State and Local Examples: Collaboration With the Courts
Building Bridges for Babies in Foster Care: The Babies Can't Wait Initiative
Dicker & Gordon (2004)
Juvenile and Family Court Journal
Highlights a court-based initiative that merges child development knowledge with court and child welfare practice through a collaboration among the New York City Family Court, child welfare system, and service providers.
Building Bridges: The Case for Sharing Data Between the Court and Child Welfare Systems: White Paper (PDF - 602 KB)
Drezelo & Lepore (2008)
Describes New York's experience and national activity around the issue of court–agency data sharing.
Collaboration: Transforming the Concept to Practice in Missouri Judicial Circuits (PDF - 488 KB)
University of Missouri Institute of Public Policy (2006)
Describes Missouri's Collaboration curriculum that addresses coordination challenges among multiple agencies to best meet the needs of abused and neglected children.
Collaborations Between Child Welfare Agencies and Court Systems to Facilitate Timely Adoptions
Describes activities and outcomes of the Nebraska Court Improvement Project and implications for future policies, programs, and evaluations.
Court-based Education Efforts for Children in Foster Care: The Experience of the Pima County Juvenile Court (PDF - 546 KB)
Casey Family Programs & National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (2007)
Chronicles the education reform efforts led by Pima County, AZ, courts by outlining the need, providing an overview, describing efforts, discussing impact, and offering suggestions to other jurisdictions that want to design and implement their own reform initiatives.
Improving Outcomes Together: Court and Child Welfare Collaboration (PDF - 280 KB)
Children and Family Research Center & National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues (2005)
Explores the ways juvenile and family courts and child welfare agencies share data and information and collaborate outside the courtroom in order to improve outcomes for children in their care. The report also discusses effects of the Federal Child and Family Services Reviews and Program Improvement Plans on collaboration, keys to collaboration, and the use of existing resources to assist in collaboration efforts.
Memorandum of Understanding: Iowa Department of Human Services - Judicial Branch Cooperation (MS Word - 89 KB)
National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues (2005)
Presents a memorandum of understanding between the Iowa Department of Human Services and the Judicial Branch of Iowa.
Michigan Logic Models: Drug Treatment Court, Communication, Screening, Assessment, Engagement, and Retention, Evaluation, Funding, Marketing, Training and Technical Assistance (PDF - 108 KB)
Michigan State Court Administrative Office, Family Independence Agency, Michigan Department of Community Health, & National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare (2004)
Includes charts with logic models for the collaboration of Michigan substance abuse and child welfare agencies.
Permanency Through Collaboration Between Delinquency and Dependency Courts (PDF - 882 KB)
Pendleton & Green
Child Court Matters, 10(2), (2008)
Describes how Idaho courts have combined dependency and delinquency matters into one hearing heard by a single judge to provide the most appropriate and effective services possible for youth.
Recommendations for Effective Partnerships on Youth Permanence Between the Juvenile Courts and Child Welfare (PDF - 909 KB)
California Permanency for Youth Project (2006)
Provides nine recommendations for establishing and supporting a commitment to permanency for all children and youth.
Strengthening Texas Courts for the Safety, Permanency, and Well Being of Children in Foster Care (PDF - 471 KB)
Supreme Court of Texas Task Force on Child Protection Case Management and Reporting (2006)
Outlines technological improvements and establishes a uniform, statewide case management and tracking system for child protection cases. The report also provides suggestions for best practices for meaningful collaboration with other courts and family welfare agencies.