Children's
Justice Statewide Collaboration
Flow Chart
Iowa Supreme Court
The
seven-member Iowa Supreme Court has many important responsibilities. The court is the highest court in the Iowa state court
system. It reviews decisions of lower
courts and its decisions shape and define the law for lower courts to
follow. In addition to its adjudicatory
function, the court oversees the administration of Iowa's state court system. This administrative role includes
responsibility for the Judicial Branch budget and for promulgating all rules of
procedure used throughout the state's court system. Finally, the Supreme Court serves a
regulatory function. The court's primary
regulatory function is the licensing and disciplining of lawyers who practice
law in Iowa.
Iowa Judicial Council
The
Iowa Judicial Council is composed of the chief justice of the Supreme Court,
the chief judge of the court of appeals and the chief judge of each of Iowa's eight judicial
districts. The council advises the Supreme
Court with respect to the administration of Iowa's court system.
Children's Justice
Advisory Committee
Federal regulations require the formation of
a multi-disciplinary committee to provide advice and feedback to the Judicial
Branch regarding the implementation of the Court Improvement Project (CIP)
grants. The Supreme Court formed the
Court Improvement Project Oversight Committee to perform this function. This committee will be renamed and
reconstituted as the Children's Justice (CJ) Advisory Committee. As always, the Supreme Court retains
decision-making authority in those areas in which it has responsibility under
federal and state statutes and regulations.
Role of
Advisory Committee
Possibilities for the role of the Advisory Committee include:
1) Provides recommendations in the development of the strategic plan
for the basic grant;
2) Reviews for acceptance or modification the strategic plans
developed by the Training Steering Committee and the Data Steering Committee;
3) Approves the final applications of all three grants for
presentation to State Court Administration and the Supreme Court for submission
to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children
and Families, The Children's Bureau;
4) Requests formation of task forces and work groups to address
issues of improvement needed in the court process;
5) Recommends to the Supreme Court rule changes, legislative changes
or procedural changes that would improve timeliness, due process or otherwise
improve the court process;
6) Forwards issues that require involvement of state agencies or
other state wide organizations to the State Children's Justice Council with
recommendations for action; and
7) Recommends priorities for CIP funds
8) Manage mini-grant process for district teams including development
of guidelines for application, reviewing proposals, awarding mini-grants, and
reviewing progress.
9) Review assessment results, identifying court process issues that
have statewide implications, develop recommendations for addressing areas
needing improvement, through task force formation, legislative change, rule
change, practice change, referral to state council for higher level action. For
instance, the results of assessments might show that quality of representation
in the court room might be a consistent area needing improvement. The advisory committee might request
formation of a work group to look at improving quality of representation.
The workgroup might involve looking at judicial leadership,
developing clear expectations and guidelines and distributing the guidelines to
all attorneys who serve in juvenile court, or developing standards of
representation and recommending adoption of those standards by the Supreme
Court, all of which are under the court's purview. Work groups would be multi-disciplinary,
including many of the child welfare stakeholders, those who are directly
related and those who might be impacted by change in practice or policy.
The advisory committee might also identify that there are cross
agency barriers to maintaining foster youth in their home schools. This type of multi-agency barrier would be
referred to the State Council through Children's Justice staff for
consideration and discussion, since it involves the need for state level
collaboration and multiple agencies such as DHS, foster parents, Education,
private agency providers and even transportation companies to address the
issue. The state council could then form
a work group to address this issue or decide not to address the issue at that
time.
Children's
Justice State Council
The Children's Justice State Council would be made up of representatives,
appointed by the Supreme Court, from those organizations that are involved in
the child welfare system and those organizations that might be impacted by
systemic change initiated by this group.
It would address issues brought to the council by one of its members or
referred to the council by CJ staff, CJ Advisory Committee or the State Court
Administrator. If the matter before the
council requires action such as a legislative change, funding, etc., the
council would make a recommendation to the Children's Justice Cabinet for
action. The council would also have the
option to make recommendations to one of its member organizations when action
by that organization would adequately address the matter. They also could enact
their own work group made up of members or add others as appropriate to address
a specific problem. For instance,
sometimes there are difficulties with competing releases of information which
prevents families from getting the services they need timely. For instance this
might happen across Dept. of Public Health, HIPPA regulations, mental health
and DHS, which prevents the most accurate information to be available from all
in a timely manner to develop an effective case plan or to get parents into
treatment in order to address the issues preventing them from safely and
effectively parenting their children.
The state council could discuss this issue and ask that a work group be
formed of the related member agencies to address this topic to develop a
solution to the complex regulations around sharing of information to assure
that families can get timely service. It
is also possible that the State Council could see the Advisory Committee as a
knowledgeable resource that could provide information or feedback to the State
Council. They might also refer an issue
for the Advisory Committee to act on or consider addressing.
Children's Justice Cabinet
This group is composed of state officials with decision and/or
policy making authority, invited by the chief justice to participate in
addressing system-wide issues that affect dependency cases. In addition to the chief justice, membership
would include the director of the Department of Human Services, the Attorney
General, the directors of the Departments of Education and Public Health, and
the State Public Defender. Participation
of these persons in any particular decision would depend on the nature of the
issue under consideration. Other persons
may be included in the discussion and resolution of an issue that involves such
person's interests, including the chief justice of the Meskwaki Tribe.
Children's
Justice District Teams
Members of the District Teams will be
appointed by the chief judge of the judicial district. CJ staff would be the primary contact for the
District Teams, to provide consultation, technical assistance, and possible
resources. The district teams are
Judicial Branch driven, with judicial leaders being held responsible by the
Supreme Court for the teams' functioning.
The teams will assist the chief judges and the Judicial Council in
achieving the required compliance with federal guidelines and will serve as a
vehicle for on-going communication both within the district and back to the
state.
Leadership of the district teams will notify
CJ staff as issues are identified as having state-level relevance or needing
state-level action. When state level
relevance is identified, CJ staff and the State Court Administrator will
determine if the issue needs judicial attention or is more appropriate for
consideration by the permanent Children's Justice State Council.
If it is determined
that it is a judicial issue, it will go to the CJ Advisory Committee, the CJ
Training Steering Committee, CJ Data Steering Committee, or directly to State
Court Administration or the Judicial Council.
If the issue is
multi-faceted or directly related to another state organization, it would be
referred to the Children's Justice State Council for discussion, consideration,
work group formation, etc.
Other
Complementary Statewide Collaborative Group
The Department of Human Services Division of
Child and Family Services and the Iowa Judicial Branch created the Child and
Family Services Stakeholder Panel in order to more actively elicit input from a
diverse group of Iowa
citizens and organizations that have a stake in the child welfare system. The Stakeholder Panel includes over 60
members representing consumers, the Court, legal representatives, DHS,
providers, public interest groups, and state and community partners. The Panel provides consultation related to
DHS and Court initiatives, as well as the state's Child and Family Service Plan
and the Child and Family Services Review.
Division and the Court retain decision-making authority in those areas
in which they have responsibility under federal and state statutes and
regulations.
CJ: 8/07