The State must document its PIP's primary strategies as the broad approaches that address the key concerns from the CFSR and serve as a framework for the achievement of the PIP's goals and negotiated measures. These strategies should reflect the overarching reforms and continuing improvements that address key concerns from the CFSR Final Report. They may build on prior PIP activity, and should be integrated with the time frames of other State plans, such as the CFSP.
Wherever possible, the PIP strategies should be thematic in nature, perhaps integrating multiple outcomes and systemic factor items to address broad areas of concern. For example, a primary strategy of “Implement a Systems of Care Practice Approach” could affect multiple areas of concern linking to OSRI outcomes and systemic factor items, such as:
- Inconsistency of child safety services in in-home cases (Safety Outcome 2)
- Ineffectiveness in addressing needs and services of families and foster parents (Child and Family Well-Being Outcome 1, as well as Service Array and Resource Development)
- Inconsistency in involving children and families in case planning (Child and Family Well-Being Outcome 1)
- Inadequate staff training program for case practice skills (Staff and Provider Training)
Note that when multiple areas are addressed by a single strategy, the State should identify the outcome or systemic factor that is most directly affected by the strategy and should avoid linking the same outcomes or systemic factors to more than one key strategy.
When developing strategies that affect front-line practice, the State should be guided by the principles of family-centered practice, community-based services, individualizing services that address the unique needs of children and families, and strengthening parents’ capacity to protect and provide for their children. In some situations, a State may need to review and revise its policies and procedures to ensure a focus on these principles and that practice is consistent with their policies.