Kikman V. CW Case Study

Your client Sue is a Social Work Assistant. In your last session she disclosed that she is concerned that on a recent home visit, herself and a senior colleague did not follow the necessary policies and procedures. They had visited a family with a history of neglect and domestic violence and did not ask to see the child or enter the home, both these actions are prescribed as appropriate as part of their work.

On 9/15/2016, CM met with the client for Bi-Weekly ILP Review. Client was dressed appropriately for the weather. She was well groomed. As usual client in the meeting was loquacious, and loud. Client continues to be hostile towards this worker. Client continues to repeat to this worker as quote: "I am not mad with you, and this has nothing to do with you. It's all about DHS and your supervisor." Client was hostile due to an Authorization of Release Form client signed for staff to contact her therapist Dr. Iris Yankelevich for a copy of the client psychosocial and psychiatrist evaluations. Client continues to report that she didn’t signed the Authorization of Release Form because the form stated that the form is for HRA 2010e and she doesn’t know how many time she need to repeat herself that she doesn’t meet the ‘CRITERAI FOR SRO”. CM tries to explain to the client that staff is requesting a copy of her psychosocial and psychiatrist evaluation, but then client continue to talk over CM and threat to contact the Coalition and DHS. Client continues to set in her way and refuses to work with staff to meet her unmet needs. CM observed that the client walk with a book bags and a small shopping cart. Client reported she walk with all her documents and letters from Adult Protective Services & Social Security Administration stating that she is capable of living independently.

I received from Loretta Henderson, Ms. Rachal Ball’s sister. Ms. Rachal Ball, has an open case under case#38676; which seems to be in closing with Christy and in transition to you Anna for an ongoing case. Ms. Henderson contacted the GAO with concerns regarding this Child Welfare case and more specifically, the placement of her niece Aunika.

She mentioned that her lawyer told her that he was told by DHS worker that they have the intent to denied her application. As of today, nobody has called her.

She asked to review her application for February then, since Jeffrey is no longer receiving UC and he does not expect to increase his income because the inclement weather. I asked her if she already has spoken with her worker. She said that she has called twice, but nobody is returning her calls. I told her I will send and email to the branch lead worker asking to have someone to call her back to discuss her application for February. I gave her my information and phone

Housing: Case Manager confirmed and verified that Ms. Williams has been attending housing meetings and that she has been submitting her weekly housing search logs. Ms. Williams has a City FEPS Voucher. Ms. Williams was escort it to go view an apartment by her assigned Housing Specialist and application was submitted. Case Manager encouraged to

Client is WECARE/FEDCAP and she is temporarily exempt from work. CM requested for the client to submit all HRA correspondence for CM to contact client worker.

The member called and gave me her DHS worker name B. Wilkerson, phone number 313-387-7166 and her case number 121646891. The member report her worker said that she does have medicaid insurance but, the member had questions about her food stamp because she is paying $700 a month and is only getting $27.00. The member also states that her worker will not change her rent from $500 which was what she was paying on Appleton St and she is now paying $700 a month on Cedargrove

contacted you, CGA, in your capacity as a tax practitioner, and has asked you to assist her in filing an appeal

She totally disagreed, and she stated that her attorney has told her that she knows other children with the same condition of Evan that is receiving more services. She ended the conversation that is going to request her attorney to lawsuit the DHS base on negligence the provide the right service, as the judge ordered. I informed her that based on the Disposition Judgement of the Circuit Linn County Co, dated on 04/08/16, it is mentioned that the DHS has made diligent efforts to prevent or

I called the constituent, she said that she is the paternal GM to Alicia Buck. She wanted to complain about CW Midtown Caseworker Eric and she also asked who to contact to change CW policy because the CW caseworker are overwhelmed with too many cases that they are assigned and they cannot do a better job because their high caseload. I asked her to be more specific please. She said that she was informed that Eric cannot return her call because he has 25 other cases, so believes he got too many cases.

Your grievance appeal has been reviewed at Central Office. Pursuant to Department Order 802.01 GENERAL INFORMATION:

Your grievance appeal has been reviewed at Central Office and the Deputy Warden’s response is affirmed. The Cook Administration investigated your claim and found your documents were E-filed. You have not provided and evidence to substansiate your claim that staff are hindering your access to the courts.

I reviewed our appeals last night. It will take me until the end of the week to clear out the following appeals below.

The constituent who is the father of a 9 year-old, called to complain against a CW Albany worker saying that the worker is harassing his girlfriend. The CW caseworker had contacted his girlfriend to investigate an sexual abuse allegations against his 9 year-old by one of his girlfriend's adult sons.