Chapin Hall

Lessons on Implementing the “Qualified Individual” Role in Residential Programs

This brief examines the implementation of the Qualified Individual (QI) role within Qualified Residential Treatment Programs (QRTPs), as required by the Family First Prevention Services Act. It explores how seven jurisdictions—Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, New York City, Utah, and Virginia—have approached, implemented, and monitored the QI role. Findings include insights into QI hiring and training processes, QI assessment and decision-making protocols, and integration of QI recommendations into legal and court procedures. 

What We Did 

We interviewed QRTP leaders from the seven jurisdictions and reviewed existing research to gather insights on QI implementation. Our methodology included a jurisdictional survey and standardized interviews based on a detailed protocol. For more on our methods and limitations, see the full brief’s Methods section. 

 What We Found 

Our analysis highlighted several key insights and emerging best practices: 

• Training and preparation: QIs require comprehensive training in trauma, cultural considerations, and Family First requirements. 

• Community engagement: Building strong relationships with community providers and maintaining consistent communication is critical for successful QRTP implementation.  

• Continuous quality improvement: Regular training and quality assurance reviews help refine the QI assessment process and improve outcomes. 

• Data tracking and monitoring: Automated case management systems help jurisdictions meet the 30-day QI assessment timeframe and efficiently monitor the process. 

• Legal and court processes: Jurisdictions have found that it is crucial to have clear guidelines and provide training for judges and court personnel. 

• Challenges in implementation: States  faced issues such as underestimating the number of QIs needed and the time required for assessments. 

• Emerging best practices:  

• • Colorado’s rapid QI assessments and timely family meetings set new standards for best practices. 

• • Illinois safeguards QRTP placement timelines with strict documentation and monitoring practices and requires a re-review of placements by the QI at specified time intervals. This ensures ongoing assessment and monitoring of children in long-term care settings to promote accountability and proactive intervention when needed.  

• • New York City requires QI assessments be completed even if a child is moved within 30 days of their initial placement in a QRTP setting. This is a strategy to enhance placement stability and support systems for children in foster care. 

• • Utah maintains small QI caseloads of typically 10–12 assessments at a time. Given that each assessment takes an average of 24 days to complete, this helps ensure QIs can provide thorough and comprehensive assessments for each child they serve. 

What It Means 

This brief provides peer insights for jurisdictions looking to: 

• refine their QI hiring and training processes and QI assessment and decision-making protocols, 

• ensure timely and appropriate QRTP placements for children, 

• enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of their QRTP court processes, and 

• foster better collaboration between child welfare agencies, courts, QRTPs, and communities.  

Our goal is to support jurisdictions in refining their approaches to QRTP placements, ultimately leading to improved outcomes for children and families.  

Read QI Implementation Guide

Read one-page summary

Recommended Citation

Small, L., Brunsink, A. M., O’Brien, J., Lane, S., Kaye, S., Landes, H., & Van Der Bosch, B. (2024). QRTP Policy Brief: Staffing the role of the “Qualified Individual.” Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago.