|
Stacey Bouchet,
"Children with Incarcerated Parents: Many Stones Still Unturned"
(page 2 of 5)
Progress in the Field
I would argue that one of the most significant markers of growth in
the field is the evolution of a core group of stakeholders. The
interest and support of several key foundations has led to collaborative
efforts from diverse players in this field. Combined with the
passage of the Second Chance Act and the reentry initiatives that are
occurring in state and local jurisdictions, this support has helped create interest
among several members of Congress and their staff in the millions of
families affected by incarceration. This growing interest provides a
real opportunity to promote policy options and to raise awareness on
Capitol Hill about the importance of children and families during
incarceration and in the reentry process.
Notably, the Council of State Governments Justice Center received
support from the Open Society Institute, the Annie E. Casey Foundation
and Casey Family Programs to develop and disseminate Children of
Incarcerated Parents: An Action Plan for Federal
Policymakers.[1]
This plan reflects a bipartisan consensus among state and local
government officials responsible for supervising people sentenced to
jail, prison, or community supervision and those agencies and advocates
responsible for protecting and serving children and families of the
incarcerated.
The Federal Action plan was broadly written for Congress and federal
policymakers and includes recommendations for improved policy for
children of incarcerated parents. The plan is organized into the
following eight substantive areas that explain the unique challenges and
needs of children of incarcerated parents based on the latest research
findings and input from key stakeholders:
- Overview and research
- Responses to children during a parent's arrest
- Parent-child interactions within correctional systems
- Coordination across service systems
- Support for kinship caregivers
- Foster care and permanence
- Child support
- Benefits and income supports
The Justice Center released the Action Plan in October 2009, and has
begun to reach out to committees and individual members of Congress
working on related legislative vehicles or who have expressed interest
in the issues surrounding children with incarcerated parents. The
intended results of this work will help set the stage for more public
awareness around this issue and an increased potential for policy
influence.
At the state and local level, work has also continued to progress. A
few noteworthy examples include:
Encouraging State Departments of Correction to Collect Data on
Children with Incarcerated Parents.
Oregon, Washington and Rhode
Island serve as good models for steps taken by a state to better data
collection on incarcerated parents and their children. Cross System Collaboration: Creating Better Collaboration and
Communication among Systems Serving this Population.
The San
Francisco Children of Incarcerated Parents Partnership and the Arizona
Children of Incarcerated Parents Bill of Rights Project demonstrate
effective strategies for coordination between corrections, child
welfare, and human services agencies to help ensure that children
and families receive the support
they need. Foster Care: Providing Reasonable Reunification Services for
Incarcerated Parents and their Children.
New York State continues
to provide a good example for the diligent efforts they make to keep
incarcerated parents and their children connected through support and
services for reunification or other permanent placement. Additionally,
the Women's Foundation of California Children of Incarcerated Parents
Learning Cohort informed and shaped a bill with the goal of preventing
the breakup of families by increasing the chance that children will be
able to reunite with their mothers after release from prison. This bill,
AB 2070, authored by California Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, gives
social workers more discretion to extend the timeline before parental
rights are terminated in the case of a parent's incarceration, and
expands the reunification services available to families following
incarceration. It was signed by the Governor and chaptered into law on
September 28, 2008. The Role of Faith-based Institutions:
The role of
faith-based organizations in aiding prisoners, their children and
families is critical. As such, the Annie E. Casey Foundation has
developed a "Healing Communities" model, which encourages communities of
faith to minister to members of their own congregations who are affected
by crime and the criminal justice system. The Healing Communities model
seeks to engage congregations by drawing upon the belief systems and
unique strengths of the faith community—acceptance, compassion,
forgiveness, redemption, and restoration. A healing community provides
what programs and services generally cannot—"the transformation of
hearts and minds" and the building of relationships that support
people.[2]
While this model is not a program per se, much can be learned
from Michigan about the process of the adaptation and implementation of
the model at the state level. Cultivating Co-investors for Sustained Resources and Capacity
Building.
In 2008, Grantmakers for Children, Youth, and Families
(GCYF), with support from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Zellerbach
Family Foundation, the California Endowment, and the Women's Foundation
of California, implemented a major learning initiative on the issue of
children with incarcerated parents. The overall goal of the initiative
was to increase investments in grantmaking initiatives for children of
incarcerated parents. Over the course of the year, GCYF held three
learning events, developed an online resource library, identified and
supported foundations working on or interested in learning more about
the issue, and established an online learning community. This grant
influenced the field by building partnerships, reaching and engaging
grantmakers at the local level, and leveraging additional private
funds.
Page: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5
Next page
|
