National Study of Child Protective Services Systems and Reform Efforts: Findings on Local CPS Practices

Chapter 4.
Investigation and Alternative Response Practices

[ Main page of Report | Contents of Report ]

Contents

• Types of Responses
• Practices and Procedures
• Worker and Supervisor Roles
• Difficulties in Conducting the Response
• Conclusion

Endnote

This chapter examines local agency practices and procedures in conducting investigations and alternative CPS responses. For the purposes of this study, the investigation response was defined as the process for determining whether child maltreatment has occurred or the child is at risk of maltreatment. An alternative response was defined as a response in which the agency assessed the needs of the child or family without requiring a determination that maltreatment had occurred or that the child was at risk of maltreatment.

The findings reported in this chapter examine the types of CPS agency responses, the features and activities of these responses, the role of workers and supervisors in the conduct of these responses, and difficulties encountered in carrying out the responses. Estimates of agencies with investigation response include those agencies that conducted investigations regardless of whether they had another response. Estimates of agencies with alternative response are based only on those agencies that conducted such responses.

Overall, the findings reveal that two-thirds of CPS agencies had an alternative response option available in addition to the investigation response. Further, CPS agencies often used similar approaches and practices and encountered similar obstacles in carrying out the response.

[Go To Contents]

4.1 Types of Responses

Nearly two-thirds of local CPS agencies (64%) conducted both investigations and alternative responses (Table 4-1). Nearly all of the remaining agencies only conducted investigations in response to maltreatment referrals.

In comparing investigation and alternative response options, important differences in the standard practices for each type of response were found (Tables 4-2 and 4-3).

• Eighty-five percent of agency procedures for conducting investigations required the removal of a child if immediate safety was an issue, while only 50 percent of agencies made such removals under their alternative response.
• Seventy-one percent of agencies made an assessment of the immediate safety needs of the family under investigation, while 53 percent of agencies made a similar assessment under alternative response.
• Under the investigation response, 67 percent of agencies required a determination of whether or not the child had been maltreated, while 42 percent of agencies required a determination of maltreatment under the alternative response option.⁽¹⁾
• Sixty-three percent of agencies required that a determination of risk of maltreatment be made under the investigation response, compared to 40 percent of agencies under alternative response.
• Sixty-one percent of agencies required that a recommendation for court intervention be made, if needed, under investigation, while 30 percent of agencies made a similar requirement under alternative response.

[Go To Contents]

4.2 Practices and Procedures

While CPS agencies used a variety of practices and procedures in conducting investigations and alternative responses, the analyses revealed many areas where the two responses were similar. In terms of the scope of the responses, the components of the responses are similar but differ among some elements. Also, some components of policy and procedure apply to investigations only or only to alternative response. This section presents data on practices and procedures for both functions so that appropriate comparisons can be drawn.

More than one-half of the agencies (55%) always extended investigations to all children in the household; an additional 31 percent of agencies included all the household children in the investigation on a case-by-case basis (Table 4-4). The estimates and percentages for the alternative response are not provided because these data were missing for a large portion of agencies. Slightly more than one-half (51%) of the agencies made a separate determination of maltreatment for each child under investigation (Table 4-5).

Most agencies always considered the severity of the case (94%) and policy-defined standards of evidence (90%) when making a determination at the conclusion of the investigation (Table 4-6). Approximately one-half of agencies always considered the family's need for services (57%) and the parents' willingness to cooperate (43%). The availability of services was always considered by 28 percent of agencies.

Concluding a response varied between investigation responses and alternative responses (Tables 4-7 and 4-8). During the investigation, almost all agencies always notified perpetrators (85%) and entered the perpetrator's name into the Central Registry (80%). In contrast, under the alternative response, fewer than one-half of the agencies always notified perpetrators (45%) and entered the perpetrator's name into the Central Registry (41%).

In general, CPS agencies establish timeframes for completing an investigation or an alternative response (Table 4-9). The majority of agencies (81%) will close the case, once the timeframe for an alternative response has elapsed. However, the majority of agencies (84%) will not close an investigation even if the timeframe has been exceeded.

The survey revealed that there was a great deal of similarity in the actual activities conducted under investigation and alternative response (Tables 4-10 and 4-11).

When conducting investigations, nearly all agencies always reviewed prior CPS records (89%), interviewed or formally observed the child(ren) (98%), and interviewed the caregiver(s) (98%). Percentages were similarly high for agencies providing an alternative response — 80 percent always reviewed prior CPS records; 69 percent interviewed or formally observed the child(ren); and 73 percent always interviewed the caregiver(s).

Furthermore, during the investigation a majority of the agencies sometimes discussed the case with other CPS workers (73%), discussed the case with a multidisciplinary team (67%), visited the family with an appointment (61%), visited the family without an appointment (65%), conducted a family group conference meeting (57%), interviewed professionals known to the family (58%), and conducted criminal background checks on the alleged perpetrator (50%). Results were similar for alternative response procedures. A majority of agencies discussed the case with other CPS workers (75%), discussed the case with a multidisciplinary team (57%), visited the family with an appointment (63%) or without an appointment (66%), conducted family group conference meetings (55%), interviewed family members other than the caregiver (62%), and interviewed professionals known to the family (65%).

Not surprisingly, given that maltreatment is infrequently involved in cases receiving the alternative response, approximately one-fourth of the agencies never obtained or preserved physical evidence (24%), removed the child from harm (23%), or conducted criminal background checks on the alleged perpetrator (24%) during this response.

Local CPS agencies had few differences between the investigation and alternative response in terms of the instruments and tools used (Tables 4-12 and 4-13). Nearly three-quarters of the agencies (74%) used guidelines for establishing risk or safety during an investigation compared to 62 percent of the agencies using an alternative response option. Only a minority of agencies used formal assessment tools during the investigation or alternative response to gauge the extent of risk, safety, substance abuse, or domestic violence.

There was a great deal of similarity between the professional resources available to agencies during the investigation and alternative response (Tables 4-14 and 4-15).

Under investigation, nearly all agencies always had clinicians or psychiatrists (90%), domestic violence specialists (80%), substance abuse specialists (92%), and child fatality review teams (80%) available to assist. Similarly high percentages of agencies claimed such professionals were always available during the alternative responses.

In addition, under investigation, most agencies always had forensic specialists (62%), child advocacy centers (58%), or hospital-based sexual abuse trauma centers (58%) available to assist. Again, these professional resources were also widely available to agencies during alternative responses.

[Go To Contents]

4.3 Worker and Supervisor Roles

The survey also gathered information about the roles of workers and supervisors in the decisionmaking process. Specifically, agencies were asked about the workers and supervisors who are assigned to conduct the response and make a final determination as to maltreatment or services.

The majority of local CPS agencies (79%) assigned investigations involving a child or household currently under investigation to a caseworker with experience with the family (Table 4-16). Agencies most often assigned referrals involving a child with prior substantiated reports and those involving prior unsubstantiated reports to the next available worker (71% and 76%, respectively). Agencies were split regarding who would be assigned to a case when the child or household was currently receiving home or foster care services — some agencies preferred to assign a caseworker with experience in working with the family and others preferred to assign the next available caseworker.

For both responses, agencies were consistent in describing who makes the final determination about maltreatment during the response. Under both investigation and alternative response, decisions were made by workers with supervisory review (Tables 4-17 and 4-18).

[Go To Contents]

4.4 Difficulties in Conducting the Response

Under the investigation approach, agencies experienced somewhat more barriers than under the alternative response approach (Tables 4-19 and 4-20). The findings are summarized below:

During investigation, few agencies always experienced obstacles because of difficulties in predicting what might happen to the child (11%), in having sufficient time to make a good determination (12%), in preparing materials for the case record (17%), or in preparing materials for the court record (10%). Similarly low percentages of agencies with an alternative response reported these obstacles.

For the investigation response, a majority of agencies sometimes experienced difficulties in locating the family (67%), in spending sufficient time with the family (55%), in assessing parenting skills (55%), in determining what happened to the child (61%), in predicting what might happen to the child (55%), in having sufficient time to make a good determination (55%), or in obtaining the necessary expertise from other professionals (68%). Nearly identical percentages of agencies experienced these problems with alternative responses.

During both responses, the majority of agencies claimed that they rarely or never experienced difficulties in explaining the consequences of actions to parent(s) (61-66%), in deciding whether to remove a child (67-71%), in deciding whether to return a child (63-64%), or in handling language barriers (60-69%).

Strategies for ensuring that workers were safe were comparable for both responses. As shown in Table 4-21, the majority of agencies provided police escort for workers, enabled for accompaniment by another worker, supported periodic telephone check-in procedures, and restricted visits to normal business hours.

[Go To Contents]

4.5 Conclusion

The findings show that the majority of agencies nationwide handled referrals through both investigations and alternative responses. However, the circumstances under which the responses were used differed widely. Alternative responses were less likely than the investigation response to be used for removing a child, assessing the safety needs of the family, making a determination of maltreatment or risk of maltreatment, or making a recommendation for court action.

Despite differences in the types of referrals handled under the two responses, the survey found many similarities in the approaches and practices used to conduct the responses. The majority of agencies extended both the investigation response and the alternative response when it was available to all children in the household. In making determinations at the conclusion of the investigation response, most agencies made separate determinations for each child. Moreover, most agencies considered such factors as the severity of the case, policy-defined standards of evidence, and the family's need for services when making determinations during the investigation.

Agencies provided a lot of information about the activities carried out while conducting these responses. The vast majority always reviewed prior CPS records, interviewed or formally observed the child, and interviewed the caregiver as part of the investigation. These same activities were consistently performed during the alternative response. Nearly three-quarters of agencies used guidelines for establishing risk or safety during investigations, while nearly as many used this tool during alternative responses. Further, professionals and assistance groups were widely available during both responses. In particular, clinicians or psychiatrists, domestic violence specialists, substance abuse specialists, and child fatality review teams were nearly always available to workers conducting investigations and alternative responses.

Workers and supervisors had similar roles in conducting the responses. For the investigation response, agencies normally assigned a referral on a child or household currently under investigation to a worker experienced with the family. For referrals with prior substantiated or unsubstantiated reports, agencies typically assigned the next available worker to investigate. In almost all agencies, investigation workers made the formal maltreatment determination with supervisory review. This same decision structure held for service determinations during the alternative responses whereby the workers made the determination with supervisory review.

The investigation response and the alternative response also faced similar challenges. The most common obstacles to timely completion of either response included locating the family, spending sufficient time with the family, and obtaining the necessary expertise from other professionals.

More notable differences between the two responses emerged in a few areas. Agencies routinely notified perpetrators and entered their names in the central registry at the conclusion of investigations, while this was somewhat less common for alternative responses. When the response was not completed within the required timeframe, procedures differed depending on the response. For investigations, the case remained open with the original worker until complete. In contrast, for the alternative CPS response, the agency closed the referral when the time frame expired.

Endnote

1.  Although the definition of alternative response specified that a maltreatment determination was not required, there are considerable differences in the types of cases that are handled, and a determination was included by almost one-half of the agencies with an alternative response.

Where to?

Top of Page | Contents

Main Page of Report | Contents of Report

Home Pages:
Human Services Policy (HSP)
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)