Policy & Practice June 2018

GUARDIANSHIP continued from page 21

State and County Innovations to Consider States have also used their dis- cretion to create diverse legal frameworks to support guardianships in their jurisdictions. This approach to legal permanency is viewed as a valuable alternative when family reunification and adoption are not available options for a child. Together, federal law, state guardianship statutes, administrative policies, pro- cedures, implementation strategies, and supports provide a rich source of innovations for states to consider when developing best practices in guardianship assistance programs. Our research suggests that states might consider pursuing new strategies for pursuing permanency through GAP and guardianship assistance. The state experts we surveyed offered examples of such strategies. A number of these warrant further research on their effectiveness: � Building a community of support so that the public child welfare agency can develop a strong relationship and referral process with organi- zations that provide services to guardians and their children. � Educating state legislators, judges, parents, guardians, child welfare staff, practitioners, and leaders on the benefits of guardianship (e.g., termination of parental rights is not required) and why these benefits might be best for some children and families who cannot be reunified or for whom adoption is not an option. This includes training child welfare staff on the value of guardianship as a permanency option, on guardians’ and their children’s unique needs, and on how best to meet those needs. � Setting guardianship subsidy rates that are equal to foster care and adoption rates, as some states already do. � Enacting standards for waiver of non-safety licensure requirements. (In general, state child welfare agencies determine licensure regula- tions, not the federal government.)

guardianship can make a difference. Agency executives can commu- nicate that positive engagement with relatives who may consider becoming guardians is valued. Leadership is key to developing a positive organizational climate, and dedicating staff and resources to supporting children in guardianship placements. 4 � Organizations can also identify within-agency champions who have the authority to implement policies and promote practices consistent includes developing resources that allow relatives to clearly understand guardianship as an option in com- parison with adoption and foster care support. 5 � Building upon the kinship navigator innovation in Washington State and other states, create a strong community network to support guardianship families, with a focus on networking through support groups and service organizations. Community-based organizations can provide helpful services to children, parents, and guardians; and all parties may work together to develop a smooth transition from guardianship to adulthood. To access the full research report, a research brief, and the national survey questions visit: https://www.casey.org/guardianship- assistance-policy-and-implementation- a-national-analysis-of-federal-and- state-policies-and-programs/. with support for guardians and guardianship placements. This Reference Notes 1. Holtan, A., Rønning, J., Handegård, B. & A. Sourander (2005). A comparison of mental health problems in kinship and nonkinship foster care. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 14, 4, 201-207; Koh, E. (2010). Permanency outcomes of children in kinship and non-kinship foster care: Testing the external validity of kinship effects. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 3, 389-398. Sakai, C. Lin, H. & G. Flores (2011). Health outcomes and family services in kinship

� Creating concise and colorful pam- phlets with brief checklists to help relatives and fictive kin understand the differences between legal guard- ianship, adoption, and foster care, and between the types of services and supports available to them for each option. � Using both federal Title IV-E GAP funds and state funds (as needed) to support guardians and children because multifaceted funding can help. Along with recommendations from state experts, our review of state statutes and administrative codes also revealed a number of potential actions moving forward: � Developing state policies that support subsidized guardianship, such as written policies and protocols that reflect the needs of children and families with respect to guardianship assistance and recognize their unique circumstances. This may also include early identification and frequent engagement of relative guardians; and ensuring that caseworkers, supervisors, judges, guardians ad litem, parent counsel, and others are informed about the benefits and availability of subsidized guardian- ship as a permanency option. � Additional research is needed to determine if state policies that set guardianship subsidy rates close or equal to foster care rates result in improved use of guardianship and better child outcomes. Recommendations derived from our review of the guardianship and child welfare literature include: � Collecting and analyzing child outcome data for children moving to permanency in guardianship. Data should include the extent to which guardianship is being used, child well-being outcomes, service needs, disruption rates, and poten- tial cost savings from shorter stays in foster care. � Clear and consistent communication from leadership about the value of

Policy&Practice   June 2018 30