Illinois DCFS Releases 2013 Report UPDATED

See the long report here. Child #50 is the Travis Messenger case. Child #48 is the Desi Scarborough case.

Most of the Death and Serious Injury investigations qualify as CPS failures. There were 7 homicides of wards of state. None were caused by foster parents.

CPS Failures/Death and Serious Injury Investigations

Case Number 1 occurred on a weekend overnight unsupervised visit: “A two-year-old girl was found dead in the home of her mother from injuries of extreme physical abuse.”

Case Number 2: ” A four year-old boy died of blunt force trauma to the head as a result of physical abuse inflicted by his mother and her boyfriend. Three months prior to his death, the Department opened a child protection investigation after the mother took the then three year-old boy to the hospital reporting he fell. Doctors stated that the numerous injuries were not consistent with the explanation and believed he was abused. The mother was charged with domestic battery and later convicted. However, the child protection investigation was unfounded for abuse and indicated for the neglect allegation of inadequate supervision”.

Case Number 3: “A one-year-old boy died as a result of severe physical abuse inflicted by his mother’s boyfriend. A child protection investigation of the family was closed two days before the boy’s death and a case was open for intact family services.”

Case Number 4:  “A two year-old child died as a result of severe head trauma inflicted by his mother. The family had been the subject of an indicated report one month prior to the child’s death.”

Case Number 5: “An eight month-old girl died of drowning after being left with her 18-month-old sister unattended in a plastic tub filled with water. The girl’s mother had been the subject of two prior indicated reports and the family had an open case for intact services at the time of the girl’s death. ”

Case Number 6: “A one-year-old boy suffered serious injuries as a result of physical abuse and neglect. The boy’s family had been the subject of an unfounded child protection investigation six weeks earlier as a result of other injuries he had suffered.”

Case Number 7: “A five month-old boy suffered severe physical abuse while in the care of his father. The father had been the subject of a child protection investigation seven months earlier involving children unrelated to the infant.”

Case Number 10: “Child died in custody of ward of state

A four month-old boy died of dehydration and failure to thrive stemming from ongoing medical conditions. The boy’s mother was an 18 year-old ward of the Department at the time of his death.

The mother’s family had an extensive history of involvement with the Department that began prior to her birth. During the mother’s childhood, both of her parents were the subjects of indicated reports for abuse and neglect of the mother and her siblings and the children were removed from their parent’s custody on multiple occasions. Following an indicated report for physical abuse, environmental neglect and risk of sexual injury, the mother, then age seven, and her siblings were taken into Department custody. The mother remained a Department ward thereafter.

At age 17, the mother reported to staff at her high school that she was pregnant. In response, her case was transferred to a private agency that operated a program specifically designed to provide services to teen mothers. The mother was placed in a traditional foster home through the program and private agency staff was assigned to manage her case. While assigned staff continued to monitor the mother’s progress in school and living arrangements, little effort was made to assist her in planning for the birth of her baby. At 33 weeks the mother went into premature labor and delivered a boy, her first child. The boy experienced bleeding on the brain at birth and remained in the hospital for five weeks. During that time, private agency staff never visited the baby in the hospital or discussed with the mother how she would provide for his care following his release. An OIG review of the case record found that in the first documented contact with the baby, two days after his discharge from the hospital, private agency staff spoke with the mother regarding her relationship with her foster parent but did not address the changes or challenges inherent in bringing her new baby into the home. Staff also neglected to ascertain the mother’s willingness or ability to obtain necessary follow-up services for the baby or post-partum care for herself. While the mother complied with the majority of the baby’s required medical appointments, she never returned to the hospital for her post-discharge appointment and was minimally compliant in participating in services for herself.

Four months after the baby was born, the mother reported to private agency staff she believed she was pregnant again and wanted to terminate the pregnancy. The mother stated she was unable to obtain a free pregnancy test and could not afford to purchase one. One week later, private agency staff provided the mother with an at-home pregnancy test. The test was positive and staff instructed the mother to make a medical appointment to determine how far along the pregnancy had advanced. Two weeks later, staff met with the mother and her foster parent to discuss their living arrangement, however no arrangements were made to ensure the mother scheduled a medical appointment. Three weeks later, more than a month after the mother had taken the at-home pregnancy test, the mother informed the private agency her pregnancy had advanced too far to consider termination and that she intended to deliver the child. While agency staff encouraged the mother to avail herself of pre-natal care, they did not facilitate her efforts to obtain treatment or document her medical care in the case record. Workers instead consistently relied upon the mother’s self-reports of her compliance with health services. Eleven months after the birth of her fist child, the mother delivered a baby boy at 34 weeks, her second premature baby born within the year.

In an interview with the OIG, the private agency supervisor responsible for overseeing the mother’s case acknowledged involved workers did not adequately assess the mother’s medical care or establish contact with her physicians to obtain vital information regarding the status of her pregnancies. The supervisor stated she was unaware that teenagers are more prone to premature deliveries or that women who have previously given birth to premature babies are at greater risk of subsequent premature deliveries. The supervisor told the OIG it is the agency’s practice to encourage clients to schedule post-partum appointments and that staff only

The mother’s family had an extensive history of involvement with the Department that began prior to her birth. During the mother’s childhood, both of her parents were the subjects of indicated reports for abuse and neglect of the mother and her siblings and the children were removed from their parent’s custody on multiple occasions. Following an indicated report for physical abuse, environmental neglect and risk of sexual injury, the mother, then age seven, and her siblings were taken into Department custody. The mother remained a Department ward thereafter.

At age 17, the mother reported to staff at her high school that she was pregnant. In response, her case was transferred to a private agency that operated a program specifically designed to provide services to teen mothers. The mother was placed in a traditional foster home through the program and private agency staff was assigned to manage her case. While assigned staff continued to monitor the mother’s progress in school and living arrangements, little effort was made to assist her in planning for the birth of her baby. At 33 weeks the mother went into premature labor and delivered a boy, her first child. The boy experienced bleeding on the brain at birth and remained in the hospital for five weeks. During that time, private agency staff never visited the baby in the hospital or discussed with the mother how she would provide for his care following his release. An OIG review of the case record found that in the first documented contact with the baby, two days after his discharge from the hospital, private agency staff spoke with the mother regarding her relationship with her foster parent but did not address the changes or challenges inherent in bringing her new baby into the home. Staff also neglected to ascertain the mother’s willingness or ability to obtain necessary follow-up services for the baby or post-partum care for herself. While the mother complied with the majority of the baby’s required medical appointments, she never returned to the hospital for her post-discharge appointment and was minimally compliant in participating in services for herself.

Four months after the baby was born, the mother reported to private agency staff she believed she was pregnant again and wanted to terminate the pregnancy. The mother stated she was unable to obtain a free pregnancy test and could not afford to purchase one. One week later, private agency staff provided the mother with an at-home pregnancy test. The test was positive and staff instructed the mother to make a medical appointment to determine how far along the pregnancy had advanced. Two weeks later, staff met with the mother and her foster parent to discuss their living arrangement, however no arrangements were made to ensure the mother scheduled a medical appointment. Three weeks later, more than a month after the mother had taken the at-home pregnancy test, the mother informed the private agency her pregnancy had advanced too far to consider termination and that she intended to deliver the child. While agency staff encouraged the mother to avail herself of pre-natal care, they did not facilitate her efforts to obtain treatment or document her medical care in the case record. Workers instead consistently relied upon the mother’s self-reports of her compliance with health services. Eleven months after the birth of her fist child, the mother delivered a baby boy at 34 weeks, her second premature baby born within the year.

In an interview with the OIG, the private agency supervisor responsible for overseeing the mother’s case acknowledged involved workers did not adequately assess the mother’s medical care or establish contact with her physicians to obtain vital information regarding the status of her pregnancies. The supervisor stated she was unaware that teenagers are more prone to premature deliveries or that women who have previously given birth to premature babies are at greater risk of subsequent premature deliveries. The supervisor told the OIG it is the agency’s practice to encourage clients to schedule post-partum appointments and that staff only .”

Case Number 11: “A five month-old boy with multiple bone fractures who was the subject of an open child protection investigation was returned to his parents’ custody while the investigation was ongoing.”

Suicides:

“During years 2000 through 2011, 35 Illinois children who committed suicide had been involved with the Department in the year prior to their suicide

Eighty-two percent (14) of the 17 ward cases were male and 18% (3) were female. Of the 17 ward suicide cases, twenty-four percent (4) were 14 years and younger. All of the children ages 14 and younger committed suicide by hanging; 75% (3) had prior psychiatric hospitalizations, and one ward was psychiatrically hospitalized when he committed suicide. Seventy-five percent (3) of those 14 and under had a history of suicidal ideation. All 17 of the wards were receiving mental health services at the time of their death. Four of the 17 were prescribed psychotropic medication.

Non-wards

Of the 34 suicide cases, 44% (15) involved cases that had been investigated by DCP in the year prior to the child’s death; however, none of these cases were investigated due to suspected mental illness. Of these 15 DCP investigations, 71% (10) were unfounded; one was indicated; and four were pending. Thirty-eight percent (3) were male and 62% were female.

Of the 15 cases involved with DCP in the year prior to their suicide, 53% (8) were 14 years and younger. All of these younger children committed suicide by hanging. Of the eight children, 38% (3) had prior psychiatric hospitalizations, with one being discharged one week prior to their suicide. Fifty percent (4) were receiving mental health services at the time of their death and the other four had no documented history of mental illness.

Of the remaining child cases, one was a closed intact case, one was an open intact case, and one child had been adopted. Of these three, all were female, two were 14 years and one was 15 years. The 15-year-old died by hanging. The two younger children committed suicide by hanging and by drowning/slitting her wrists.”

Death Totals Compared with 2 previous years:

“In Fiscal Year 2012 OIG staff investigated 106 child deaths meeting criteria for review, a decrease (of 7) from 113 deaths in FY 2011, but still an increase (of 23) from 83 deaths in FY 2010.”

Ward of State Deaths: 19:  7 homicide; 2 suicide; 2 accident; 8 natural

REFORM Puzzle Piece

Update: “The number of Illinois children killed by abuse or neglect over the past year likely will be the state’s most in a quarter century, Illinois child-welfare officials announced Thursday in imploring residents to report suspected mistreatment of youths before it turns deadly.

A new report by the Illinois Department of Children & Family Services showed 94 of the 223 deaths investigated during the latest fiscal year that ended June 30 involved credible evidence of abuse or neglect. With 45 cases still being investigated and awaiting an official ruling, the number of abuse-related deaths — what the department terms “indicated” cases — appears likely to surpass the state’s previous high of 102 in the 1989 fiscal year.

There were 90 indicated cases statewide over each of the previous two years and 69 during the 2010 fiscal year, according to the DCFS tally it has kept since 1981. Three of every four deaths linked to abuse or neglect involved households with no prior contact with DCFS, spokesman Dave Clarkin said.

“That’s why the department has been urging relatives, neighbors and friends to call our hotline (at 800-252-2873) when they first suspect abuse, rather than waiting until the abuse becomes fatal and they’re getting a call from a coroner or police,” Clarkin said.

Explanations for the latest increase remain elusive, though Clarkin said 60 percent of the children confirmed to have died from abuse or neglect were younger than 6 months old, perhaps reflecting “very stressful, isolated times” parents of infants may encounter.

Still, Clarkin said there are encouraging signs: The number of Illinois child deaths over the past six months has dropped, with the 18 deaths in July was nine fewer than the same month in 2012, perhaps thanks to the agency’s partnering since January with nonprofit groups, ethnic chambers of commerce, and law enforcers to encourage citizens to report suspected abuse before it proves fatal.

“It reinforces for all of us the importance of all adults ensuring safe, loving homes for kids,” Clarkin said. “Whether they’re from sleep suffocations, inadequate supervision or death by abuse, all of these deaths are preventable.”

The 223 child deaths probed by DCFS over the latest fiscal year was a 14-percent jump over the previous year and the most since the 257 investigated in 1994.

Infants who suffocated while sleeping with parents, with blankets or on their stomachs appears to be the leading cause of death among children, despite cautions by the American Academy of Pediatrics against such dangerous practices. Other common causes of child deaths have been homicides — typically fatal beatings — and inadequate supervision, most often reflected in drownings.”

Deaths linked to child abuse rise in Illinois

[Daily Herald 8/9/13 by Associated Press]