Report On Omarion Humphrey

STATE OF MICHIGAN
RICK SNYDER
GOVERNOR
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

DEPARTMENT OF CHILD WELFARE LICENSING
NICK LYON
DIRECTOR
August 17, 2015

Yvwania Richardson
Alternatives for Children & Families, Inc.
PO Box 190238
Burton, MI 48519
RE: License #: CB250200945

Investigation #: 2015C0221023
Dear Ms. Richardson:

Attached is the Special Investigation Report for the above referenced facility. Due to
the severity of the violations, disciplinary action against your license is recommended.
You will be notified in writing of the departments action and your options for resolution
of this matter.
Please review the enclosed documentation for accuracy and contact me with any
questions. In the event that I am not available and you need to speak to someone
immediately, please contact the local office at (248) 975-5053.
Please note that violations of any licensing rules are also violations of the MSA and your
contract.
Sincerely,
Alicia Wiggins, Licensing Consultant

MDHHS\Division of Child Welfare Licensing
4th Floor, Suite 4B
51111 Woodward Avenue
Pontiac, MI 48342
(248) 917-1048
enclosure
P.O. BOX 30664 LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909-8164

www.michigan.gov (517) 284-9700
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

DEPARTMENT OF CHILD WELFARE LICENSING
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
I. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
License #:
CB250200945
Investigation #:
2015C0221023
Complaint Receipt Date:
07/08/2015
Investigation Initiation Date:
07/08/2015
Report Due Date:
09/06/2015
Licensee Name:
Alternatives For Children & Families, Inc.
Licensee Address:
2065 South Center Road

Burton, MI 48519
Licensee Telephone #:
(810) 250-3820
Administrator:
Yvwania Richardson, Administrator
Licensee Designee:
(810) 250-3820
Name of Facility:
Facility Address:
2065 S. Center Rd
Burton, MI 48519
Facility Telephone #:
(810) 250-3820
Original Issuance Date:
03/01/1993
License Status:
REGULAR
Effective Date:
01/27/2015
Expiration Date:
01/26/2017
Capacity:
Unknown
Program Type:
CHILD PLACING AGENCY, PRIVATE
II.
ALLEGATION(S)
Alternatives for Children & Families placed Foster Child A in a

foster home that has had several infractions, many for lack of
supervision. They left an additional foster child in the home after
Foster Child A went missing.
The following information has not been entered in MiSACWIS
and/or has not been provided to Oakland Co. MDHHS:
Violation
Established?
Yes
Yes
Foster Child A
1. Dental exam
2. Placement Exception Request (PER) for Foster Parent A as
there were more than 6 children in the foster home.
3. Initial Service Plan (ISP) and Updated Service Plan (USP)
4. Updated school records
5. No face to face visits entered in MiSACWIS since April 2015
Foster Child B
1. Medical and dental exam
2. Family Team Meeting (FTM) for change of placement
3. ISP and USP
4. Relative licensing waiver
5. Change of placement documents
Foster Child C
3. FTM for change of placement
Foster Child D
2. Relative home study
3. Relative licensure referral or relative licensing waiver
4. Change of placement documents. MDHHS and GAL were not
notified of Foster Child Ds change of placement.
5. Social work contacts beginning on 03/18/2015
MDHHS and GAL were not notified of Foster Child As AWOLP
according to MDHHS AWOLP policy.
Additional Findings:
Yes
Yes
III.
METHODOLOGY
07/08/2015
Special Investigation Intake

2015C0221023
07/08/2015
Special Investigation Initiated - Telephone

Spoke with Oakland Co. MDHHS Supervisor, Justin Wrobel,
Oakland Co. MDHHS Foster Care Worker, Ebony Jeffries and
Oakland Co. MDHHS Foster Care Worker, Alisia Johnson.
07/10/2015
Inspection Completed On-site

Reviewed Foster Parent A's case file.
07/14/2015
Contact - Face to Face

Interviewed Alternatives for Children & Families' Director of
Clinical and Casework Services, Geneva Harvey. Reviewed
Foster Parent A, Foster Child A, Foster Child B, Foster Child C
and Foster Child Ds case files and documentation on MiSACWIS.
07/20/2015

Interviewed Kristen Nolen-Winfield, Alternatives for Children &
Families' Foster Care Worker, Laura Vyvyan, Alternatives for
Children & Families' Licensing Worker, Brad Dixon, Director of
Adoption & Placement Services, and Geneva Harvey, Director of
Clinical and Caseworker Services. Reviewed documentation on
MiSACWIS.
07/23/2015
Contact - Telephone call made

Interviewed Foster Parent B, Foster Parent C, Foster Parent D,
Foster Parent E and Foster Parent F.
07/29/2015
Contact - Telephone call received

Interviewed Foster Parent G.
08/05/2015

Reviewed licensing files for Foster Home A, Foster Home B,
Foster Home C, Foster Home D, Foster Home E and Foster Home
F.
08/14/2015
Exit Conference
ALLEGATION #1:
Alternatives for Children & Families placed Foster Child A in a foster home that has had
several infractions, many for lack of supervision. They left an additional foster child in
the home after Foster Child A went missing.
INVESTIGATION:
A review of the Interim Inspections and Renewal Inspections beginning in 2012 for
Alternatives for Children & Families revealed the following citations:
January 2012 Interim Inspection
R 400.12212 Personnel Records (3) (a)
R 400.12311 Placement Agreement (3) and (4)
R 400.12313 Reevaluation (6)
R 400.12314 License Recommendation (3)(b)(iii)
R 400.12315 Borrowed Home (1)(b), (c), (d), (f) and (g)
R 400.12316 Special Evaluation (2)(a), (b), (c), (4) and (5)
R 400.12403 Policy and Procedures (2) (p)
R 400.12404 Placement (5)
R 400.12409 Education Policy
R 400.12413 Medical and Dental Care Policy (1)(c)(ii) and (f)(i)
R 400.12418 Service Plans: Initial and Updated (2) and (3)
R 400.12419 Visitation (2)
R 400.12606 Agency Recommendation (3)
R 400.12707 Orientation (a),(b),(c),(d) and (e)
January 2013 Renewal Inspection
R 400.12306 Application Request (2)(a),(b),(c),(d),(e),(f),(g) and (i)
R 400.12313 Reevaluation (2) (b)
R 400.12314 License Recommendation (3)(b)(iii)
R 400.12404 Placement (5), (6)(a)(iii-vi), (6)(b), (6)(c), (6)(d) and (6)(g)
R 400.12405 Change of Placement (d)
R 400.12409 Education Policy
R 400.12413 Medical and Dental Care Policy (1)(c)(ii)
R 400.12418 Service Plans: Initial and Updated (1)(a)(b), (6)(a) and (6)(g)
R 400.12605 Adoptive Evaluation (3)(i),(v), (viii),(ix),(x) and (xv)
R 400.12606 Agency Recommendation (3)
MSA VI E Caseload Standards
MSA VII A Assessments and Service Plans
MSA VII B Supervisory Overnight of Assessments and Service Plans
MSA VII G Caseworker Contact and Visits
MSA VII G Worker-Parent Visits
DHHS Policy FOM 722-6 Foster Care-Developing the Service Plan
DHHS Policy FOM 722-6 Unannounced Home Visit

DHHS Policy FOM 722-8 Foster Care Initial Service Plan (Supervisory
Approval)
DHHS Policy FOM 722-8C Foster Care Parent Agency Treatment Plan &
Service Agreement
DHHS Policy FOM 722-9 Foster Care-Updated Service Plan (Supervisory
Approval)
DHHS Policy FOM 722-9 USP Updated
DHHS Policy ADM 210 Required Adoption Focus Activities
DHHS Policy ADM 300 Child Adoption Assessments
DHHS Policy ADM 330 Quarterly Adoption Progress Reports
DHHS Policy ADM 710 State Ward Tracking System and Registration on the
Michigan Adoption Resource Exchange
DHHS Policy ADM 950 Post Placement, Adoption Supervision and Finalization
Procedures
DHHS Policy ADM 980 Closing Documentation
February 2014 Interim Inspection

R 400.12214 Compliance with 1975 PA 238
R 400.12315 Borrowed home (1) (c),(f) and (g)
R 400.12418 Service plans; initial and updated (2) and (3)
R 400.12419 Visitation (2)
MSA VII.G.2 Caseworker Contacts and Visits
DHHS Policy FOM 722-6H Caseworker Contact with Child in Out-of-Home
Placement: First Two Months after Initial Placement or a Placement Move
DHHS Policy FOM 722-8 ISP Supervisory Approval
DHHS Policy FOM 722-8C PATP Signatures Development, Participation and
Negotiation of PATP Signatures
DHHS Policy FOM 722-9 USP Supervisory Approval
December 2014 Renewal Inspection
R 400.12310 Initial evaluation (2)
R 400.12316 Special evaluation (6)(a) and (b)
R 400.12317 Foster home record (2)(d) (iii)
R 400.12418 Service plans; initial and updated (1)(a) and (b)
MSA VII A 5 Assessments and Service Plans
MSA VII B Supervisory Oversight of Assessments and Service Plans
MSA VII D 1b Family Team Meetings
MSA VIII B 3 Medical Files
DHHS Policy FOM 722-3 Quarterly Assessments
DHHS Policy FOM 722-6H Caseworker Contact with Child in Out-of-Home
Placement: First Two Months after Initial Placement or a Placement Move
DHHS Policy FOM 722-8 ISP Supervisory Approval
5
DHHS Policy FOM 722-9 USP Supervisory Approval

DHS Policy FOM 801 Health Requirements
A review of the Special Investigations (SI) beginning in 2012 for Alternatives for
Children & Families revealed the following citations:
SI#2013C0420016 was received on 12/21/2012. The allegations were as

follows: (1) the agency failed to complete a timely DHS- 69 showing Child A and
Child Bs out of state address change, USP covering the quarterly period
05/19/2012-08/16/2012, or to submit the next USP due 11/2012; as well as,
failed to submit court reports for court hearing 07/13/2012 and 08/10/2012, (2)
the agency failed to request courtesy out-of-state supervision or a wellness child
check for Child A and Child B whose Guardianship was not ordered for until
09/26/2012, (3) it was also noted that the complaint included an allegation
pertaining to overpayments to the agency, after the childrens relatives home
was closed, yet that issue was not investigated as it was not rule related , and
reportedly repayment issues were being addressed. The agency received
citations for the following:
o R 400.12207 Staff responsibilities (3) (a). The agency did not complete a
court report for the childrens 07/13/2012 or 08/10/2012, court hearing;
and review of the court order for each hearing indicated the agency gave a
verbal report suggesting the court did not require/request a written court
report. However, the worker/agency did not appropriately indicate this
information to DHHS; and therein was/were not responsive in her duties to
work directly with DHHS.
o R 400.12418 Service plans, Initial and Updated (1) (b). The 05/19/201208/16/2012 USP stated 08/16/2012 as the completion date; however, the
agency worker, supervisor and director all indicated the USP signed by
the worker and supervisor on10/18/2012 was not completed on time.
o DHHS Policy FOM 913-4 Placement Resources: Child Placing Agency
Reporting Requirements. A DHS-69 documenting Child A and Child Bs
replacement to Arkansas was not completed and the foster care worker
could not recall when exactly DHHS was made aware of the placement
change. The change was indicated in the 05/19/2012- 08/16/2012 USP,
which was documented being submitted to DHHS on 10/18/2012.
Additionally, the agency did not complete a November 2012 USP and one
was due for the period 08/17/2012- 11/14/2012, in that the last USPs
08/16/2012 end date, and the 11/08/2012 date the agency submitted the
DHS-69 Action Summary closing the case was greater than 30 calendar
days. This stated USP remained outstanding. Furthermore, the agencys
case closing DHS-69 Action Summary was completed 11/05/2012 per the
workers signature date and submitted to DHHS 11/08/2012, more than
three business days of the childrens guardianship which was granted at
the 09/07/2012 court hearing.
o DHHS Policy FOM-722 Foster Care- Courtesy Supervision. A request to
DHHS for courtesy supervision of Child A and Child Bs placement in
Arkansas, pending their guardianship by their great grandmother, was not

made.
o MSA VII D Family Team Meeting. A family team meeting was not held
related to Child A and Child Bs relocation outof- state, and the case
termination.
SI#2013C0420024 was received on 03/07/2013. The allegations were as follows:
(1) the agency placed Child A in Illinois without prior Interstate approval. The agency
failed to seek courtesy supervision, and had no face to face contact or supervision
for the child from 12/23/2012 through 01/29/2013. (2) During the course of the
investigation, it was discovered the agency failed to complete an action summary
(DHS-69) related to Child As replacement, as the agency believed case transfer to
DHHS was within the required timeframe. The agency failed to conduct a
FTM prior to or after the childs replacement. The agency received citations for the
following:
o R 400.12403 Policy and procedures (1). The agency admitted it allowed the
grandparent to take the child for placement in Illinois, prior to Interstate
Compacts approval of the home/placement.
o DHHS Policy FOM 722-14. A request to DHHS for courtesy supervision of
Child A s placement with the maternal grandparents, in Illinois, for the period
December 23, 2012 to January 29, 2013 was not made.
o DHHS Policy FOM 913-4 Placement Resources: Child Placing Agency
Reporting Requirements. The agency did not provide advance notice to
DHHS of Child As replacement to Illinois. The DHS-69 documenting Child As
replacement to Illinois was completed 01/02/2013, more than three business
days after the childs 12/23/2012 placement with the grandparents.
o MSA VII D Family Team Meeting. A FTM was not held related to Child As
relocation outof-state/replacement.
SI#2013C0420048 was received on 08/26/2013. The allegations were as follows: (1)
On 8/25/2013, Child A (2 ) choked on a peanut butter sandwich and died. (2) During
the course of the investigation, it was discovered the agencys special evaluation report
related to Child As death, and three other special evaluation reports (dated
02/12/2013, 02/26/2013 and 09/02/2013) contained information related to Children
Protective Services (CPS) involvement. The special evaluation report related to Child
As death mentioned CPS several times and named the CPS worker. Two other special
evaluation reports reviewed during the investigation also mentioned CPS on more than
one occasion. (3) During the course of the investigation, it was discovered the agency
did not request an exception for Child As foster parents to have more than a total of six
children placed in the foster home, as mandated by DHHS policy. The agency received
citations for the following:
o 722.120 Investigation and examination of conditions, books, records, and
reports; visits regarding health or fire protection; records; report; forms;
confidentiality; disclosure of information; availability of confidential records.
[M.S.A. 25.358(20)] The agencys special evaluation related to Child As
death and two other special evaluations completed on Child As foster parents
in 2013 did not safeguard CPSs involvement.
o DHHS Policy FOM 722-3 Foster Care- Placement/Replacement. An exception
request (DHS- 399) for the foster family to have more than a total of six
children in the home was not requested or approved.
The agency failed to invite the Lawyer- Guardian Ad Litem (LGAL) to Youth As FTM
held 05/28/2013 or to hold a FTM after Youth A went AWOLP in July and August 2013.
(2)The agency failed to provide notice of Youth As AWOLPs to the LGAL or to file for
an AWOLP hearing with the court. (3) The agency failed to pursue Youth As goal of
independent living by obtaining him a supervised independent living stipend as ordered
by the court on 06/11/2013. (4) The agency failed to seek the Michigan Children
Institutes (MCI) assistance in approval of an alternative placement of Youth A, an MCI
ward, with his biological mother. (5) The agency closed Youth As case prior to
providing Youth A his clothing allowance. (6) Youth A has had four different workers
since May 2013. (7) During the source of the investigation, it was discovered Youth As
12/28/2012-02/22/2013 USP did not contain the youths or foster parents signature; and
that a subsequent USP was late. The agency received citations for the following:
o MSA VII D Family Team Meeting. Written nor advance notification of the May
28, 2013 FTM, nor indicated scheduled August 12, 2013 and August 15, 2013
FTMs was not provided to the LGAL nor did the FTM convene in absence of the
family, as dictated in the MSA requirement.
o DHHS Policy FOM 722-3 Foster Care Placement and Replacement. The agency
contacted DHHS related to the AWOLP and provided the childs known location.
Written notification to the court for an AWOLP hearing was not advised.
However, after receiving notification of the youths AWOLP in July and again in
August, the agency did not provide notification of the AWOLPs to the LGAL or
court within 24 hours as indicated by the policy.
o DHHS Policy FOM 722-8 C Foster Care- Parent Agency Treatment Plan &
Service Agreement. The 12/28/2012- 02/22/2013 service plan did not contain the
foster parents signature.
o MSA VII A Assessments and Service Plans. The 12/28/2012-02/22/2013 service
plan did not contain the youths signature.
o DHHS Policy FOM 722-6 Foster Care- Updated Service Plan. The supervisor
signed the 05/24/2013-08/21/2013 USP seven days late.
The agency failed to maintain various case file documentation as required by policy,
inclusive of a signed copy of a September 12, 2012 court report, Foster Care
Review Board (FCRB) Report regarding the agencys recommendation for Child As
replacement from his foster home; social work contacts of the agencys contacts with
the paternal uncle, and social work contacts of Child As visits with the paternal uncle;
and a copy of the paternal uncles guardianship petition and the courts denial order
pertaining to it. (2) The agency failed to complete a relative home study on Child As
paternal uncle prior to, recommending the uncle for placement of Child A, allowing Child
A unsupervised visits with the paternal uncle. (3) During the course of the investigation
it was discovered, the agency did not complete FTMs as required by MSA and policy.
Additionally, the agency did not conduct criminal history and central registry clearances
on Child As paternal uncles wife prior to allowing visitations between Child A and the
paternal uncle and his wife. The agency received citations for the following:
o DHHS Policy FOM 722-05 Foster Case- Case Record. The agency failed to
obtain or maintain a copy of service activity reporting: namely, a December 2013
FCRB hearing document and guardianship petitioning and denial documentation
related the childs paternal uncles pursuit of guardianship of the child. The
agency admitted, it did not request or obtain a copy of the FCRB document until
months after the said event; and after DHHS brought the matter to their
attention. The agency was not sure when the guardianship paper work was
received; though it was provided via DHHS just prior to or after this complaint.
o DHHS Policy FOM 722-06H Caseworker Contacts. The agency failed to
adequately document its or Child As ongoing contacts with the paternal uncle,
or the paternal uncles wife. The agency reported its worker conducted a home
visit with the paternal uncle and his wife on 10/29/2013 to assess the paternal
uncles home; and that the relative had a visit with Child A in Child As foster
home 10/31/2013; and thereafter visited Child A in the community; and that Child
A had at least two overnight visits with the paternal uncle in December 2013.
Also that the paternal uncle continued visitations with Child A until July 2014.
The 10/29/2013, 10/31/2013 or other specific dates of visits or contacts with the
paternal uncle, or between the paternal uncle and Child A were not documented,
on some type of visit sheet, or within the social work contacts of the service
plans.
o MSA VIII D 6(c) Foster & Adoption Recruitment, Retention & Support. The
agency scheduled placement of Child A with a paternal uncle and the uncles
wife for 12/13/2013, but it failed to complete a home study, or document that the
uncles home was safe and was an appropriate placement for Child A prior to
allowing Child A unsupervised visits with the paternal uncle. A home study on
this uncle and his wife was not documented until 07/01/2014.
o MSA VII D Family Team Meeting. A FTM was not documented to have occurred
when the agency decided to pursue the paternal uncle as a permanent
placement plan for Child A; or during the case service plan periods notably
07/20/2013- 10/08/2013; 10/09/2013- 01/06/2014, and 01/07/2014- 04/04/2014.
o DHHS Policy FOM 722-06 Criminal Record Check-Law Enforcement Information
Network( LEIN). The agency failed to obtain or request a criminal history
clearance on Child As paternal uncles wife, prior to allowing contact between
that person and Child A. The agency did not obtain a criminal history clearance
on the paternal uncles wife until 07/07/2014, though contacts between the child
and the paternal uncle reportedly commenced in October or November 2013;
and subsequently included unsupervised overnight visits in December 2013,
which would have included the paternal uncles wife.
o R 400.12207 Staff responsibilities (3) (a). The agency staff failed to obtain or
apprise DHHS of the need for a central registry clearance on Child As paternal
uncles wife, prior to allowing that person contact and unsupervised visits with
the child; or to keep DHHS apprised of the dates and outcome of the visits with
that person and Child As paternal uncle.
Foster Parent As case file was reviewed on 07/14/2015. Since 2012, the agency
completed six special evaluations on Foster Parent A. Foster Parent A was found to be
in non-compliance of licensing rules and provided with a corrective action plan (CAP) for
four of the special evaluations.
On 05/08/2012, the agency opened a special evaluation. The allegations were as
follows: (1) A 17 year old foster child was arrested for alleged sexual contact with
another youth in the home. (2) Foster Parent A takes a foster child to his biological
mothers home for parenting time. Foster Parent A was found to be in non-compliance
with R 400.9501 (2) (a) due to Foster Parent A being a mandated reporter and not
calling the allegations into Genesee Co. CPS. Foster Parent A was found to be in noncompliance with R400.9202 (e) due to Foster Parent As mother, who was the substitute
caregiver and the adult in the home responsible for supervision of the children,
indicating that she did not leave her bedroom to check on the children while they were in
another area of the house. The CAP consisted of Foster Parent A agreeing to contact
CPS immediately any time physical or sexual abuse is suspected or known to have
occurred in the foster home, provide direct supervision to all youth in the foster home
and attend training titled Rights, Roles and Responsibilities of foster parents.
On 08/25/2013, the agency opened a special evaluation. The allegation was that
Foster Parent A backhanded a foster child in the face and hurt his nose. No marks or
bruises were observed. The foster child stated Foster Parent A backhanded him
because his brother hit him and he hit his brother back. Foster Parent A was found to
be in non-compliance with R 400. 9201 (i) and R 400.9404 (1) and (3). The foster child
and his brother reported that Foster Parent A has used physical discipline on the foster
child. The foster child repeated the same exact story to his foster care worker and the
foster care workers supervisor, who both felt that he was telling the truth. The CAP
consisted of Foster Parent A agreeing to provide appropriate discipline according to the
agencys policy, which states that physical discipline cannot be used on any youth
residing in the foster home and attending training on behavioral management.
On 08/21/2014, the agency opened a special evaluation. The allegation was that a
foster child disclosed to Foster Parent A that two foster children in the home kissed. It
was alleged that the female foster child performed oral sex on the male foster child.
Foster Parent A was found to be in non-compliance with R 400.9501 (2) (a) due to
Foster Parent A being a mandated reporter and not calling the allegations into Genesee
Co. CPS. Foster Parent A was found to be in non-compliance with R 400.9202 (e) due
to Foster Parent As mother, who was the adult in the home who was responsible for
supervision, was sitting on the front porch while the children were playing in the back
yard. Foster Parent A was in the house cooking dinner. The CAP consisted of Foster
Parent A agreeing to contact CPS immediately any time physical or sexual abuse is
suspected or known to have occurred in the foster home, provide direct supervision to
10
all youth in the foster home and attend training titled Rights, Roles and Responsibilities
of foster parents.
On 12/19/2014, the agency opened a special evaluation. The allegation was that
Foster Parent A did not administer a foster childs prescription medication as ordered.
The prescribed medication was in the foster childs possession and not locked in a safe
place. Foster Parent A was found to be in non-compliance with R 400.9411 (3) due to
Foster Parent A admitting that she gave the foster child her medication to give to the
new foster parent when going on a weekend visitation with the new foster parent. Foster
Parent A was found to be in non-compliance with R 400.9411 (4) due to Foster Parent A
not giving the foster child her prescribed Risperdal for over a week as the medication
was missing and Foster Parent A did not report this to the case manager. The agency
developed a CAP for Foster Parent A consisting of Foster Parent A agreeing to keep all
prescribed and over the counter medication in a locked safe place, not allowing children
to keep medication in their possession and dispensing medication prescribed by a
physician to the foster child. This CAP was not signed by Foster Parent A.
Foster Parent As training log was reviewed. There was no documentation that provided
evidence that Foster Parent A had received training pertaining to caring for
children who have autism. Foster Parent A signed the agencys Foster Parent
Information Checklist form for Foster Child A on 02/27/2015. The form documented that
Foster Child A was non-verbal and he had autism.
On 07/20/2015, Laura Vyvyan, Alternatives for Children & Families' Licensing Worker,
was interviewed on-site. Ms. Vyvyan reported that she began her employment with
Alternatives for Children & Families on 03/18/2015. She reported that the only special
evaluation that she has been assigned to is the current one regarding Foster Child As
disappearance at the park. Ms. Vyvyan reported that she has not completed the special
evaluation regarding Foster Child A. She stated that when Foster Child A was placed
with Foster Parent A there were not more than 6 children in the home. However, Ms.
Vyvyan stated that in March 2015 Kristen Nolen-Winfield, Alternatives for Children &
Families' Foster Care Worker, completed a home visit with Foster Parent A and
observed that another child was living in the home. Ms. Nolen-Winfield then informed
Ms. Vyvyan that there was another child living in the home, which Foster Parent A had
received power of attorney for so that she could care for him. She stated that she had
received the power of attorney documentation from Foster Parent A approximately 6
weeks ago. Ms. Vyvyan stated that she did not open a special evaluation regarding
Foster Parent A not disclosing the household member change because she was waiting
for Foster Parent A to provide the documentation showing that she has power of
attorney of the child. Ms. Vyvyan reported that a PER was not requested once there
were more than 6 children in Foster Parent As home. Ms. Vyvyan indicated that to her
knowledge Foster Parent A has not had any training pertaining to caring for children
who have autism.
On 07/20/2015, Brad Dixon, Director of Adoption & Placement Services, was
interviewed on-site. Mr. Dixon reported that Foster Parent A did not have training
11
pertaining to caring for children who have autism. He reported that he reviewed Foster
Parent As case file including the special evaluations that have been completed on her.
He indicated that after reviewing the special evaluations Foster Parent As license
probably should have been changed to a provisional license. Mr. Dixon stated that he
could not explain why Foster Parent A continued to have a regular license after the
special evaluations were completed. He reported that when a foster parent is placed on
a provisional license the agency usually does not place children in the home because
the agency does not receive payment for the foster child. Mr. Dixon stated that when a
foster home is placed on a provisional license the issues in the foster home have to be
severe, which would cause the children to be removed from the home. He reported that
the issues being addressed in the special evaluations for Foster Parent A were not that
severe to remove the children from the foster home. Mr. Dixon reported that he was
made aware that Foster Parent A had power of attorney of Child D via the document
that was signed on 03/03/2015. He reported that a special evaluation was not opened
on Foster Parent A for not informing the agency of the change of her household
members. Mr. Dixon stated that Foster Parent A did not sign the CAP for the
12/19/2014 special evaluation. He stated that the licensing worker who completed the
special evaluation reported that she mailed the CAP to Foster Parent A, but never
received the signed copy back.
As a result of the significant licensing rule violations with Foster Parent A stemming
from the investigation of Allegation#1, further foster home licensing files were reviewed.
On 08/05/2015, six of fifty-nine foster home licensing files were randomly selected and
reviewed. The following information was found in the foster home licensing files:
Foster Home A
A biological parent complained that she smelled liquor on the breath of the
babysitter of the children while at the hospital on 08/26/2014. An incident report
was written on 09/03/2014 by the agency when they were made aware. A letter
was sent to the foster parent on 09/15/2014 summarizing a meeting with the
foster parent, (a date was not given for the meeting), acknowledging that the
foster parent was aware of the allegation that the babysitter smelled like alcohol
and that it had happened before. She gave the babysitter a drug/alcohol screen
which came back negative. The foster mother decided not to use the babysitter
again. The letter stated that the foster mother would be off work for 4-6 weeks
and the children would be enrolled in a local daycare center.
Foster Home B
The agency received a complaint on 04/14/2015. The investigation close date is
05/28/2015 and the report signature date is 06/01/2015. The CAP was signed by
the foster parent on 06/01/2015. Foster Home B was found to be in noncompliance with the following rules:
o R 400.9201 (j) (k) Foster home applicant/licensee qualifications. In the
agencys investigation, the foster mother initially lied about a retail fraud
charge. She reported she thought it was not on her record because she
did not do it, yet she was serving community service for it.
12
o R400.9301 (1) Maintenance. The agencys report cited broken glass on

the front lawn.
o R400.9304 (1) (a) and (2) Smoke detectors; carbon monoxide detectors.
The agencys report stated there was no carbon monoxide detector and
no batteries for the smoke detectors.
o R400.9306 (3) (b) and (d) Bedrooms. A foster child, who had been in the
home for a year, had no bedding for the entire time he was in the home.
o R400.9310 (2) Smoking. The foster parent cleaned away ashes during
the interview with the workers and asked her if they smelled smoke.
o R400.9413 (3) and (4) Substitute care. Upon arrival for the investigation,
the worker found the children alone with the foster parents 13 year old
relative providing substitute care.
o Rule 400.9414 (4) (f) Unusual incident notification. The foster mother
failed to report the retail fraud and license suspensions.
o R400.9415 (2) Hazardous materials. The foster mother did not have
medication stored securely.
Foster Home C
The relocation study for Foster Home C says that they have no pets. The
previous renewal reevaluation says that they have 2 dogs, a fish and 2 geckos.
The relocation reevaluation does not mention the changes in the number of pets.
In the narrative paragraphs of the income section of the reevaluation reports, it
says that the foster father in Foster Home C is employed at BRD construction
and has a net income of $2800.00 per month. However, the lists of income and
expenses all say that he is receiving this amount as unemployment. The 2012
renewal reevaluation says he is receiving unemployment.
The 2014 renewal reevaluation report did not have an assessment of training
needs of foster parents. They have children placed in their home. All of the
training these foster parents have had since licensure has been taken on-line,
has been from books and videos. The report says there is a mandatory 2 hour
training that all foster parents must take every 2 years on rights, role, and
responsibilities of foster parents. It was not documented that they had the
training.
The 2013 interim report has no assessment of training needs. The report just
says they received 10 hours of training and need 6 more hours. The report says
there is a mandatory 2 hour training that all foster parents must take every 2
years on rights, role, and responsibilities of foster parents. It was not
documented that they had the training.
13
The 2012 reevaluation report has no assessment of training hours. The report
says there is a mandatory 2 hour training that all foster parents must take every 2
years on rights, role, and responsibilities of foster parents. It was not
documented that they had the training.
The 2015 relocation study, 2014 renewal report, 2013 interim report all say they
are licensed for children 5-14 years. The 2012 renewal report says they are
licensed for children 2-10 years. The 2012 BCAL-3706 form says they are
licensed for children 2-10 years.
Foster Home D
The 2012 reevaluation report says the foster parents each competed 6 hours of
training. Four hours each was for watching the movie Blindside. The training
records in the file list no training received for 2012 at all. There is no supporting
documentation that indicates that any training was received for 2012, including
what is mentioned in the report.
The 2013 reevaluation and 2014 renewal reevaluation had no assessment of
training needs for the foster parents. It only says how many hours they got, how
many they need, and that they have to attend the mandatory training on rights,
role, and responsibilities of foster parents.
Foster Home E
The 2012, 2013 and 2014 reevaluation reports state that the foster parent needs
to complete the mandatory training on rights, role, and responsibilities of foster
parents.
Substitute caregiver did not receive a criminal history clearance and a central
registry clearance.
Foster Home F
The May 2012 renewal reevaluation indicated that on the day of the home visit
for the renewal the foster parent informed the licensing worker that her daughter
moved back into the home on 01/12/2012. A special evaluation was not opened
for the non-compliance of the licensing rule for not notifying the agency of the
change in household members.
Substitute caregiver did not receive a criminal history clearance and a central
registry clearance.
The training log for the foster parent documented the following trainings:
o Antoine Fisher movie on 05/17/2011
o I am Sam movie on 05/17/2011
o Losing Isaiah on 05/17/2011
o Antoine Fisher movie on 05/02/2012
o I am Sam movie on 05/02/2012
o Losing Isaiah on 05/02/2012
14
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12206
Staff qualifications.
(1) An agency shall require a staff member who has ongoing
contact with children or parents to be a person who is of good
character and emotionally stable and who has the ability,
experience, education, and training to perform the duties
assigned.
ANALYSIS:
Five special evaluations were reviewed and all demonstrate a

pattern of Brad Dixon, Alternatives for Children & Families
Director of Adoption & Placement Services, approving special
evaluations which have inappropriate licensing
recommendations based on the findings and continuing to
recommend regular licenses for foster parents when significant
violations have been cited and safety issues are present.
On 05/08/2012, the agency opened a special evaluation in
which Foster Parent A was found to be in non-compliance with
R 400.9501 (2) (a) due to not reporting alleged sexual abuse
allegations into Genesee Co. CPS. She was found to be in noncompliance with R400.9202 (e) due to lack of supervision by
Foster Parent As mother, who was the substitute caregiver and
the adult in the home responsible for supervision of the children.
Foster Parent A was given a CAP and it was recommended that
a regular license be continued. On 08/25/2013, the agency
opened a special evaluation in which Foster Parent A was found
to be in non-compliance with R 400. 9201 (i) and R 400.9404 (1)
and (3) due to using physical discipline on a foster child. Foster
Parent A was given a CAP and it was recommended that a
regular license be continued. On 08/21/2014, the agency
opened a special evaluation in which Foster Parent A was found
to be in non-compliance with R 400.9501 (2) (a) due to Foster
Parent A not reporting sexual abuse allegations into Genesee
Co. CPS. She was found to be in non-compliance with R
400.9202 (e) due to lack of supervision by Foster Parent As
mother, who was the adult in the home who was responsible for
supervision. Foster Parent A was given a CAP and it was
recommended that a regular license be continued. On
12/19/2014, the agency opened a special evaluation in which
Foster Parent A was found to be in non-compliance with R
400.9411 (3) due to Foster Parent A admitting that she gave a
foster child her medication to give to the new foster parent when
going on a weekend visitation with the new foster parent. Foster
Parent A was found to be in non-compliance with R 400.9411
(4) due to not administering the foster childs prescribed
15
Risperdal for over a week as the medication was missing and

Foster Parent A did not report this to the case manager. Foster
Parent A was given a CAP and a regular license was
recommended.
The agency completed a special evaluation on Foster Home B
on 05/28/2015. Foster Home B was found to be in noncompliance with the following rules:
R 400.9201 (j) (k) Foster home applicant/licensee
qualifications due to lying about a retail fraud charge.
R400.9301 (1) Maintenance due to the foster parent
having broken glass on the front lawn.
R400.9304 (1) (a) and (2) Smoke detectors; carbon
monoxide detectors due to the foster home not having a
carbon monoxide detector and having no batteries for the
smoke detectors.
R400.9306 (3) (b) and (d) Bedrooms due to a foster child,
who had been in the home for a year, having no bedding
for the entire time he was in the home.
R400.9310 (2) Smoking due to the foster parent cleaning
away ashes during the interview with the workers and
asking them if they smelled smoke.
R400.9413 (3) and (4) Substitute care. Upon arrival for
the investigation, the worker found the children alone with
the foster parents 13 year old relative providing
substitute care.
Rule 400.9414 (4) (f) Unusual incident notification due to
the foster mother failing to report the retail fraud and
drivers license suspension.
R400.9415 (2) Hazardous materials due to the foster
parent not having medication stored securely.
Foster Home B was provided with a CAP which was signed on
06/01/2015 and it was recommended that her regular license
status continue.
Each special evaluation had significant licensing rule violations.
However, the foster parents continued to have regular licenses
when in fact a recommendation should have been made to
either issue a provisional license or revocation of their foster
home license. The licensing recommendations that were made
demonstrated that there was no assessment of the foster
parents decision making skills when it comes to safely caring
for foster children.
CONCLUSION:
VIOLATION ESTABLISHED
16
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12303
Policy and procedures.
(1) An agency shall have and follow written policies and
procedures for assessing and certifying foster homes for
licensure. An agency may not have a policy related to certifying
homes that violates Section 102 of the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights
Act, 1976 PA 453, MCL 37.2102.
(2) Policies and procedures shall cover all of the following areas
and be on forms provided, and in a manner prescribed, by the
department:
(h) Foster parent/agency agreement.
(j) ) Behavior management.
(k) Religion.
(l) ) Communication.
(m) Personal possessions.
(n) Allowance and money.
(o) Clothing.
(p) Substitute care.
(q) ) Supervision.
(r) ) Hazardous materials.
(s) Unusual incidents.
(t) Emergency policy.
ANALYSIS:
At the 08/05/2015 on-site visit, the Chief Administrator was

asked to provide the agencys updated policy and procedures
manual due to there being new licensing rules which were
effective on 01/05/2015. The Chief Administrator indicated that
she was currently in the process of updating the agencys
policies and procedures to reflect the changes of the new rules.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12312
Foster parent training.
(5) An agency shall document all training received by each
foster parent.
17
ANALYSIS:
The reevaluation report for Foster Home D states that the foster
parents received four hours each for watching the movie
Blindside. The movie is not four hours long. The training
records in the file list no training received for 2012 at all. There
is no supporting documentation that indicates that any training
was received for 2012, including what is mentioned in the report.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12316
Foster parent training.
(3) The training specified in subrule (2)(a), and (b), of this rule
shall address all of the following areas:
(a) Characteristics and needs of children who may be placed
into the home.
18
ANALYSIS:
Foster Child A was placed in Foster Parent As home on

02/23/2015. Foster Parent As training log did not document that
Foster Parent A had received training pertaining to caring for
children who have autism. Both the licensing worker and
licensing supervisor acknowledged that Foster Parent A had not
received training on autism. Per the rule, Foster Parent A
should have been provided training that related to Foster Child
As needs. At the very least, Foster Parent A should have been
trained on how to handle issues dealing with Foster Child As
communication skills, physical safety and self-care.
Foster Home Es training completed in 2012 was the same
training they completed in 2011. The foster parent watched the
same movie in 2012 that they watched in 2011. The trainings
that foster parents complete should not include a repeat of a
movie they watched. There should be a variety of training that
addresses all of the following areas:
(a) Characteristics and needs of children who may be placed
into the home.
(b) Safe sleep practices for infants.
(c) Effective parenting.
(d) Behavior management, including de-escalation techniques.
(e) Importance of the foster childs family.
(f) ) Concurrent planning.
(g) ) Role of the agency.
(h) Emergency procedures, first aid, and fire safety.
(i) ) Preparation of the foster child for permanence
and independence.
(j) The role of the court and lawyer guardian ad litem in
permanency planning.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12319
Substitute care policy.
An agencys substitute care policy shall, at a minimum, contain
provisions for all of the following:
(a) Qualifications for substitute caregivers, consistent with the
requirements of 1973 PA 116 and child care licensing rules.
ANALYSIS:
CONCLUSION:
There were no criminal history clearances and central registry

clearances for the substitute caregivers for Foster Home E and
Foster Home F.
19
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12324
Reevaluation.
(2) The annual reevaluation shall include a determination and
assessment of all of the following:
(a) All changes to the factual information contained in the
initial evaluation and subsequent renewal evaluations.
ANALYSIS:
It appears that the reports for Foster Home C are not being
updated to reflect accurate information. The relocation study for
Foster Home C says that they have no pets. The previous
renewal reevaluation says that they have 2 dogs, a fish and 2
geckos. The relocation reevaluation does not mention the
changes in the number of pets. There was inconsistent
reporting of the foster parents income. In the narrative
paragraphs of the income section of the reevaluation reports, it
says that the foster father in Foster Home C is employed at BRD
construction and has a net income of $2800.00 per month.
However, the lists of income and expenses all say that he is
receiving this amount as unemployment. The 2012 renewal
reevaluation says he is receiving unemployment.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12324
Reevaluation.
(2) The annual reevaluation shall include a determination and
assessment of all of the following:
(c) Training needs of the family.
ANALYSIS:
The agency has not addressed the fact that for three years they
have required Foster Home C to complete 2 hours of training on
rights, role, and responsibilities of foster parents and Foster
Home C has not completed the training.
The agency has not addressed the fact that for two years they
have required Foster Home D to complete 2 hours of training on
rights, role and responsibilities of foster parents and Foster
Home D has not completed the training.
The agency has not addressed the fact that for three years they
have required Foster Home E to complete 2 hours of training on
rights, role and responsibilities of foster parents and Foster
Home E has not completed the training.
20
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12325
License recommendation.
(1) An agency shall recommend to the department the
appropriate licensing action consistent with facts contained in
the foster home evaluation and any special evaluations.
21
ANALYSIS:
Since 2012, the agency completed six special evaluations on

Foster Parent A. Foster Parent A was found to be in noncompliance of licensing rules and provided with CAPs for four of
the special evaluations. The 05/08/2012 special evaluation was
concerning allegations of inappropriate sexual contact among
children that were in the home due to Foster Parent As
substitute caregivers lack of supervision of the children. In
addition, Foster Parent A failed to report the allegations to CPS.
The 08/25/2013 special evaluation was concerning Foster
Parent A using physical discipline violating the agencys
discipline policy. The 08/21/2014 special evaluation was
concerning allegations of inappropriate sexual contact among
the children in the home due to Foster Parent As lack of
supervision as well as Foster Parent As substitute caregivers
lack of supervision. Again, Foster Parent A failed to report the
allegations to CPS.
The third special evaluation should have prompted the agency
to recommend that disciplinary action be issued to Foster Parent
A. The three special evaluations demonstrated Foster Parent
As substantial noncompliance of foster home licensing rules
which could have jeopardized the health, safety, and care of the
children placed in her home.
The fourth special evaluation, which occurred on12/19/2014,
further shows Foster Parent As continuous lack of judgment
and inappropriate decision making skills when caring for
A special evaluation for Foster Home B was completed on
06/01/2015. The agency failed to use the findings of this
investigation to make the correct recommendation, which should
have been disciplinary action of her foster home license.
Children were put at risk while placed with Foster Home B.
They were left with a 13 year old caregiver. The foster mother
was shop lifting with the foster children and the stolen item was
hidden under a diaper bag. Her drivers license was suspended,
yet she was still driving. A foster child went without proper
linens for a year. The foster parent demonstrated both willful and
substantial non-compliance of foster home licensing rules
which could have jeopardized the health, safety, and care of the
For Foster Home C, the age range on the BCAL-3706 form was
not changed until October 2014 to state that the foster home
was licensed to accept children between the ages of 2-14 years
22
old.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12325
License recommendation.
(3) Except for an original license, an agency shall recommend to
the department the issuance of a regular license or the
continuation of an active license only when all rules are in
compliance or both of the following conditions exist:
(b) A written corrective action plan has been developed. The
plan shall be in compliance with all of the following
requirements:
(iii) Be signed and dated by the foster parent and the
agency.
ANALYSIS:
A CAP was developed as a result of the 12/19/2014 special

evaluation for Foster Parent A. The CAP was not signed by
Foster Parent A. The agencys Director of Adoption and
Placement stated that the licensing worker, who completed the
special evaluation, reported that she mailed the CAP to Foster
Parent A, but never received the signed copy back.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12327
Special evaluation.
(1) An agency shall do all of the following when anyone in the
agency receives information that relates to possible
noncompliance with any foster home rule:
(a) Submit a special investigation record to the departments
licensing authority within 5 working days in the manner
prescribed by the department.
(b) Initiate a special evaluation of the foster home as soon as
is indicated, based on the information received, but not later
than 7 calendar days after receipt of the information.
(c) Conduct a thorough investigation including all necessary
collateral contacts.
(d) Notify all social service workers who have children placed
in the home that a special evaluation has been initiated.
(2) An agency shall inform foster parents of all of the following
before they are questioned or interviewed regarding a special
evaluation:
23
(a) That a special evaluation has been initiated.

(b) A clear description of the allegations.
(c) That the foster parents may involve a person of their choice
in any interviews with them involving the special evaluation if the
involvement does not impede the timely completion of the
evaluation.
(3) An agency shall complete a special evaluation within 45
calendar days after receipt of the information. If additional time
is required, then the agency shall inform the foster parent, in
writing, of the basis for the extension and the expected length of
the extension. The total time for the completion of the
investigation shall not exceed 90 calendar days without written
approval from the chief administrator or his or her designee.
(4) ) Before completion of the written report required by subrule

(6) of this rule, an agency shall provide the foster parent with a
verbal summary of the preliminary findings at the conclusion of
the evaluation.
(5) Within 15 days of the conclusion of the evaluation, an
agency shall complete a written report that includes all of the
following information:
(a) The date the information was received.
(b) Identification of the information source, unless anonymous
or confidential, as specified in the child protection law, 1975 PA
238, MCL 722.621 to 722.638.
(c) The allegations.
(d) Dates and places of contacts, names of persons
interviewed, and names of the interviewers. If children are
interviewed, their last names shall not be included in the report.
(e) Findings of fact, based upon the evaluation.
(f) ) Conclusions regarding licensing rules compliance
or noncompliance based on the findings of fact.
(g) ) Any change in the agencys decision regarding the
number, gender, age, race, ethnic background, and specific
characteristics of children who may be placed that is based
upon the documentation contained in the summary and
conclusions of the report.
(h) Recommendations regarding licensing action and any
required corrective action.
(6) An agency shall do all of the following:
(a) Provide the foster parent with a copy of the report
required by subrule (5) of this rule within 10 calendar days of its
24
completion.
(b) Inform the foster parent, in writing, that he or she has a
right to have his or her written response included as an
attachment to the report required by subrule (5) of this rule.
(c) Provide a copy of the report to any social services worker
that has children placed in the home.
(7) If any violations are cited and there is a signed corrective
action plan, all social service workers who have children placed
in the home shall be notified there is a corrective action plan and
what is required of the foster parent in that plan.
ANALYSIS:
In March 2015, the agencys licensing worker was made aware

that Foster Parent A had received power of attorney of a child
and that the child was living in the home. Foster Parent A was
in violation of foster home licensing rule 400.9502 Reporting
foster home changes (c) due to her not informing the agency of
the change of household composition. The agency failed to
open a special evaluation to address this non-compliance of the
foster home licensing rule.
A special evaluation should have been completed for Foster
Home A in September 2014 regarding the allegations that were
made. There is no known information about the other time or
times the babysitter was drinking. A special evaluation would
have addressed answered questions such as were the children
in danger while she was babysitting and was she driving the
children while intoxicated. The foster father is a cross country
truck driver and the foster mother works outside of the home as
a nurse. The home is licensed for six. The foster mother needs
a reliable substitute care giver. The agencys failure to look
further into this placed the children at risk.
The May 2012 renewal reevaluation for Foster Home E
indicated that on the day of the home visit for the renewal the
foster parent informed the licensing worker that her daughter
moved back into the home on 01/12/2012. A special evaluation
was not opened for the non-compliance of the licensing rule for
not notifying the agency of the change in household members.
CONCLUSION:
25
ALLEGATION#2:
The following information has not been entered in MiSACWIS and/or has not been
provided to Oakland Co. MDHHS:
Foster Child A
1. Dental exam
2. Placement Exception Request (PER) for Foster Parent A as there were more than 6
children in the foster home.
3. Initial Service Plan (ISP) and Updated Service Plan (USP)
Foster Child B
2. Family Team Meeting (FTM) for change of placement
3. ISP and USP
Foster Child C
7. ISP and USP
Foster Child D
2. Relative home study
3. Relative licensure referral or relative licensing waiver
4. Change of placement documents. MDHHS and GAL were not notified of Foster Child
Ds change of placement.
5. Social work contacts beginning on 03/18/2015
7. ISP
26
INVESTIGATION:
A review of Foster Child As agency case file and his case on MiSACWIS showed the
following:
Foster Child As body was found on 07/10/2015 in Lake Callis in Davisburg,
Michigan.
There was not a dental exam in the case file or in MiSACWIS.
A PER was not completed for Foster Parent A when there were more than 6
children in the home.
The ISP for reporting period 02/23/2015 to 03/24/2015 was completed on
07/10/2015. It should be noted that an email from Kristen Nolen-Winfield,
Alternatives for Children & Families' Foster Care Worker, to Alisia Johnson,
Oakland Co. DHHS PAFC Monitoring Worker, dated 05/13/2015 indicated that
the helpdesk ticket had been resolved, which allowed Ms. Nolen-Winfield to
complete the ISP.
The USP for report period 03/25/2015 to 06/22/2015 was in progress status in
MiSACWIS.
The case file contained Foster Child As IEPC dated 03/05/2015 from the school
he attended while placed in Foster Parent As home. MiSACWIS did not contain
any updated educational records.
A face to face visit with Foster Child A took place on 04/10/2015 and it was
entered in MiSACWIS on 07/06/2015. A face to face visit with Foster Child A took
place on 05/20/2015 and it was entered in MiSACWIS on 07/20/2015. A face to
face visit with Foster Child A took place on 06/10/2015 and it was entered in
MiSACWIS on 07/20/2015.
A review of Foster Child Bs agency case file and his case on MiSACWIS showed the
following:
Foster Child B was placed with relatives on 04/28/2015.
There were no medical or dental exam forms in the case file or in MiSACWIS.
There were no educational records in the case file or in MiSACWIS.
A FTM for Foster Child Bs change of placement to his relatives home is
documented in MiSACWIS having been completed on 04/23/2015. Ms. NolenWinfield and Foster Child Bs mother participated in the FTM. A DHS-1105,
Family Team Meeting Report, was not in the file nor was it uploaded in
MiSACWIS.
complete the ISP.
The USP for report period 03/25/2015 to 06/22/2015 was in progress status in
MiSACWIS.
A relative home study for Foster Child Bs relative placement was not in the file
nor was it uploaded in MiSACWIS.
27
The relative licensing waiver was signed by the relative and supervisor
on03/17/2015. The PAFC Director signed the waiver on 03/20/2015. The waiver
was not approved by the Child Welfare County Director.
The relative caregiver did not sign the DHS-972, Foster Home Licensing
Requirements for Relative Caregivers.
The DHS-30, Foster Parent Notice and the DHS-31, Foster Care Placement
Decision Notice were completed on 06/30/2015. These forms were not uploaded
in MiSACWIS.
A DHS-69 Foster Care/Juvenile Justice Action Summary to document the
change of placement to Foster Child Bs relative home was not in the case file
A face to face visit with Foster Child B took place on 04/28/2015 and it was
entered in MiSACWIS on 07/06/2015. A face to face visit with Foster Child B
took place on 05/20/2015 and was entered in MiSACWIS on 07/06/2015. A face
to face visit with Foster Child B in June was not entered in MiSACWIS.
A review of Foster Child Cs agency case file and his case on MiSACWIS showed the
following:
Foster Child C was placed with relatives on 04/28/2015.
There were no educational records in the case file or in MiSACWIS.
There were no medical or dental exam forms in the case file or in MiSACWIS.
A FTM for Foster Child Cs change of placement to his relatives home is
documented in MiSACWIS having been completed on 04/23/2015. Ms. NolenWinfield and Foster Child Cs mother participated in the FTM. A DHS-1105,
MiSACWIS.
A relative home study for Foster Child Cs relative placement was not in the file
The relative caregiver did not sign the DHS-972, Foster Home Licensing
Requirements for Relative Caregivers.
The relative licensing waiver form was signed by the relative and supervisor on
03/17/2015. The PAFC Director signed the waiver on 03/20/2015. The waiver
was not approved by the Child Welfare County Director.
in MiSACWIS.
change of placement to Foster Child Cs relative home was not in the case file
complete the ISP.
28
A face to face visit with Foster Child C took place on 04/28/2015 and was
entered in MiSACWIS on 07/06/2015. A face to face visit with Foster Child C
took place on 05/20/2015 and it was entered in MiSACWIS on 07/06/2015. A
face to face visit with Foster Child C took place on 06/10/2015 and it was entered
in MiSACWIS on 07/06/2015.
A review of Foster Child Ds agency case file and his case on MiSACWIS showed the
following:
A medical exam was completed for Foster Child D; however, there is no date on
the medical exam to verify when it was completed. The medical exam form is not
uploaded in MiSACWIS.
A dental exam was not completed for Foster Child D.
Foster Child D was placed with his relative on 06/12/2015. The home visit to the
relatives home was completed on 05/13/2015 by Ms. Vyvyan. The relative home
study for Foster Child Ds current relative placement was signed on 06/01/2015
by Ms. Vyvyan and was not signed by a supervisor. Brad Dixon, Director of
Adoption & Placement Services, was typed where the supervisors signature
should have been signed. The relative home study was entered in MiSACWIS
on 06/16/2015.
in MiSACWIS. Social work contacts did not document that MDHHS was notified
about the change of placement occurring before Foster Child D was placed with
his relative.
A court report dated 06/09/2015 indicated that a home study for Foster Child Ds
relative was completed and that the plan was for Foster Child D to be placed with
this relative on 06/12/2015 after the school year.
change of placement to Foster Child Ds relative home was not in the case file
A face to face visit with Foster Child D took place on 04/10/2015 and was
entered in MiSACWIS on 06/24/2015. A face to face visit with Foster Child D
took place on 05/20/2015 and it was entered in MiSACWIS on 06/24/2015. A
face to face visit with Foster Child D took place on 06/12/2015 and it was entered
in MiSACWIS on 06/24/2015.
A FTM for Foster Child Ds change of placement to his relatives home is
documented in MiSACWIS having been completed on 06/12/2015. Ms. NolenWinfield and Foster Child Ds mother participated in the FTM. A DHS-1105,
MiSACWIS.
The ISP was completed in MiSACWIS on 04/30/2015. The ISP has not been
The USP was due 06/22/2015 and it was completed 06/24/2015. The USP was
uploaded in MiSACWIS on 07/07/2015.
29
On 07/14/2015, Geneva Harvey, Alternatives for Children & Families' Director of Clinical
and Casework Services, was interviewed on-site. Ms. Harvey reported that the ISP for
Foster Child A and his siblings was completed late due to there being an issue with
MiSACWIS. She reported that Foster Child A did not receive a dental exam because
the dentist said that he was not equipped with appropriate staff to be able to deal with
his behaviors during the dental exam. Ms. Harvey reported that there was no
documentation of the dentist making this statement. She reported that Foster B was
taken to his medical appointment by Foster Parent F; however, there is no
documentation that the medical exam was completed. Ms. Harvey reported that the
relative home study for Foster B and Foster Cs placement was uploaded in MiSACWIS.
Ms. Harvey reported that at the time of Foster B and Foster Cs placement with
relatives, the relative stated that she did not want to be licensed. She reported that to
her knowledge the relative signed a relative licensing waiver.
On 07/20/2015, Kristen Nolen-Winfield, Alternatives for Children & Families' Foster Care
Worker, was interviewed on-site. Ms. Nolen-Winfield reported that she has been the
assigned worker for Foster Child A, Foster Child B, Foster Child C and Foster Child D
since they were placed with Alternatives for Children & Families in February 2015. She
reported that her face to face visits with the children have been entered in MiSACWIS.
Ms. Nolen-Winfield reported that when Foster Child A was placed in Foster Parent As
home there were four adopted children in the home in addition to Foster Child A and
Foster Child B. Once Foster Child B was placed with his relative, another child whom
Foster Parent A had power of attorney of moved into the home. Ms. Nolen-Winfield
reported that while Foster Child A was placed in Foster Parent As home there were no
safety or supervision issues. She stated that Foster Parent A learned Foster Child As
behaviors quickly. Foster Child A was having issues with sleeping at night and Foster
Parent A expressed her concerns with the psychiatrist, Dr. Ellen Johnson. Dr. Johnson
prescribed him medication and he was sleeping better. Ms. Nolen-Winfield stated that
Foster Child A did not have a dental exam and she could not provide an answer as to
why he did not have a dental exam completed. She reported that the ISP was
completed late due to a MiSACWIS issue. The USP was completed during the week of
July 13th; however, her supervisor returned it to her with corrections. Ms. NolenWinfield reported that information regarding educational updates was entered in social
work contacts. She reported that she did not receive report cards for the foster children.
She stated that she believed that Foster Child B had a medical and dental exam. Ms.
Nolen-Winfield reported that a FTM for Foster Child B and Foster Child Cs change of
placement occurred, however, she cannot locate the FTM paperwork. She stated that
DHHS was not notified about the change of placement for Foster Child B and Foster
Child C. Ms. Nolen-Winfield reported that at the 06/09/2015 court hearing she reported
to the court about the plan to move Foster Child D with his relative. Ms. Nolen-Winfield
stated that the LGAL was present at the hearing; however, she is unsure if the Oakland
Co. DHHS Foster Care Monitor was present at the court hearing. She stated that she
does not recall if the Oakland Co. DHHS Foster Care Monitor was notified about Foster
Child Ds change of placement. She stated that she does not know if there is a
procedure on how DHHS is supposed to be notified regarding change of placements.
She reported that the relative home study for Foster Child B and Foster Child Cs
30
current placement has been uploaded in MiSACWIS. She reported that the change of
placement forms were completed for Foster Child B and Foster Child C. Ms. NolenWinfield stated that Foster Child B and Foster Child Cs current relative placement did
not sign a relative licensing waiver and they were not referred for licensure.
On 07/20/2015, Brad Dixon, Director of Adoption & Placement Services, was
interviewed on-site. Mr. Dixon reviewed the placements for Foster Parent A with this
Licensing Consultant, which are as follows:
Foster Child E was placed in the home from 01/06/2015 to 05/14/2015.
Foster Child A was placed in the home from 02/23/2015 to 07/04/2015.
Foster Child B was placed in the home from 02/23/2015 to 04/28/2015.
Foster Child F was placed in the home from 05/28/2015 to 07/06/2015.
Foster Parent As three adopted children lived in the home as well as the child whom
she had power of attorney of beginning in 03/03/2015. Mr. Dixon agreed that there was
a period of time where there were more than six children in Foster Parent As home and
a PER should have been requested.
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12413
Medical and dental care policy.
(1) An agency's medical and dental care policy shall, at a
minimum, include all of the following:
(c) A physical examination for each child as follows, unless a
greater frequency is medically indicated:
(i) ) For a child under 2 years of age, a physical
examination shall have been completed within 3 months before
being placed in foster care or a new physical examination shall
be completed within 30 calendar days after being placed in
foster care.
(ii) For a child 2 years of age or older, a physical
examination shall have been completed within 12 months before
placement or a new physical examination shall be completed
within 30 calendar days after placement.
(iii) ysical examination every 14 months.
(f) The provision of a dental examination and any treatment
required for each child who is 4 years of age and older,
including both of the following:
(i) ) A dental examination within 12 months before
placement or a new dental examination shall be completed not
more than 90 calendar days after placement.
(ii) A dental reexamination shall be obtained at least every
18 months, unless a greater frequency is indicated.
31
ANALYSIS:
Foster Child A did not receive a dental exam within 90 calendar

days after placement. Foster Child B did not receive a medical
exam within 30 calendar days after being placed in foster care
and he did not receive a dental exam within 90 calendar days
after placement. Foster Child C did not receive a medical exam
within 30 calendar days after being placed in foster care and he
did not receive a dental exam within 90 calendar days after
placement. A medical exam was completed for Foster Child D;
however, there is no date on the medical exam to verify when it
was completed. The medical exam form was not uploaded in
MiSACWIS. Foster Child D did not have a dental exam.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
MSA X B 3
Placement Limitations.
DHS shall make placement decisions pursuant to DHS
placement selection criteria. Limitations on Number of
Children in Foster Home: No child shall be placed in a foster
home if that placement will result in more than three foster
children in that foster home, or a total of six children, including
the foster familys birth and/or adopted children. No placement
shall result in more than three children under the age of three
residing in a foster home. Exceptions to these limitations may be
made, on an individual basis, documented in the case file, when
in the best interest of the child(ren) being placed, as follows: a.
In a Designated County, by the county Child Welfare Director;
b. In any other county, by the County Director.
ANALYSIS:
After reviewing Foster Parent As placement list and the

interview with Brad Dixon, Director of Adoption & Placement
Services, it was confirmed that there was a period of time where
there were more than six children in Foster Parent As home. A
PER for Foster Parent A having more than six total children in
her home should have been requested.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12418
Development of service plans.
(2) An agency shall complete written service plans for each child
and parent or parents, as follows:
(a) Within 30 calendar days from removal from the home.
(b) Within 120 calendar days after the initial removal and at
32
least once every 90 calendar days thereafter.

ANALYSIS:
The ISP for Foster Child A, Foster Child B and Foster Child C
was not completed within 30 calendar days from removal from
the home. Kristin Nolen-Winfield, Alternatives for Children &
Families' Foster Care Worker, reported that there was an issue
with MiSACWIS, which prevented her from completing the ISP
on time. An email from Ms. Nolen-Winfield to Alisia Johnson,
Oakland Co. DHHS PAFC Monitoring Worker, dated 05/13/2015
indicated that the helpdesk ticket had been resolved, which
allowed Ms. Nolen-Winfield to complete the ISP. The ISP was
completed on 07/10/2015, which is 58 days after the MiSACWIS
issue was resolved. At the time of the interview with Ms. NolenWinfield, the USP for Foster Child A, Foster Child B and Foster
Child C was pending approval as Ms. Nolen-Winfield needed to
make corrections that her supervisor gave her.
The ISP for Foster Child D was not completed within 30
calendar days from removal from the home. The ISP was due
on 03/24/2015 and it was completed on 04/30/2015. At the time
of the interview with Ms. Nolen-Winfield, the ISP had not been
entered in MiSACWIS. The USP for Foster Child was not
completed within 120 calendar days after the initial removal.
The USP was due on 06/22/2015 and it was completed on
06/24/2015.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
Educational Services: Updated Educational Information.
DHHS Policy
FOM 723
Updated school information is required in all case service plans.
The narrative must reflect the childs current academic
achievements and challenges. All case service plans must
document or address the following items:
Name of current school and grade.
A reassessment of the childs educational needs and

strengths documented each report period in the Child
Assessment of Needs and Strengths.
Special education information, if applicable.
Childs current academic performance and behaviors in

school.
Description of provided services from school, parent,

foster parent/caregiver and/or others to meet the childs
33
educational needs.
Document the childs full-time elementary or secondary

school attendance with a statement that the child is a full-time
student, has completed secondary education or is incapable of
attending school on a full-time basis due to the childs medical
condition.
ANALYSIS:
There was no updated school information for Foster Child A,

Foster Child B, Foster Child C and Foster Child D in the case
files or in MiSACWIS.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
DHHS Policy
Caseworker Contacts: Timely Entry of Caseworker
FOM 722-06H
Contacts and Caseworker Contact with Child in Out-ofHome Placement: First Two Months after Initial Placement
or a Placement Move.
All caseworker contacts must be entered in MiSACWIS; this
includes attempted contacts and missed appointments, and all
pertinent information obtained must be summarized and
included in the appropriate section of the case service plan.
All face-to-face contacts must be entered in MiSACWIS, within
five business days of the contact. This includes the following:
Any face-to-face contacts with children, parents, or

caregivers made by any of the following:
Foster care worker.
CPS worker.
Adoption worker.
Permanency resource monitors.
Parent/child face-to-face contacts.
Sibling/child face-to-face contacts.

All other social work contacts must be entered prior to the report
period end date on the applicable case service plan.
The caseworker must have at least two face-to-face contacts
per month with the child for the first two months following an
initial placement or a placement move. The first face-to-face
contact with the child must take place within five business days
from the date the case is assigned to the caseworker or within
five business days of the date of the placement move. At least
one contact each month must take place at the childs
placement location. Each contact must include a private meeting
between the child and the caseworker.
34
ANALYSIS:
The face-to-face visits for Foster Child A, Foster Child B, Foster

Child C and Foster Child D were entered in MiSACWIS more
than five business days of the contact occurring. A face-to-face
visit with Foster Child B in June 2015 was not entered in
MiSACWIS.
The foster care worker did not complete at least two face-to-face
contacts per month with Foster Child B, Foster Child C and
Foster Child D for the first two months following there placement
move with relatives.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
MSA VII D 1b
Family Team Meetings.
The following events shall trigger FTM for out of home cases:
Case service plan development
permanency goal changes
placement preservation/disruption
permanency planning at six months in care
annual transition planning for youth every six months

from age 16 until case closure
90 day discharge planning for youth
Case closure
ANALYSIS:
A FTM for Foster Child B and Foster Child Cs change of

placement to their relatives home is documented in MiSACWIS
having been completed on 04/23/2015. However, a DHS-1105,
Family Team Meeting Report, was not in the file nor was it
uploaded in MiSACWIS. A FTM for Foster Child Ds change of
placement to his relatives home is documented in MiSACWIS
having been completed on 06/12/2015. However, a DHS-1105,
Family Team Meeting Report, was not in the file nor was it
There was no documentation of FTMs being completed for case
service plan development for any of the foster care cases.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
DHHS Policy
Relative Engagement and Placement: Placement with
FOM 722-03B
Relatives & Relative Licensure.
The DHS-3130A, Relative Placement Home Study, is used to
35
complete the required home assessment for children placed

with unlicensed relative caregivers. The DHS-3130A, Relative
Placement Home Study, must be completed within the time
frames described below.
For initial placements, within 30 calendar days of the

childs placement in the relative home.
For placement changes, prior to placement in the relative

home.
For all other requests, within 60 days of the written

request for consideration.
Anytime a placement is made, the caseworker must discuss
licensure with the caregiver. The discussion of licensure must
include completion of the DHS-972, Foster Home Licensing
Requirements for Relative Caregivers. The caregiver is required
to sign the DHS-972, and indicate if they are interested in
pursuing or wish to waive licensure. For placement moves, the
caseworker must have the caregiver sign the DHS-972, Foster
Home Licensing Requirements for Relative Caregivers, prior to
placement.
To request a waiver, the assigned caseworker must complete
the DHS-875, Relative Caregiver Waiver of Licensure, with the
relative. The caseworker must scan the DHS-875, Relative
Caregiver Waiver of Licensure, into MiSACWIS. The
caseworker must send it and the approved DHS-3130A,
Relative Home Assessment, through the electronic approval
process in MiSACWIS. The waiver must receive final
approval/denial within 30 calendar days of the request date.
Note: The request date is the date the relative signs the DHS875, Relative Caregiver Waiver of Licensure.
Approval Path for Placement Agency Foster Care Provider:
The PAFC caseworker must forward the DHS-875 and DHS3130A, to the PAFC supervisor for approval.
If approved, the PAFC supervisor must forward the forms to the
PAFC director for approval.
If approved, the forms must be forwarded to one of the following
DHS directors for final approval:
In a designated county, the child welfare director.
In any other county, the county director.

Note: The waiver must be scanned into MiSACWIS and signed
by the relative annually; see Annual Review in this item.
ANALYSIS:
A relative home study for Foster Child B and Foster Child Cs

relative placement was not in the file nor was it uploaded in
36
MiSACWIS. Ms. Nolen-Winfield reported that the relative home

study had been completed; however, the actual form could not
be located. The relative home study for Foster Child D was
completed on 05/13/2015 by Ms. Vyvyan, Alternatives for
Children & Families licensing worker. The relative home study
for Foster Child Ds current relative placement was signed on
06/01/2015 by Ms. Vyvyan and was not signed by a supervisor.
Brad Dixon, Director of Adoption & Placement Services, was
typed where the supervisors signature should have been
signed. The relative home study was entered in MiSACWIS on
06/16/2015.
The relative caregivers for Foster Child B, Foster Child C and
Foster Child D did not sign the DHS-972, Foster Home
Licensing Requirements for Relative Caregivers form.
The DHS-875, Relative Caregiver Waiver of Licensure form for
the relative placement for Foster Child B and Foster Child C was
signed by the relative caregiver and agencys foster care
supervisor on 03/17/2015. The agencys Director signed the
waiver form on 03/20/2015. However, the waiver was not
approved by Oakland Co. Child Welfare Director.
CONCLUSION:
APPLICABLE RULE
DHHS Policy
Placement Selection and Standards: Foster Care Placement
FOM 722-03
Decision Notice & Placement Change.
MCL 722.954a, requires the supervising agency to make a

placement decision and document in writing the reason for the
decision within 90 days of the child's removal from his or her
home.
Child Placing Agency Rule 400.12405 requires that the
caregiver be notified of the intent to move the child 14 days prior
to the intended date of the move unless the childs health and
safety is jeopardized. The DHS-30, Foster Parent Notice, must
be used to notify the caregiver and the Foster Care Review
Board (FCRB) of the intent to move the child.
The caseworker must make the placement decision and
document the reason for the decision on the DHS-31, Foster
Care Placement Decision Notice.
The DHS-31, Foster Care Placement Decision Notice, must be
37
sent to all of the following:
Child's attorney, guardian, and/or guardian ad litem

(LGAL).
The prosecutor.
Mother.
Father.
The attorney(s) for the child's mother and father.
Each relative who expresses an interest in caring for the

child.
Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA).
The child if the child is old enough to be able to express

an opinion regarding placement.
The DHS-69, Foster Care/Juvenile Justice Action Summary,
must be completed prior to any placement change and must
include:
Reasons for the placement change and why the child

was not returned to the parent(s) or placed with siblings or
suitable relative.
Supervisory approval before the placement change,

unless the childs health and safety is jeopardized.
The efforts made by the caseworker to contact

appropriate relative family members.
The evaluation of the appropriateness of continued outof-home placement.
Placement change preparation appropriate to the child's

capacity to understand which includes an explanation as to why
the change is necessary; see Placement Preparation in this
item.
Notification of the placement change to the parents if

appropriate.
Notification to the DHS local office, if a private agency is

supervising the case.
Disposition and documentation of any CPS investigation

in the case service plan, if appropriate.
Documentation that the caregiver was notified of the

placement change at least 14 calendar days prior to the move
and that he/she was informed of his/her ability to appeal the
move to the FCRB. If prior notice was not given, document the
reasons why.
Information about the child, including case service plans,

shared with the new provider. See FOM 722-04, Release of
Information, for all required information that must be given to the
new caregiver.
If the placement change is an emergency change of placement,
the DHS-69, Foster Care/Juvenile Justice Action Summary,
38
must be completed within three business days of the change in

placement.
ANALYSIS:
For Foster Child B and Foster Child C, the DHS-30, Foster

Parent Notice and the DHS-31, Foster Care Placement Decision
Notice was completed on 06/30/2015, after the placement
occurred. These forms were not uploaded in MiSACWIS. For
Foster Child D, the DHS-30, Foster Parent Notice and the DHS31, Foster Care Placement Decision Notice was completed on
06/12/2015. These forms were not uploaded in MiSACWIS.
A DHS-69 Foster Care/Juvenile Justice Action Summary to
document the change of placement for Foster Child B, Foster
Child C and Foster Child D to their relatives homes was not in
the case file nor was it uploaded in MiSACWIS.
Social work contacts did not document that Oakland Co.
MDHHS was notified about the change of placement occurring
before Foster Child D was placed with his relative. A court
report dated 06/09/2015 indicated that a home study for Foster
Child Ds relative was completed and that the plan was for
Foster Child D to be placed with this relative on 06/12/2015 after
the school year. Ms. Nolen-Winfield stated that the LGAL was
present at the hearing; however, she is unsure if the Oakland
Co. DHHS Foster Care Monitor was present at the court
hearing. She stated that she does not recall if the Oakland Co.
DHHS Foster Care Monitor was notified about Foster Child Ds
change of placement.
CONCLUSION:
ALLEGATION#3:
MDHHS and GAL were not notified of Foster Child As AWOLP according to MDHHS
AWOLP policy.
INVESTIGATION:
A review of the social work contacts in MiSACWIS for Foster Child As AWOLP status
revealed the following:
On 07/04/2015 at 7:32 p.m. Geneva Harvey, Alternatives for Children & Families'
Director of Clinical and Casework Services, received a text message from Foster
Parent A requesting a return call due to her having an emergency.
On 07/04/2015 at 7:57 p.m. Ms. Harvey called Foster Parent A but had to leave a
voicemail message.
39
On 07/04/2015 at 8:05 p.m. Ms. Harvey spoke with Foster Parent A regarding
Foster Child A being missing.
On 07/04/2015 at 8:20 p.m. Ms. Harvey made several attempts to contact Foster
Child As birth parents by telephone.
On 07/04/2015 at 8:30 p.m. Ms. Harvey contacted CPS regarding Foster Child A
being missing.
On 07/04/2015 at 9:43 p.m. Ms. Harvey spoke with Foster Child As birth father
regarding him being missing.
On 07/04/2015 at 11:59 p.m. Ms. Harvey and Foster Child As birth parents
spoke with law enforcement who had been at the park searching for Foster Child
A.
On 07/05/2015 at 4:26 p.m. Ms. Harvey left voicemail messages for Oakland Co.
DHHS Supervisor, Justin Wrobel and Oakland Co. DHHS Section Manager,
Deborah Frye, regarding Foster Child A being missing.
On 07/06/2015 at 09:04 a.m. Ebony Jeffries, Oakland Co. DHHS Foster Care
Worker, called Ms. Harvey regarding Foster Child A being missing.
On 07/06/2015 at 2:43 p.m. Ms. Jeffries called Ms. Harvey regarding the
emergency court hearing for 07/07/2015.
APPLICABLE RULE
Absent Without Legal Permission (AWOLP)
DHHS Policy
FOM 722-03A
Foster parents, relative/unrelated caregivers, parents, and/or
residential facility staff must immediately notify law enforcement
agencies (state police, local police, or the sheriffs department)
and the supervising agency when a ward under their care fails
to return at the expected time or leaves a home without
permission.
Note: The supervising agency must establish procedures to
implement this policy during non-working hours. The assigned
caseworker must be notified the next business day.
Immediately, the supervising agency must file a missing person
report with the local law enforcement agency.
PAFC providers must immediately notify the DHS monitoring
worker and document the notification in social work contacts.
Within 24 hours of the childs absence, the supervising agency
must notify:
The court of jurisdiction.
The parents, if appropriate.
Lawyer-guardian ad litem (LGAL).
40
ANALYSIS:
The social work contacts documented that the agency contacted

CPS and the birth parents according to the policy. The agency
left a voicemail for the Oakland Co. DHHS Foster Care
Monitors Supervisor and the Oakland Co. DHHS Foster Care
Section Manager. Ms. Harvey spoke with Ms. Jeffries, the
Oakland Co. DHHS Foster Care Monitor, on the next business
day due to Ms. Jeffries contacting her. Ms. Harvey was in
contact with law enforcement the night Foster Child A went
missing. There were no social work contacts regarding the
agency notifying the court of jurisdiction and the LGAL regarding
Foster Child As disappearance.
CONCLUSION:
ADDITIONAL FINDINGS:
ALLEGATION#4:
During the course of the investigation, it was alleged that a former foster child, who was
placed in Foster Parent As home, was out walking in the middle of the night on
07/03/2015. The foster child went to Foster Parent As home and stayed there for a
period of time. He left Foster Parent As home when she was sleeping. Foster Parent
A contacted Geneva Harvey, Alternatives for Children & Families' Director of Clinical
and Casework Services. Ms. Harvey told Foster Parent A that CPS did not have to be
notified because the foster child had been returned to his mothers care.
INVESTIGATION:
On 07/20/2015, Ms. Harvey was interviewed on-site. Ms. Harvey reported that on
07/04/2015 at 12:33 p.m. Foster Parent A called her and asked her if the former foster
child was back in care. Ms. Harvey told Foster Parent A not to my knowledge. He is
not placed with their agency. Ms. Harvey reported that Foster Parent A then called her
back on 07/04/2015 at 1:03 p.m. and said that on 07/03/2015 the former foster child
came to her house and when she woke up at 4:00 a.m. to check on the children, he and
his friend were sleeping in one of the bedrooms. Foster Parent A stated that she went
back to sleep and when she woke back up to cook breakfast she had noticed that he
had left her home. She asked the children in the home where he went and one of the
children said that he left because Foster Parent A said that he could not go to the beach
with them. Foster Parent A told Ms. Harvey that she called and texted the former foster
childs mother but she did not call her back. Foster Parent A called the former foster
child on his cell phone and asked him why he left. He told Foster Parent A that he left
because he could not go to the beach with them. Foster Parent A told him that he could
go if she spoke with an adult. The former foster child put someone on the phone that
sounded like another child but was pretending to be an adult. Foster Parent A told the
former foster child that she needed to speak with an adult but he said that his
grandfather was sleep. Ms. Harvey reported that Foster Parent A never asked her if
41
she could contact CPS regarding him staying at her home. Ms. Harvey stated that she
did not notify CPS or anyone else regarding the matter. She reported that the former
foster child is 11 years old and his foster care case was closed.
A review of the former foster childs case in MiSACWIS was completed. The former
foster child is 11 years old. He was returned to his mothers care and his case was
closed on 06/08/2015. One of the reasons he was brought into foster care was due to
lack of supervision.
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12214
Compliance with 1975 PA 238.
An agency shall develop a written plan and implement the plan
to assure compliance with 1975 PA 238, MCL 722.621, and
known as the child protection law.
ANALYSIS:
Ms. Harvey reported that Foster Parent A contacted her

regarding the former foster child sleeping at her house;
however, she reported that Foster Parent A did not ask if she
should contact CPS. Ms. Harvey stated that she did not contact
CPS or anyone else such as law enforcement regarding the
matter.
Ms. Harvey should have contacted CPS to report the allegations
due to the child being a former foster child, Foster Parent A
waking up to find him sleeping in her home, the foster care case
recently being closed and one of the reasons he entered foster
care was due to lack of supervision.
CONCLUSION:
ALLEGATION#5:
During the course of the investigation, it was alleged that Alternatives for Children &
Families workers are completing drive-by visits with foster children and are
documenting them as actual visits.
It should be noted that the following allegations were not investigated as they are not
possible rule/MSA/DHHS policy or contract violation, or difficult to prove without
additional information:
Mishandling of funds by CEO-lack of work ethic

Salary in justifications
Misuse/abuse of Christmas gifts
Falsification of training hours for staff
Abuse of vacation pay/time-certain staff allowed to sell back hours
42
INVESTIGATION:
Six of fifty-nine foster parents who are licensed through Alternatives for Children &
Families were randomly selected and interviewed.
On 07/23/2015, Foster Parent B was interviewed via telephone. Foster Parent B
reported that her adoption worker visits every month. She reported that there have
been no issues with the agency not visiting the foster children in her home.
On 07/23/2015, Foster Parent C was interviewed via telephone. Foster Parent C
reported that the adoption worker visits the home every month. She reported no issues
with the agency.
On 07/23/2015, Foster Parent D was interviewed via telephone. Foster Parent D stated
that the foster care worker visits her home every month and some visits are
unannounced. She stated that the foster care worker speaks with her regarding issues
she may have and talks with the children. Foster Parent D reported no issues with the
agency.
On 07/23/2015, Foster Parent E was interviewed via telephone. Foster Parent E
reported that the foster care worker visits every month. She stated that she asks her
questions about the children and she answers Foster Parent Es questions. Foster
Parent E reported that she lives over 60 miles from the agency and if Foster Parent E is
not home, then the worker will not leave the area until the children have been seen.
On 07/23/2015, Foster Parent F was interviewed via telephone. Foster Parent F stated
that the foster care worker visits his home and the children every month. He reported
no issues with the agency.
On 07/29/2015, Foster Parent G was interviewed via telephone. Foster Parent G stated
that the foster care worker visits her home and the children every month. She reported
that she does not have any issues with the agency.
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.12421
Visitation and parenting time.
An agency shall have a policy regarding visitation and parenting
time that contains, at a minimum, all of the following:
(b) An agency social service worker shall visit the foster child
and the foster parent in the foster parents home at least once
every month.
43
IV.
ANALYSIS:
Six of fifty-nine foster parents who are licensed through

Alternatives for Children & Families were randomly selected and
interviewed regarding home visits. All of the foster parents
reported that the worker visits the home and children every
month. The foster parents reported no issues with the agency.
CONCLUSION:
VIOLATION NOT ESTABLISHED
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the agencys continuous pattern of failing to recommend appropriate
licensing recommendations for special evaluations that were reviewed during the
current special investigation after the findings showed substantial non-compliance of
foster home licensing, the agencys failure to provide foster parents with adequate
training on how to care for children who will or have been placed in their home, and
the violations regarding Foster Home A, Foster Home B, Foster Home C, Foster
Home D and Foster Home E, revocation of the agencys license is being
recommended.
08/17/2015
Alicia Wiggins
Licensing Consultant
Date
Approved By:
August 17, 2015
Linda Tansil
Area Manager
Date
44

Report On Omarion Humphrey

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Report On Omarion Humphrey

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

STATE OF MICHIGAN

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

August 17, 2015

RE: License #: CB250200945

Dear Ms. Richardson:

Alicia Wiggins, Licensing Consultant

P.O. BOX 30664 LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909-8164

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Complaint Receipt Date:

Investigation Initiation Date:

Report Due Date:

Alternatives For Children & Families, Inc.

2065 South Center Road

Yvwania Richardson, Administrator

Alternatives for Children & Families, Inc.

Original Issuance Date:

CHILD PLACING AGENCY, PRIVATE

Alternatives for Children & Families placed Foster Child A in a

Special Investigation Intake

Special Investigation Initiated - Telephone

Inspection Completed On-site

Contact - Face to Face

Contact - Face to Face

Contact - Telephone call made

Contact - Telephone call received

Contact - Face to Face

DHHS Policy FOM 722-6 Unannounced Home Visit

February 2014 Interim Inspection

DHHS Policy FOM 722-9 USP Supervisory Approval

SI#2013C0420016 was received on 12/21/2012. The allegations were as

Arkansas, pending their guardianship by their great grandmother, was not

o R400.9301 (1) Maintenance. The agencys report cited broken glass on

Five special evaluations were reviewed and all demonstrate a

Risperdal for over a week as the medication was missing and

At the 08/05/2015 on-site visit, the Chief Administrator was

Foster Child A was placed in Foster Parent As home on

There were no criminal history clearances and central registry

Since 2012, the agency completed six special evaluations on

A CAP was developed as a result of the 12/19/2014 special

(a) That a special evaluation has been initiated.

(4) ) Before completion of the written report required by subrule

In March 2015, the agencys licensing worker was made aware

Foster Child A did not receive a dental exam within 90 calendar

After reviewing Foster Parent As placement list and the

least once every 90 calendar days thereafter.

Name of current school and grade.

A reassessment of the childs educational needs and

Special education information, if applicable.

Childs current academic performance and behaviors in

Description of provided services from school, parent,

Document the childs full-time elementary or secondary

There was no updated school information for Foster Child A,

Any face-to-face contacts with children, parents, or

Parent/child face-to-face contacts.

Sibling/child face-to-face contacts.

The face-to-face visits for Foster Child A, Foster Child B, Foster

Case service plan development

permanency goal changes

permanency planning at six months in care

annual transition planning for youth every six months

90 day discharge planning for youth

A FTM for Foster Child B and Foster Child Cs change of

complete the required home assessment for children placed