the child and did not immediately intervene.

Child was placed in a foster home that had recently been placed on a break due to stressors related to difficult placements. This child has severe behavioral issues including suicidal ideations and supervision needs that the foster parent was unable to provide.

Inspector requested a copy of the agencies Electronic Record Policy. It was not available.

An SIR for a child admitted to the hospital for pneumonia did not include the health care professionals information.

Agency did not allow inspector imediate access to records.

The agency is aware of a frequent visitor at a foster home and has not submitted a background for this person.

Two of three child's files did not have a required initial service plan.

One monthly child contact form was not complete ensuring the safety of a child in care.

A foster parent hit a child in care with a broom and admitted to pushing the same child during a verbal altercation.

A foster parent yelled at a child in care and used profane language.

A caregiver placed three children in a vehicle. The caregiver returned to the home and used the restroom and changed clothes. The caregiver had no ability to observe the children during this timeframe.

Two 1 year old and one 5 month old children in care were left in the vehicle unattended, while the caregiver returned into the home for approx. 2 to 5 mins. During this time 1 child got out the vehicle and walked back to the home unattended.

A 10, 7 and 6 year old child in care were spanked by an extended family member. In one instance, the 10 year old child suffered extensive bruising due to being disciplined with a belt by this person.

Children in care were subjected to physical discipline that resulted in bruising.

A caregiver did not provide the level of supervision to ensure the safety and well being of children when an unapproved caregiver physically discipline the children.

A child received extensive injuries as a result of physical discipline, the abuse was not reported as required.

The fire extinguisher in the kitchen and upstairs game room had expired February 2021

The two fire extinguishers in the home were last serviced in December 2019 and out five months past due for servicing.

It was found that siblings of the opposite gender ages 11 and 9 were allowed to sleep in the same bed on the night they were placed in the foster home. The children were no longer in the home.

Foster parent admitted to raising a hand to a child in care during a confrontation

The fire extinguisher has not been serviced within the last year. Note: This was corrected at inspection due to being provided documentation that the fire extinguisher had been serviced in April of 2021.

Caregiver did not follow the supervision instructions in the service plan by allowing a child to be home alone.

One of three child records reviewed did not have documentation that the service providers or the caregivers were notified of a child in care's Preliminary Service Plan.

A child's safety plan was not followed as directed. The child was to be supervised at all times by an approved caregiver. The foster parent left the child in the house without an approved caregiver.

A baby sitter left a child in a room unattended for approximately an hour. The child was in a car seat. During that time the seat tipped over. The child was trapped underneath and the belts caused injuries to the child's arms. The caregiver was not alerted to the incident.

An 18 month old was left in a car seat. The car seat tipped over. The child's position and movement caused burns, cuts, and blisters to the hands and wrist.