HD14 - Report of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission on the Virginia Division for Children

  • Published: 1984
  • Author: Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission
  • Enabling Authority: House Joint Resolution 10 (Regular Session, 1983)

Executive Summary:
Created as an autonomous children's agency in 1978, the Virginia Division for Children grew out of recommendations made by two legislative commissions. The Division was established with the dual purpose of providing for the planning and coordination of all State services to children and promoting the best interests of all children and youths.

The Division's 15 full-time staff carry out a broad range of responsibilities, including monitoring and evaluating State children's programs, legislative tracking, training, informing the public and other professionals of opportunities available for children, and maintaining a central State registry of all public and private placements.

House Joint Resolution 10 directed JLARC to evaluate the performance of the Division for Children and recommend whether the Division's enabling legislation should be reenacted. This report therefore focuses on the Division's fulfillment of its mandate and on determining whether there is a continuing need for the Division's services.

Evidence contained in this report suggests that there is a continuing need in Virginia for an organization of this kind. However, in its past performance the Division has not placed appropriate emphasis on certain of its mandated responsibilities. To ensure that its activities address identified needs, revisions appear necessary in the Division's enabling legislation.

Fulfillment of Mandate

During its early years of operation, the Division for Children seems to have taken an adversarial position regarding its child advocacy role and placed a lower priority on its planning and coordination mandate. This position seems to have limited the Division's ability to work with State agencies. Recently, under the leadership of a new director, the Division appears to have achieved organizational stability and clearer direction. Nevertheless, the Division has not completely carried out its legislative mandate.

Agency Outcomes and lmpacts. The Division for Children has carried out certain mandates relating to its information, technical assistance, and advocacy responsibilities. These activities, which include a monthly newsletter, individualized consultation, informational publications, and innovative approaches to reaching "parents at risk," have received generally favorable ratings from recipients.

However, the Division's primary purpose as specified in its enabling legislation - planning and coordination of children's services - has not received adequate attention. In order to fulfill this role, the General Assembly gave the Division such tools and responsibilities as budget review, program evaluation, planning, monitoring, and making legislative recommendations. The Division has not effectively used these tools and has been reluctant to address its broad coordination function. Many State officials and members of the child-care comnmnity indicated to JLARC that greater coordination is needed and that the Division's past efforts have had little impact in this area.

Although some effort was initiated in the past, the Division has not fulfilled its mandate to review the budgets of State agencies providing services to children. The experiences of children's offices in other states and the Virginia Department for the Aging, which have similar review functions, indicate that budget reviews can be used for such purposes as identifying duplication, comparing relative funding of special interests or programs, creating a central resource for information on State programs, and tracking funding trends. The information derived from such reviews could also help in fostering coordination, and would be useful to both executive and legislative policy-makers during budget deliberations.

In addition, the Division has not effectively exercised its authority to evaluate children's programs. Only two of the 17 studies conducted by the Division during the past five years directly related to the agency's evaluation mandate. JLARC's analysis indicates that weaknesses in the Division's research practices have often resulted in inconclusive findings. Such problems make it difficult for the Division to carry out its evaluation mandate, have limited the studies' impacts, and affect the Division's research credibility with other State agencies.

The Division has also been charged with maintaining a listing of all placement facilities in which children are placed by, or with funds from, State agencies. To comply, the Division published its registry, the "Yellow Pages of Children's Services," in 1980. The 2000-page publication contains listings beyond those required by statute and is of limited usefulness due to its large size, out-of-date and incomplete information, and difficulties updating the data. Moreover, the existence of several other sources of placement information may eliminate the need for the Division's registry in the future. In particular, a legislative Commission is studying the feasibility of a Statewide information and referral network, through which a comprehensive resource directory may become available.

Existing lmpediments. The Division's current organizational structure has resulted in the inefficient use of staff resources. Changes are needed in order to improve the span of supervisory control and to centralize supervision of the Division's clerical staff.

In addition, officials of the Division are concerned about the limited administrative resources available to this small agency. Assigning the Division's support services to a larger State agency is advisable.

Continuing Need for the Division for Children

Several issues are involved in determining whether the Division should continue operating, whether the need continues for State-level attention to children's issues and coordination of children's services, the Division's performance in meeting that need, and the likely impact if the Division were abolished.

Need for a Focus on Children. Conditions which led to the creation of the Division for Children continue to exist. Among these are fragmentation and duplication of children's services and agency management problems which prompted the Virginia Advisory Legislative Council to recommend creation of the Division in 1976. Respondents to JLARC's survey of the child-care community indicated that planning and coordination continues to be the most important function a State-level organization could perform. In addition, although lobbying efforts in certain areas related to children are intense, the need continues for a single State entity to speak for all children.

The Division's Performance. JLARC found that the Virginia Division for Children has not effectively carried out all of its mandates and has not systematically addressed existing needs. Therefore, the current responsibilities assigned to the Division should be re-examined and revised.

Likely Results if Abolished. As the Division is presently constituted, there would be little impact on current services to children if the agency were abolished. However, the State would lose the potential for a central focus for children's issues and a mechanism for coordinating and monitoring programs. No State entity would represent all children, fragmentation of services would continue without review, and an information source would be lost. In addition, such action would make Virginia one of the few states without such a State-level organization focusing on children.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Evidence contained in this report suggests a continuing need for the planning and coordination of children's services. Therefore, State-level support for these areas should be continued. However, changes are needed in order to increase the impact and effectiveness of the Division for Children in addressing these needs.

Recommendation (1). The General Assembly should reenact legislation in 1984 to continue the Division for Children. Several revisions, however, should be made to Division's enabling legislation:

(a) The Division's coordinative responsibility should be more clearly spelled out in legislation. Such a definition should communicate to the Division that coordination is the first priority of the organization. The Division should be directed to coordinate children's services and programs by convening agencies and other interested parties on matters of mutual concern and interest; by facilitating the exchange of information and ideas on children's services through planning, monitoring, budget review, and legislative tracking; and by advocating the best interests of children and youth before agencies, the Governor, and the General Assembly.

(b) Because of the Division's past performance and incompatibility with its advocacy role, the Division's evaluation responsibility should be deleted from its legislative mandate.

(c) The responsibility for maintaining the central registry of placement facilities should be transferred to either an information and referral network or another State agency such as the Department of Social Services.

Recommendation (2). Because of its advocacy role, the Division should continue to have an independent identity as an agency, but its administrative support services should be assigned to another State agency. Such action would reduce the routine administrative demands on the Division's staff and increase the·agency's service delivery capability. If a new department of advocacy agencies is created, the Division should be assigned to that agency for administrative purposes.

Recommendation (3). The number of authorized positions assigned to the Division should be reduced by at least four. Three professional positions and one clerical position could be eliminated through assignment of some administrative support activities to a larger agency, centralization of support staff, more efficient word processing, agency reorganization, and reduction in legislatively assigned responsibilities.

Recommendation (4). The General Assembly should enact a sunset provision expiring the Division for Children in five years. Such a provision would authorize another review of the continuing need for the Division for Children and provide the basis for an assessment of the Division's performance in carrying out its revised mission. If the Division does not fully comply with its mandate, it should be abolished.