Please update your browser

You're using a version of Internet Explorer that isn't supported by Questia.
To get a better experience, go to one of these sites and get the latest
version of your preferred browser:

Fostering Innovation through Title IV-E Waiver Demonstrations

By Testa, Mark | Policy & Practice, June 2012 | Go to article overview

Fostering Innovation through Title IV-E Waiver Demonstrations


Testa, Mark, Policy & Practice


How many times as a child welfare practitioner or administrator have you thought: I could do much better by this child if only I could use the Title IV-E dollars my state receives differently than to spend them solely on child placement administration and foster care maintenance? Now you have the opportunity to act on your inclinations and evaluate the impact.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Whether you want to offer evidence-based services that are not reimbursable under Title IV-E, such as drug-recovery coaches or parent-management training, or test promising practices that lack solid scientific proof of effectiveness, such as kinship navigator programs, the restoration of IV-E waiver authority by the Child and Family Services Improvement and Innovation Act (P.L. 21-118) once again gives states a powerful tool for testing innovative service-delivery strategies and contributing to the evidence base of what works to ensure the safety, permanency, and well-being of vulnerable children and their families.

Guidance from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on the new waiver program was not published when this article went to press, but there is sufficient similarity with the old program and enough details in the Federal Register (FR) to outline the key ingredients that go into a waiver application. Even though a letter of intent is not strictly required, it is good practice to identify the four components that the FR encourages Title IV-E agencies to describe in a letter: the target population, the intervention the agency proposes to implement, the comparison group, and the outcomes the agency expects to change.

Conveniently, these four components align closely with the four elements of a well-built PICO question that evaluators use to guide intervention research: Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome. For example, the subsidized guardianship demonstrations that Illinois, Tennessee, and Wisconsin conducted can be summed up as answering the following PICO question: Does the availability of guardianship assistance (I) for children who have been in foster care for a year or more and resided continuously with a related foster parent (P) increase overall permanency rates at no extra cost (0) compared to children in similar circumstances who receive permanency planning services as usual without the guardianship assistance option (C)? The affirmative answer that all three demonstrations gave to this question is generally credited with helping to pave the way for the creation of the kinship Guardianship Assistance Program (GAP) in 2008.

Permanency, Prevention, and Well-Being Outcomes

As is true with PICO questions, it is usually best to begin with the 0 when preparing a waiver application. States like Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, that have already turned the corner on caseload growth but face challenges finding permanent homes for children who enter foster care after age 12, may best improve outcomes by prioritizing permanency for older youth and promoting their successful transition to adulthood. States like Iowa, Nebraska, and Wyoming that register foster care placement and entry rates well above the U.S. average may best improve outcomes by preventing child abuse and neglect and re-entry into care. The federal statute identifies a third goal: increasing well-being and other positive outcomes for infants, children, and families in their homes and communities, including tribal communities.

When justifying the reasons for a waiver demonstration project, it is advisable to couple well-being outcomes with either permanency or prevention. This is because funding for any new services must come from the "savings" generated by holding costs in the intervention group below the cost-neutrality limit set by the control group. Improvements in well-being, such as educational success or emotional health, are vital but don't always translate directly into cost savings.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Fostering Innovation through Title IV-E Waiver Demonstrations
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.