Vermont Parent Representation Center, Inc.

Today, on Channel 17/Town Meeting Television (on Comcast Cable and Burlington Telecom), VPRC’s Trine Bech talked about Results Based Accountability.

Click here to watch this program on-line:
http://www.cctv.org/watch-tv/programs/trine-bech-results-based-accountability

JANUARY, 2012

This past week two VPRC families had their cases dismissed in Court. We believe it had to do with our work with DCF, the other lawyers involved and, of course, the families themselves.

 “Ella’s” Story

The Probate Court referred Ella to VPRC because her former in-laws, the paternal grandparents of her four-year-old child, filed a petition for minor guardianship. Then, within days of this referral, DCF filed a Child in Need of Care and Supervision (CHINS) petition, claiming that Ella had neglected her child over a long period of time. 

DCF had already completed a "safety plan” and removed the child from Ella’s care, placing her with the paternal grandparents. The child's father was in jail. Ella was living in a homeless shelter and addicted to non-prescription drugs. 

At the first hearing, the Court entered an interim emergency care order that transferred temporary custody of the child to the paternal grandparents. VPRC advocated for a conditional custody order for Ella. The Court set it for further hearing. Two and a half months elapsed, during which three more hearings took place.

At this point, the judge made findings and conclusions that, under the law, there were insufficient facts to remove custody from Ella. However, instead of returning Ella’s child to her, he issued an order which, in essence, contradicted his own findings and conclusions. He gave "respite" to the grandparents, ordering that the child live with them five days per week; overnights for Ella with her daughter were to increase over time. VPRC worked intensely with Ella, her service providers and DCF. After three months, the child was returned to Ella in a subsequent order by the Court.

By that time, Ella was in recovery and had moved into her own apartment. Over the following 4 months, Ella continued to parent her child, following all the conditions of her custody. This week, the Court dismissed the CHINS petition and ordered full and unrestricted custody to Ella. 

This happy ending could not have happened without the DCF case worker’s tremendous collaboration with VPRC. She tirelessly supported Ella, and held her accountable while working closely with VPRC, fully appreciating the differences in roles and how our partnership could best support Ella.  

 Another Family’s Story

VPRC became involved with the parents of a teenage adopted child who was going through a rough spot. The State had filed an “unmanageable” petition and the child was taken into custody. The parents were horrified.

Without legal representation they at first advocated extremely well for themselves. The judge returned the child to their custody with conditions. The parents then contacted VPRC. After quick action on our part and lots of conversations with DCF and the other attorneys involved, VPRC reached an agreement and the judge dismissed the petition at the merits hearing.  

This family can now, with continued support, carry on the work required to address the issues—most importantly, without the threat of the child being removed from the home by the court.

DECEMBER 31, 2011

VPRC has now provided legal advocacy and social work support services to families involved in our child welfare system for over one year. We have served 21 families with 47 children. VPRC’s program model includes our team members meeting with parents in their homes. All our families have found these visits very supportive and helpful for them to be able to meet their goals.

Comments of parents, from their evaluations of VPRC’s services, include:

• “I trust them & trust is always very important.”
  
• “I am glad to have such a good support group for me and for the best interest of my son. This has been a very lengthy process and I am glad my team has stuck by me for so long.”
  
• “When I was incarcerated the VPRC team was very [underlined three times] helpful...it was a hard time and they helped me through it.  I will truly miss the VPRC team.”

Despite such clear evidence that VPRC’s combination of legal and social work advocacy and support is valued by the families and is effective, the Vermont Legislature was unable to continue funding our program last year. The state’s economic downturn left VPRC to depend entirely on private resources. We had generous responses from foundations and private donors. Nevertheless, we have had to reduce staff and cut salaries, hopefully for the short run only.

On the Advocacy Front

VPRC (through our work with minor guardianships in the Probate Court) was influential in DCF’s decision to halt the use of minor guardianships when DCF is involved with families. VPRC’s parents (and, by extension, we assume other parents in the same situation) understand the threat of a removal resulting from a Children in Need of Care and Supervision (CHINS) petition. They all believed that, to avoid this, they had no other choice but to transfer guardianship of their children to relatives, although that is not the case. VPRC successfully advocated for a Legislative Study Committee to evaluate and make recommendations concerning the use of minor guardianships when DCF is involved.  VPRC is a member of this Committee. 

On the Program Front

VPRC’s outcome data unmistakably reflect improved outcomes for the families we have served.  A full picture of our effectiveness throughout our first year of operation can be found on the Performance Measures  page on our website.