[ Main page of Report | Contents of Report ]
The analyses for the Local Agency Survey (LAS) also examined any differences across local agencies that were tied to agency administrative structure at the State level. Administrative structure refers to the method of assigning organizational authority for CPS among subjurisdictions in a State. In some States, the entire CPS program is managed and operated by the State, the local agencies are offices of the State, local employees are State employees, the managers and administrators of the local offices report to the director of the State agency, infrastructure is centralized, and so forth. In other States, CPS is run by county agencies or similar jurisdictions where the managers and administrators report to a board of county commissioners, the employees are county employees, and the county provides basic infrastructure, and so forth. However, policies for these county-administered systems are usually defined at the State level, resulting in the designation that such systems are State supervised and county administered.
The type of administrative structure found in a State CPS agency is determined by the State and the category of structure used in these analyses was identified to the study by the State agency. This is distinct from self-identification of administrative structure by the local agency, which may be perceived differently by staff in a local agency compared to what is generally acknowledged by staff at the State level.
The primary basis for the administrative structure information is data collected and maintained by the American Public Human Services Association (APHSA), as modified through the review of policies and interviews described as a part of the Review of State CPS Policies, an earlier report from this study.(1) To reiterate those findings, 13 States (25.5%) were characterized as State supervised/county administered and 38 States (74.5%) were characterized as State administered. Based on the policy review and interviews, eight, or one-fifth of State-administered systems (21%), were reclassified based on direct input from the State agencies involved as having strong county structure and discretion, although not as county administered according to study criteria.
Based on the data supplied through the Review of State CPS Policies, the three categories of administrative structure were used in this analysis: State-administered, State-administered/strong county structure, and State supervised/county administered. When statistically significant differences based on this Administrative structure emerged, analyses detailing the nature of the differences found for CPS agencies with each type of administrative structure are described in this chapter.
[Go To Contents]
State-administered agencies had more staff compared to State-administered agencies with strong county structure. The average number of social workers or caseworkers among State-administered agencies was 31, for county-administered agencies it was 18, and for State-administered agencies with strong county structure the average was 4. A statistically significant difference was noted when the State-administered agencies were compared to the State-administered agencies with strong county structure.(2)
Both State-administered and county-administered agencies also had more staff specializing in investigations when compared to State-administered agencies with strong county structure. The number of full-time caseworker or social worker staff who were only assigned investigations for both State-administered and county-administered agencies averaged five workers, while for State-administered agencies with strong county structure the average was two, which was a statistically significant difference when compared to both State- and county-administered agencies.
There were two supervisors assigned to other responsibilities in addition to investigation in county-administered agencies compared to one in State-administered agencies, each of which averaged five full-time workers who only conducted investigations (Table 7-1).
| Statistical comparison | Full-time workers who only conducted investigations | Supervisors who supervised investigation in addition to other responsibilities | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.)* |
Estimate (C.I.) |
|||
| A | State-administered | 5 (3-7) |
1 (1-1) |
|
| B | County-administered | 5 (3-7) |
2 (1-2) |
|
| C | State-administered with a strong county structure | 2 (1-3) |
1 (1-2) |
|
| * The 95 percent confidence interval (C.I.) indicates that,
if the study were to be repeated with the same methodology 100 times, 95
of the replications would produce an estimate within the interval. b-c: T = 2.063, p < 0.05 a-c: T = 2.040, p < 0.05 a-b: T = -2.796, p < 0.01 |
||||
State-administered agencies have a higher percentage of workers that strictly specialize in conducting either screening/intake or investigations compared to county-administered agencies, and the percentage of specialized workers in State-administered agencies with a strong county structure fall between. On the other hand, county-administered agencies appear to have a greater percentage of staff that fill in and perform other functions when needed. For the screening/intake and investigation function 43 percent of State-administered agencies were estimated to have specialized staff members, while 23 percent of county- and 32 percent of State-administered with strong county structure had specialized staff. Staff routinely switched between functions if needed for 24 percent of county-administered agencies, 21 percent of State-administered agencies with strong county structure, and 13 percent of State-administered agencies. Roughly comparable percentages of agencies had staff who performed both functions; State-administered (37%), county-administered (45%), and State-administered agencies with strong county structure (46%). Differences between agencies were not found to be significant in terms of child population (Table 7-2).
| Staff | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with a strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Different workers for screening/intake and investigation | 480 (340-610) |
43% | 220 (160-290) |
23% | 170 (70-280) |
32% |
| When needed, an intake worker can conduct an investigation, or an investigation worker can conduct screening/intake | 140 (70-210) |
13% | 230 (160-300) |
24% | 110 (30-190) |
21% |
| Workers routinely conduct both screening/intake and investigation | 410 (300-520) |
37% | 430 (350-520) |
45% | 250 (130-380) |
46% |
| Other | 60 (10-100) |
5% | 60 (30-90) |
6% | 10 (<1-30) |
2% |
| No Response | 10 (<1-30) |
1% | 20 (<1-30) |
2% | <1 (<1-<1) |
<1% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| X2 = 15.756, p < 0.05 | ||||||
Despite similarities in the numbers of staff that are specialized, county-administered agencies have more workers who are also assigned other responsibilities besides screening and intake compared to State-administered agencies. Among those social workers or caseworkers who also were assigned other responsibilities in addition to screening and intake, the average number for State-administered agencies was three, for county-administered agencies the average was six, and for State-administered agencies with strong county structure the average was four. The difference between State administered and county-administered agencies suggests that county agencies might not have specialized in the screening and intake function to the same degree that State-administered agencies did. In general, it appeared that at least one-half of the staff assigned to this function at either the caseworker or supervisory level was assigned to other responsibilities.(3)
As with screening/intake and investigations, the pattern of State-administered agencies having higher percentages of workers that specialize is repeated in comparing specialization of workers performing screening/intake versus alternative response, with State-administered agencies with strong county structure falling in the middle. For instance, more State-administered agencies (43%) had specialized staff compared to county-administered agencies (21%), and State-administered agencies with strong county structure (31%). A greater proportion of State-administered agencies with strong county structure (28%) used staff on an as-needed basis compared to State-administered agencies (12%) or county-administered agencies (13%). A higher proportion of county-administered agencies (48%) used staff in both functions than State-administered agencies (39%) and State-administered agencies with strong county structure (36%), (Table 7-3).
| Staff | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with a strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Different workers for screening/intake and other response | 330 (230-430) |
43% | 120 (60-180) |
21% | 100 (30-180) |
31% |
| When needed, an intake worker can conduct an other response, or an other response worker can conduct screening/intake | 90 (30-150) |
12% | 70 (30-110) |
13% | 90 (30-160) |
28% |
| Workers routinely conduct both screening/intake and other response | 300 (220-380) |
39% | 270 (210-340) |
48% | 120 (30-220) |
36% |
| Other | 40 (<1-80) |
5% | 80 (40-120) |
14% | 20 (<1-40) |
5% |
| No Response | -- | -- | 20 (0-40) |
4% | -- | -- |
| Total | 760 (640-870) |
100% | 570 (480-660) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| X2 = 21.107, p < 0.01 | ||||||
Even though differences in the availability of specific services were found by administrative structure, no clear pattern differentiating agencies by administrative structure was identified. Statistically significant differences with respect to administrative structure were found for the following services categories:
It appears that State-administered agencies could offer fewer services following an investigation when compared to county-administered agencies. The situation for alternative response is less conclusive (Table 7-4).
| Service | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | Percen t | Estimate | Percent | Estimate | Percent | |
| Investigation | ||||||
| Dental examsa | 550 | 50% | 620 | 64% | 330 | 60% |
| Transportationb | 660 | 60% | 680 | 71% | 320 | 59% |
| Tutoringc | 370 | 34% | 410 | 43% | 280 | 52% |
| Financial planningd | 490 | 45% | 600 | 63% | 380 | 69% |
| Child caree | 820 | 74% | 780 | 81% | 390 | 71% |
| Employment servicesf | 520 | 48% | 640 | 66% | 340 | 62% |
| Alternative response | ||||||
| Marital counselingg | 590 | 78% | 430 | 75% | 200 | 61% |
| aX2 = 14.509, p <
0.05 bX2 = 16.344, p < 0.05 cX2 = 13.007, p < 0.05 dX2 = 20.539, p < 0.01 eX2 = 19.232, p < 0.01 fX2 = 19.162, p < 0.01 gX2 = 22.564, p < 0.05 |
||||||
State-administered agencies more often required that services be provided within 31-60 days compared to either county-administered or State-administered agencies with strong county structure (Table 7-5).
| Timeframe | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with a strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| No time limit | 180 (100-260) |
16% | 240 (170-310) |
25% | 140 (20-260) |
26% |
| Time limit determined by supervisor | 310 (190-430) |
28% | 310 (230-380) |
32% | 100 (30-170) |
18% |
| No more than 1-30 days | 30 (0-60) |
3% | 90 (50-140) |
10% | 40 (<1-90) |
7% |
| No more than 31-60 days | 140 (50-230) |
12% | 60 (30-90) |
7% | --- | <1% |
| No more than 61-90 days | 90 (<1-160) |
8% | 10 (<1-20) |
<1% | 10 (<1-30) |
2% |
| Other | 320 (210-430) |
29% | 240 (170-320) |
25% | 230 (140-330) |
43% |
| No response | 30 (0-60) |
3% | 10 (0-20) |
<1% | 30 (<1-70) |
5% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| X2 = 44.761, p < 0.001 | ||||||
Among agencies providing alternative response, more State-administered agencies and State-administered agencies with strong county structure have service priority arrangements with multiple providers compared to county-administered agencies. County-administered agencies tend to have such a relationship with only one provider. A greater proportion of State-administered agencies (36%) and State-administered agencies with strong county structure (48%) had established priority service provision arrangements with multiple providers compared to county-administered agencies (22%). The results also indicate that county-administered agencies had more priority service relationships with mental health providers (9%) compared to the other two types of agencies; less than 1 percent for both of the other structure categories (Table 7-6).
| Arrangements | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with a strong county struc ture | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Agency does not have priority status arrangements | 340 (230-450) |
45% | 250 (180-320) |
43% | 160 (60-250) |
47% |
| Agency has priority status arrangements with mental health providers | 20 (<1-40) |
<1% | 50 (10-90) |
9% | 10 (<1-30) |
<1% |
| Agency has priority status arrangements with substance abuse providers | 50 (20-90) |
7% | 40 (10-80) |
8% | --- | --- |
| Agency has priority status arrangements with other providers | 60 (10-110) |
8% | 40 (10-70) |
7% | --- | --- |
| Agency has priority status arrangements with multiple types of services providers | 270 (180-360) |
36% | 130 (60-190) |
22% | 160 (70-250) |
48% |
| No response | 10 (<1-20) |
1% | 60 (30-100) |
11% | 10 (<1-30) |
3% |
| Total | 760 (640-870) |
100% | 570 (480-660) |
100% | 340 (210-470) |
100% |
| X2 = 22.584, p < 0.05 | ||||||
A key distinction between State-administered agencies (including those with strong county structure) and county-administered agencies is that more State-administered agencies have strictly specialized staff performing the screening/intake, investigation, and where it exist the alternative response function. On the other hand, both State-administered and county-administered agencies have the same average number of staff who are specialized. These findings indicate the difference appears to be tied to the expectation that specialized staff may fill in for other functions when needed in county-administered agencies.
From the analysis of service data there does not appear to be any specific trend that characterizes the differences between administrative structures. In the range of services that are available, county-administered agencies may have had a broader set of services to offer. Proportionally, more of these agencies may also have established priority service arrangements with mental health providers. On the other hand, when they had a priority service relationship, more State-administered agencies had such relationship with multiple providers. An important confirmation regarding CPS from these data is that around 75 percent of agencies were able to offer services regardless of the status of the response or the disposition. It is interesting to note, however, that a few agencies required a determination of maltreatment before they were able to offer services. Almost all agencies were able to offer a potentially wide range of services and most services could be offered in well over 50 percent of the agencies. While potentially offered, the availability of these services was not addressed in this study. Of the range of services that agencies offered — parenting, substance abuse, and child focused interventions appeared to be the most common, whereas, services that address financial well-being were less common.
[Go To Contents]
Further analyses of the LAS findings revealed some important differences in the screening function depending on the agency's administrative structure. The differences emerged in how referrals were received and processed and in the role of the State hotline.
While the overall findings showed little variation in how referrals entered agencies, further analyses found some variation by administrative structure in some of the logistical aspects of receiving referrals. For example, weekday evening referrals were more often assigned to on-call staff in county-administered agencies (71%) than in agencies in either State-administered systems (39%) or State-administered systems with strong county structure (46%). Not surprisingly, weekday evening referrals were more often handled by the State hotline for agencies in State-administered systems and State-administered systems with strong county structure, (31% and 14%, respectively), when compared to county-administered agencies (4%), (Table 7-7). A similar pattern appeared with how agencies handled referrals on weekends. Agencies in county-administered systems assigned referrals to on-call staff much more often (74%) than did the other types of agencies (39% for agencies in State-administered systems and 53% for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure).
| Weekday evenings* | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Handled by intake unit | 30 (0-70) |
3% | 50 (20-70) |
5% | 50 (0-100) |
9% |
| Assigned to on-call staff | 430 (330-520) |
39% | 680 (590-770) |
71% | 250 (150-360) |
46% |
| Routed to another agency | 40 (0-80) |
3% | 40 (0-70) |
4% | 50 (0-100) |
9% |
| Handled by State hotline | 340 (230-460) |
31% | 40 (10-60) |
4% | 80 (0-160) |
14% |
| Other method | 90 (30-150) |
9% | 10 (0-30) |
1% | 50 (0-100) |
9% |
| Missing | 170 | 15% | 150 | 15% | 80 | 14% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| Weekends** | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent |
| Handled by intake unit | 20 (0-60) |
2% | 20 (0-40) |
2% | 10 (0-30) |
2% |
| Assigned to on-call staff | 430 (330-520) |
39% | 710
(640-780) |
74% | 290
(170-410) |
53% |
| Routed to another agency | 40 (0-80) |
3% | 40 (10-70) |
4% | 50 (0-100) |
9% |
| Handled by State hotline | 310 (200-420) |
28% | 40 (10-70) |
4% | 80 (0-160) |
14% |
| Other method | 140 (70-210) |
13% | 10 (0-30) |
1% | 50 (0-100) |
9% |
| Missing | 160 | 15% | 140 | 15% | 80 | 14% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) | 100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| * X2=20.05, p<.001 (excludes missing)
** X2=22.91, p<.001 (excludes missing) Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
A somewhat different pattern emerged for how different types of agencies handled referrals from non-English speakers. Many more agencies in State-administered systems (24%) handled referrals from non-English speakers with non-English speaking staff than did agencies in county-administered systems (6%) or State-administered systems with strong county structure (2%). In contrast, more than two-thirds of agencies in State-administered systems with a strong county structure used a method other than non-English speakers on staff or on call. This compares to 43 percent for agencies in county-administered systems and 38 percent for agencies in State-administered systems (Table 7-8).
| Referral assignments | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | E stimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Handled by non-English speakers on staff | 260 (170-350) |
24% | 60 (20-90) |
6% | 10 (0-30) |
2% |
| Handled by non-English speakers on call | 110 (40-180) |
10% | 110 (60-160) |
11% | 30 (0-70) |
5% |
| Other method | 420 (300-530) |
38% | 410 (320-510) |
43% | 370 (220-530) |
68% |
| Multiple methods | 180 (100-260) |
16% | 210 (150-270) |
22% | 50 (0-100) |
9% |
| Not able to accept | 130 (60-200) |
12% | 170 (90-250) |
18% | 90 (0-180) |
16% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| * X2=27.72, p<.001 Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
Agencies in State-administered systems also stood out in terms of the automatic acceptance of referrals. Only 27 percent of agencies in State-administered systems automatically accepted referrals from some reporters. This practice was more common for agencies in county-administered systems (42%) or State-administered systems with strong county structure (53%), (Table 7-9).
| Referral acceptance | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Some referrals are automatically accepted | 300 (210-390) |
27% | 410 (320-490) |
42% | 290 (140-440) |
53% |
| No referrals are automatically accepted | 720 (580-860) |
66% | 540 (460-620) |
56% | 260 (150-370) |
47% |
| Missing | 80 (30-130) |
7% | 20 (0-40) |
2% | --- | --- |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
|
| * X2=8.68, p<.05 (excludes missing)
Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
Among those agencies that automatically accepted some referrals, 80 percent of agencies in State-administered systems accepted referrals from specific types of agencies. This compares to 55 percent of agencies with State-administered systems with strong county structure and 35 percent of agencies with county-administered systems. In contrast, agencies in county-administered systems (43%) and State-administered systems with strong county structure (38%) more often automatically accepted referrals from mandated reporters than did agencies in State-administered systems (14%), (Table 7-10).
| Referral acceptance | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Accept from specific agency | 240 (140-330) |
80% | 140 (100-180) |
35% | 160 (70-250) |
55% |
| Accept from multiple agencies | 40 (0-80) |
14% | 170 (100-250) |
43% | 110 (20-200) |
38% |
| Accept from all agencies | 20 (0-60) |
6% | 40 (0-80) |
11% | 20 (0-60) |
7% |
| Accept from central registry | --- | --- | 40 (0-70) |
11% | --- | --- |
| Total | 300 (210-390) |
100% | 410 (320-490) |
100% | 290 (140-440) |
100% |
| * X2=19.31, p<.01 (excludes missing)
Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
The overall survey findings showed that CPS agencies had flexibility in how they processed referrals during the screening function. In a few situations, the processing of referrals also depended on the agency's administrative structure. Nearly all agencies in county-administered systems (93%) performed the screening and intake function themselves (Table 7-11). While this was also true for the other types of agencies, the percentages were somewhat lower (76% for agencies in State-administered systems and 80% for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure). Not surprisingly, the State hotline performed screening less often for agencies in county-administered systems (5%) compared to agencies in State-administered systems (21%) or State-administered systems with strong county structure (17%).
| Referral processing | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Local agency screens | 830 (700-970) |
76% | 900 (840-960) |
93% | 440 (260-610) |
80% |
| State hotline screens | 230 (150-320) |
21% | 50
(20-80) |
5% | 90 (20-160) |
17% |
| Missing | 30 (0-70) |
3% | 20 (0-40) |
2% | 20 (0-60) |
3% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| * X2=9.10, p<.001 (excludes missing)
Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
The analyses also revealed two screening activities that varied depending on the agency's administrative structure. Agencies in State-administered systems and those in State-administered systems with strong county structure always searched CPS records for alleged perpetrators (81% and 84%, respectively). This screening practice was somewhat less common among agencies in county-administered systems (77%), (Table 7-12). Use of safety assessment tools during screening also differed depending on the agency's administrative structure. While 65 percent of agencies in county-administered systems always used such safety assessments during screening, this was truer for agencies in State-administered systems (73%) and agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (70%).
| Screening activity | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Search CPS records for information on alleged perpetratora | 890 (770-1,010) |
81% | 750 (660-830) |
77% | 460 (280-650) |
84% |
| Use of safety assessment toolsb | 780 (680-920) |
73% | 630 (540-720) |
65% | 380 (220-540) |
70% |
| a X2=16.5, p<.001 b X2=23.68, p<.001 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
Agencies operating under different administrative structures also differed in terms of the role of the State hotline for the screening function. Not surprisingly, it was more common for agencies in State-administered systems (72%) and State-administered systems with strong county structure (72%) to receive referrals from the State hotline when compared to agencies in county-administered systems (38%), (Table 7-13).
| Hotline recommendations | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C .I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Yes | 790 (630-940) |
72% | 360 (290-440) |
38% | 400 (220-580) |
72% |
| No | 280 (180-380) |
25% | 590 (490-690) |
61% | 150 (50-250) |
28% |
| Missing | 30 (0-70) |
3% | 10 (0-30) |
1% | --- | --- |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| * X2=25.25, p<.001 (excludes missing)
Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
Among agencies that used State hotlines, 68 percent of agencies in State-administered systems and 44 percent of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure received recommendations from State hotlines regarding the response to the referral. This compares to just 7 percent of such agencies in county-administered systems (Table 7-14).
| Hotline recommendations | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Hotline makes recommendations | 530 (380-690) |
68% | 30 (10-50) |
7% | 180 (20-330) |
44% |
| Hotline does not make recommendations | 250 (160-340) |
32% | 320 (240-400) |
89% | 210 (100-320) |
53% |
| Missing | --- | --- | 10 (0-30) |
4% | 10 (0-30) |
2% |
| Total | 790 (630-940) |
100% | 360 (290-440) |
100% | 400 (220-580) |
100% |
| * X2=16.0, p<.001 (excludes missing) Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
The analysis by administrative structure found a number of situations where screening practices were different for different types of agencies. State-administered agencies were more likely to handle referrals from non-English speakers with regular or on call staff. However, agencies in State-administered systems were less likely to automatically accept certain referrals. When they did automatically accept referrals, these agencies were also less likely to automatically accept from mandated reporters. Rather, they more often automatically accepted from specific agencies.
County-administered agencies were different from the other agency types in a number of areas. County-administered agencies were more likely to utilize on-call workers to cover referrals received during non-business hours. Not surprisingly, these agencies were also more likely to screen locally and less likely to receive referrals from the State hotline and to receive response recommendations from the State hotline. In terms of processing referrals, two specific screening activities were different for agencies in county-administered systems. These agencies searched CPS records and used safety assessment tools considerably less often than other agencies.
[Go To Contents]
The LAS analyses also examined how agencies with different administrative structures conducted investigations and alternative responses. This section describes the differences for both responses.
In terms of the scope of the investigation response, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure appeared to be more flexible and expansive than other agencies. State-administered agencies with a strong county structure more often (67%) extended the investigation to all children in the household in all cases when compared to agencies in State-administered (51%) and county-administered systems (54%), (Table 7-15).
| Scope | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Only children specified in referral | 30 (0-60) |
3% | 60 (20-110) |
7% | 10 (0-30) |
2% |
| Extend to all children in household, case-by-case | 350 (230-480) |
32% | 290 (240-350) |
31% | 170 (70-270) |
31% |
| Extend to all children in household in all cases | 550 (420-690) |
51% | 520 (440-600) |
54% | 370 (190-550) |
67% |
| Missing | 160 (100-220) |
14% | 80 (40-130) |
9% | --- | --- |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies.
* X2=15.28, p<.05 |
||||||
The analyses revealed some differences in the procedures agencies used at the conclusion of their investigations. Agencies in State-administered (80%) and county-administered (85%) systems were somewhat more likely to always enter the perpetrator information into the Central Registry than were agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (72%), (Table7-16). The same patterns appear with regard to notifying the reporter at the conclusion of the investigation, more agencies in State- and county-administered systems (30% and 36%, respectively) always made this notification when compared to agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (17%).
| Procedure | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Enter perpetrator information in Central Registrya | 870 (760-990) |
80% | 820 (750-880) |
85% | 390 (210-580) |
72% |
| Notify reporterb | 330 (220-440) |
30% | 350 (270-430) |
36% | 90 (30-160) |
17% |
| a X2=27.13, p<.001
b X2=62.2, p<.001 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
These analyses also found a few differences in the frequency of specific investigative activities. Certain activities were much more common for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure. For example, a greater proportion of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (19%) always discussed the case with a multidisciplinary team than did agencies in State-administered (5%) or county-administered systems (10%), (Table 7-17). Similarly, it was more common for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure to always interview the reporter and to always interview witnesses when compared to State- and county-administered agencies.
| Activity | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Discuss with Multidisciplinary Team a | 50 (0-100) |
5% | 100 (50-150) |
10% | 100 (30-180) |
19% |
| Interview reporterb | 450 (320-580) |
41% | 300 (230-370) |
31% | 370 (210-540) |
67% |
| Interview witnessesc | 680 (550-810) |
62% | 610 (530-690) |
63% | 410 (230-600) |
75% |
| Interview professionals known to familyd | 480 (340-620) |
44% | 330 (250-400) |
34% | 260 (130-380) |
47% |
| Conduct criminal background check on alleged perpetratore | 530 (410-640) |
48% | 190 (130-240) |
19% | 110 (40-180) |
20% |
| a X2=19.82, p<.05 b X2=22.94, p<.01 c X2=14.34, p<.05 d X2=13.25, p<.05 e X2=23.99, p<.01 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). |
||||||
Other investigation activities were also more common for State-administered agencies. Agencies in State-administered systems (44%) and those in State-administered systems with strong county structure (47%) always interviewed professionals known to the family more often than did agencies in county-administered systems (34%), (Table 7-22). Finally, more State-administered agencies (48%) always conducted criminal background checks on the alleged perpetrator than did agencies in county-administered systems (19%) or in State-administered systems with strong county structure (20%).
Only one difference by administrative structure emerged in how often agencies used different instruments or tools during the investigation. County-administered agencies (4%) were less likely to always conduct standardized domestic violence assessments as part of the investigation when compared to other agencies (15% for both State-administered and State-administered with strong county structure), (Table 7-18).
| Instruments and tools | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C .I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Always | 170 (80-250) |
15% | 40 (10-70) |
4% | 80 (10-140) |
15% |
| Sometimes | 890 (760-1,020) |
81% | 900 (810-980) |
93% | 470 (310-640) |
86% |
| Missing | 40 (0-80) |
3% | 20 (0-40) |
2% | --- | --- |
| Total | 1,100
(970-1,220) |
100% | 960
(890-1,030) |
100% | 550
(350-750) |
100% |
| Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies.
* X2=10.55, p<.05 |
||||||
The analyses also uncovered evidence that agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure had fewer resources during investigations. In State- and county-administered systems both domestic violence specialists and substance abuse specialists were almost always available during investigations. While 81 percent of agencies in State-administered systems and 85 percent of agencies in county-administered always had access to domestic violence specialists, this was true for 69 percent of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (Table 7-19). Similarly, 91 percent of State-administered agencies and 97 percent of county-administered agencies always had substance abuse specialists available during investigations, compared to 84 percent of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure. One exception to this pattern was related to access to hospital-based sexual abuse trauma centers. While 71 percent of county-administered agencies always had access to these centers, 46 percent of State-administered agencies and 60 percent of agencies in State-administered with strong county structure reported such widespread access.
| Type of assistance | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I .) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Domestic violence specialistsa | 880 (760-1,010) |
81% | 820 (740-900) |
85% | 380 (230-530) |
69% |
| Substance abuse specialistsb | 1,000 (870-1,130) |
91% | 930 (870-1,000) |
97% | 460 (270-650) |
84% |
| Hospital-based sexual abuse trauma centersc | 500 (370-630) |
46% | 690 (620-750) |
71% | 330 (200-470) |
60% |
| a X2=11.4, p<.05 b X2=15.04, p<.01 c X2=12.42, p<.05 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). |
||||||
When examining the obstacles to timely completion of investigations, fewer barriers were found for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure. Just over one-half of the agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (52%) rarely cited the need to predict what might happen to the child as an obstacle to completing the investigation. This compares to 24 percent for agencies in both State- and county-administered systems (Table 7-20). The same pattern emerges for difficulties related to preparing materials for the case record, preparing materials for the court record, and handling language barriers. For these obstacles, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure rarely faced the obstacle compared to State- or county-administered agencies.
| Obstacles | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Predicting what might happen to the childa | 260 (170-350) |
24% | 230 (170-300) |
24% | 290 (150-420) |
52% |
| Preparing materials for case recordb | 310 (200-420) |
28% | 210 (160-260) |
22% | 240 (130-350) |
43% |
| Preparing materials for court recordc | 330 (220-430) |
30% | 300 (240-370) |
31% | 310 (170-450) |
57% |
| Handling language barriersd | 580 (460-690) |
53% | 510 (430-590) |
53% | 400 (220-570) |
72% |
| a X2=27.63, p<.001 b X2=20.6, p<.01 c X2=24.23, p<.01 d X2=17.68, p<.05 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). |
||||||
The supplemental analyses also examined the alternative response function to uncover any notable differences in how this response was carried out by agency administrative structure. Overall, when conducting an alternative response, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure were more consistent in several practices than agencies in State-administered systems or county-administered systems.
A few differences by administrative structure emerged in the standard practices for the alternative response. More agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (73%) were required to assess the family needs before completing the response, when compared to agencies in State-administered systems (60%) or county-administered systems (51%), (Table 7-21). It was also more common for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure to have requirements related to assessing the underlying causes of maltreatment and referring the family for further services before completing the response than it was for the other types of agencies.
| Practice | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Assess family needsa | 400 (300-490) |
60% | 250 (180-330) |
51% | 230 (120-350) |
73% |
| Assess underlying causes of maltreatmentb | 200 (120-280) |
31% | 150 (90-210) |
30% | 180 (90-270) |
52% |
| Refer family for further servicesc | 220 (140-300) |
34% | 120 (80-160) |
26% | 130 (60-200) |
42% |
| a X2=17.54, p<.05 b X2=15.81, p<.05 c X2=15.81, p<.05 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). |
||||||
CPS agencies with different administrative structures had different procedures for concluding the alternative response. Agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (72%) always notified the perpetrator about the determination much more often than did the other types of agencies (37% for State-administered and 38% for county-administered), (Table 7-22). Likewise, State-administered agencies with strong county structure always entered perpetrator information into the Central Registry more frequently than did the other agencies (67% v. 34% and 35%).
| Procedure | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Notify perpetrator of determinationa | 280 (20-360) |
37% | 220 (160-280) |
38% | 240 (130-360) |
72% |
| Enter perpetrator information in Central Registryb | 260 (170-340) |
34% | 200 (130-270) |
35% | 220 (100-350) |
67% |
| a X2=27.86, p<.01 b X2=32.58, p<.001 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). |
||||||
The specific activities conducted during the alternative response also varied by the agency's administrative structure. Again, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure stood out from the other types of agencies. State-administered agencies with strong county structure were more likely to always work with multidisciplinary teams (11%) than State-administered agencies (4%) or county-administered agencies (7%), (Table 7-23). These agencies were also more likely than the others to conduct family group conference meetings, interview additional family members, interview the persons who made the report alleging maltreatment, and remove the child. A different pattern emerged for one alternative response activity. Almost all agencies in State-administered (87%) and agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (86%) always reviewed prior CPS records when conducting an alternative response, compared to just 67 percent of county-administered agencies (Table 7-23).
| Activity | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Discuss with multidisciplinary teama | 30 (0-70) |
4% | 40 (10-70) |
7% | 40 (0-90) |
11% |
| Conduct family group conference meetingb | 10 (0-20) |
1% | 20 (10-50) |
4% | 70 (10-120) |
20% |
| Interview family members other than the caregiverc | 140 (70-210) |
19% | 140 (80-190) |
24% | 130 (50-220) |
39% |
| Interview reporter who alleged maltreatmentd | 120 (70-180) |
16% | 120 (60-180) |
21% | 260 (150-370) |
76% |
| Remove child if evidence of harm or danger of harme | 370 (260-480) |
49% | 210 (140-280) |
37% | 180 (90-260) |
52% |
| Review prior CPS recordsf | 650 (550-760) |
87% | 380 (300-470) |
67% | 290 (180-200) |
86% |
| a X2=20.75, p<.01 b X2=21.28, p<.01 c X2=20.1, p<.01 d X2=62.4, p<.001 e X2=25.66, p<.001 f X2=18.65, p<.05 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
In terms of standard use of various instruments or tools during the alternative response, other patterns emerged. State-administered agencies were less likely to always use formal safety assessment instruments (16%) and formal risk assessment instruments (22%) than agencies in county-administered systems (35% and 43% respectively) or agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (31% and 27% respectively), (Table 7-24). At the same time, State-administered agencies were more likely to always use standardized domestic violence assessment instruments (18%) compared to county-administered agencies (4%) or agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (8%).
| Instruments and tools | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I. ) |
Percent | |
| Formal safety assessment instrumenta | 120 (60-180) |
16% | 200 (130-270) |
35% | 100 (30-180) |
31% |
| Formal risk assessment instrumentb | 170 (110-230) |
22% | 240 (180-310) |
43% | 90 (20-160) |
27% |
| Standardized domestic violence assessment instrumentc | 130 (60-210) |
18% | 20 (0-40) |
4% | 30 (0-70) |
8% |
| a X2=17.01, p<.01 b X2=15.96, p<.01 c X2=11.96, p<.05 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
Access to professional resources during the alternative response also varied depending on the agency's administrative structure. For example, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure were more likely (75%) to always have child advocacy centers available compared to State administered agencies (55%) or county-administered systems (38%). For one professional resource, both State-administered agencies (48%) and agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (42%) were more likely (48%) to always have citizen CPS review teams available compared to agencies in county-administered systems (30%), (Table 7-25).
| Assistance | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Child Advocacy Centera | 410 (300-530) |
55% | 220 (150-280) |
38% | 250 (130-380) |
75% |
| Citizen CPS Review Teamb | 360 (250-430) |
48% | 170 (110-230) |
30% | 140 (60-220) |
42% |
| a X2=13.76, p<.01 b X2=10.0, p<.05 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
When different types of administrative structures were compared, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure emerged as different from the other types of agencies in certain practices or approaches used during investigations and alternative responses.
Agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure had more expansive and flexible investigations than other agencies. These agencies were more likely to always extend the investigation response to all children in the household and to include certain activities, such as discussing the case with a multidisciplinary team, as part of the investigation. These agencies also faced fewer obstacles to timely completion of the investigation. Agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure rarely reported obstacles like preparing materials for the case or court record and handling language barriers.
In terms of the alternative response function, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure appeared more consistent in how they conducted the response than the other types of agencies. These agencies had more required practices to perform before completing the alternative response. For example, CPS agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure were more often required to assess family needs, assess the underlying causes of maltreatment, and refer the family for further services before completing the response than the other kinds of agencies. Likewise, these agencies were more likely to routinely conduct procedures such as notifying the perpetrator of the determination and entering the perpetrator information into the Central Registry than other agencies. Agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure also more often discussed the response with a multidisciplinary team, conducted family group conference meetings, interviewed family members, and interviewed the reporter during the course of the alternative response.
For the alternative response function, county-administered agencies stood out in two ways. First, county-administered agencies were more likely to routinely use formal safety and risk assessment instruments as part of the alternative response when compared to the other agencies. In addition, these agencies were less likely to have access to certain professional resources such as Child Advocacy Centers or citizen CPS review teams during the alternative response.
[Go To Contents]
Further analyses of the role of law enforcement and other agencies examined differences in agencies' patterns of survey responses depending on their administrative structure. This section shows how responsibility sharing differed by function, type of maltreatment, and type of perpetrator depending on the CPS administrative structure.
The supplemental analyses found several differences in responsibility for CPS functions related to the agency's administrative structure. In terms of the overall level of responsibility for the screening function, more agencies in State-administered systems (52%) and county-administered systems (55%) had lead responsibility for screening/intake of all types of maltreatment than did agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (37%). At the same time, it was more common for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (48%) to have varied levels of responsibility depending on the type of maltreatment than it was for agencies in State-administered systems (19%) or county-administered systems (34%), (Table 7-26).
| Level of responsibility | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Lead for all types of maltreatment | 570 (410-730) |
52% | 530 (430-620) |
55% | 200 (90-310) |
37% |
| Share for all types of maltreatment | 200 (110-290) |
18% | 80 (40-130) |
9% | 70 (0-140) |
12% |
| Support for all types of maltreatment | 30 (0-70) |
3% | 10 (0-30) |
1% | 10 (0-30) |
2% |
| No responsibility | 30 (0-70) |
3% | 10 (0-20) |
1% | --- | --- |
| Other (lead some, support some, share some) | 210 (130-290) |
19% | 320
(240-410) |
34% | 260
(150-370) |
48% |
| Missing | 50 (10-100) |
5% | 10 (0-20) |
1% | 10 (0-30) |
2% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| * X2=18.53, p<.01 (excludes missing) Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
For the investigation function, a greater proportion of agencies in State-administered systems had lead responsibility for all types of maltreatment (25%) compared to agencies in county-administered systems (15%) and State-administered systems with strong county structure (5%), (Table 7-27).
| Responsibility | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Lead for all types of maltreatment | 280 (190-370) |
25% | 140 (70-210) |
15% | 30 (0-70) |
5% |
| Share for all types of maltreatment | 130 (70-190) |
12% | 50 (10-100) |
6% | 30 (0-80) |
6% |
| Support for all types of maltreatment | 20 (0-40) |
2% | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Other (lead some, support some, share some) | 660 (520-790) |
60% | 770 (700-840) |
80% | 490 (300-670) |
89% |
| Missing | 10 (0-30) |
1% | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies.
* X2=32.05, p<.001 |
||||||
Two patterns related to administrative structure emerged when examining CPS agency responsibility for investigations for different types of maltreatment. For certain more serious types of maltreatment, it was considerably less common for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure to have lead responsibility compared to agencies in State-administered or county-administered systems. For example, a smaller proportion of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (9%) had lead responsibility for investigating severe physical abuse than did agencies in State-administered systems (33%) or county-administered systems (20%), (Table 7-28). The same pattern emerged for severe and moderate sexual abuse, for child fatalities, for severe and moderate emotional maltreatment, and for risk of emotional maltreatment. For these types of maltreatment, fewer agencies in State-administered systems with strong county had lead responsibility than State- or county-administered agencies.
| Type of maltreatment | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Severe physical abusea | 360 (250-470) |
33% | 190 (120-270) |
20% | 50 (0-90) |
9% |
| Severe sexual abuseb | 300 (200-400) |
28% | 140 (70-200) |
15% | 40 (0-80) |
7% |
| Moderate sexual abusec | 340 (240-440) |
31% | 170 (100-250) |
18% | 50 (0-90) |
9% |
| Severe emotional maltreatmenth | 770 (610-930) |
70% | 740 (650-930) |
77% | 300 (190-420) |
56% |
| Moderate emotional maltreatmenti | 770 (630-900) |
70% | 780 (700-870) |
81% | 360 (210-520) |
66% |
| At risk of emotional maltreatmentj | 750 (610-900) |
69% | 660 (780-740) |
69% | 330 (180-480) |
60% |
| Child fatalityd | 220 (120-320) |
20% | 80 (40-120) |
9% | 20 (0-60) |
3% |
| At risk of physical abusee | 840 (670-1,000) |
76% | 680 (600-760) |
70% | 460 (280-650) |
84% |
| At risk of neglectf | 800 (650-940) |
73% | 690 (600-760) |
72% | 400 (240-590) |
76% |
| Status offenseg | 60 (10-120) |
6% | 80 (40-110) |
8% | 90 (20-170) |
17% |
| a X2=27.59, p<.001 b X2=30.54, p<.001 c X2=20.75, p<.01 d X2=21.96, p<.01 e X2=21.07, p<.01 f X2=19.43, p<.05 g X2=20.84, p<.01 h X2=28.04, p<.001 I X2=25.41, p<.01 j X2=17.0, p<.05 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
For other less serious types of maltreatment, agencies operating under State-administered systems with strong county structure more often had lead responsibility. A greater proportion of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure had lead responsibility for children at risk for physical abuse (84%), risk of neglect (76%), and status offenses (17%) compared to agencies in State-administered systems (76%, 73%, 6%, respectively) and county-administered systems (70%, 72%, 8%, respectively), (Table 7-28).
The analyses also revealed differences in how CPS agencies shared lead responsibility with law enforcement for different types of maltreatment (Table 7-29). While nearly two-thirds (64%) of CPS agencies in State-administered systems shared lead responsibility with law enforcement for physical abuse, the percentages were even higher for CPS agencies with other administrative structures. Seventy-four percent of CPS agencies in county-administered systems and 84 percent of CPS agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure shared lead responsibility with law enforcement when the allegation involved physical abuse. A similar pattern is seen for sexual abuse, with fewer agencies in State-administered systems sharing lead responsibility with law enforcement (62%) and more agencies in county-administered systems (74%) and in State-administered systems with strong county structure (78%) doing so. The differences by administrative structure are even more pronounced for neglect. Fewer than one-half (49%) of CPS agencies in State-administered systems shared lead responsibility with law enforcement for neglect. This compares to 59 percent of CPS agencies in county-administered systems and 74 percent of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure.
| Type of maltreatment | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Physical abusea | 700 (580-820) |
64% | 710 (640-790) |
74% | 460 (280-650) |
84% |
| Sexual abuseb | 680 (560-800) |
62% | 710 (630-790) |
74% | 430 (250-600) |
78% |
| Neglectc | 530 (430-630) |
49% | 570 (490-660) |
59% | 410 (240-570) |
74% |
| a X2=9.65, p<.001 b X2=6.06, p<.05 c X2=9.16, p<.01 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
The supplemental analyses found administrative structure differences in agency responsibility for different types of perpetrators. Agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure were less likely to have lead responsibility when perpetrators were facility personnel, but the reverse was true if the perpetrator was a noncaregiver (Table 7-30). Specifically, agencies in State-administered systems (30%) and county-administered systems (21%) more often had lead responsibility when the maltreatment was perpetrated by a staff person at a group home or institution than did agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (14%). When the perpetrator was not a caregiver, a higher proportion of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (16%) had lead responsibility compared to both State-administered agencies (1%) and county-administered agencies (10%).
| Type of perpetrator | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Group home or institution staffa | 330 (230-440) |
30% | 200 (130-270) |
21% | 80 (10-140) |
14% |
| Noncaregiverb | 10 (0-30) |
1% | 100 (50-140) |
10% | 90 (20-150) |
16% |
| a X2=33.26, p<.001 b X2=21.55, p<.001 Note: Percentages are not additive because agencies were included in each applicable row (category). Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
Differences by administrative structure in the role of law enforcement emerged for one type of perpetrator. Four percent of agencies in State-administered systems and 14 percent of agencies in county-administered systems shared responsibility with law enforcement for noncaregiver perpetrators (Table 7-31). Nearly one-third (31%) of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure shared lead responsibility with law enforcement for maltreatment by noncaregivers.
| Lead responsibility | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Share for noncaregiver perpetrators | 40 (10-70) |
4% | 140 (90-180) |
14% | 170 (80-260) |
31% |
| Do not share for noncaregiver perpetrators | 1,060 (940-1,180) |
96% | 830 (750-900) |
86% | 380 (210-550) |
69% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| a X2=12.37, p<.001 Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
There was also one notable difference by administrative structure in how CPS agencies shared lead responsibility with other, nonlaw enforcement agencies for different types of perpetrators. CPS agencies were more likely to share lead responsibility with other agencies for maltreatment perpetrated by staff at a group home or institution when their system was county-administered (33%) compared to agencies in State-administered systems (19%) or State-administered with strong county structure (10%), (Table 7-32).
| Lead responsibility | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Share for institutional perpetrators | 200 (120-290) |
19% | 320 (250-390) |
33% | 60 (0-110) |
10% |
| Do not share for institutional perpetrators | 890 (750-1,030) |
81% | 640 (540-740) |
67% | 490 (300-680) |
90% |
| Total | 1,100 (970-1,220) |
100% | 960 (890-1,030) |
100% | 550 (350-750) |
100% |
| a X2=14.34, p<.001 Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
These analyses examined differences related to administration structure in the role of CPS agencies in performing the traditional CPS functions. Overall, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure had lead responsibility for screening and investigation less often than the other types of agencies. For both functions, these agencies were more likely to have varied levels of responsibility depending on the type of maltreatment.
This same pattern held true when looking at agency responsibility for investigations by maltreatment type. For many of the more serious types of maltreatment, State- and county-administered agencies had lead responsibility much more often than agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure. For example, State- and county-administered agencies had lead responsibility for investigations of severe physical abuse, severe sexual abuse, moderate sexual abuse, and child fatalities more often than did agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure.
The role of law enforcement in responding to different types of maltreatment also depended on the agency's administrative structure. For certain types of maltreatment, State-administered agencies with strong county structure shared lead responsibility with law enforcement more often than State- or county-administered agencies. For example, these agencies more often shared lead responsibility with law enforcement for allegations of physical abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect.
When examining the level of responsibility for investigation for different types of perpetrators, two different patterns emerged. State-administered agencies more often had lead responsibility for institutional perpetrators, while State-administered agencies with strong county structure more often had lead responsibility for investigations for noncaregiver perpetrators.
Finally, a few differences by administrative structure emerged when examining the involvement of other agencies for different types of perpetrators. When the perpetrator was a noncaregiver, agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure shared lead responsibility with law enforcement much more often than did other agencies. Agencies in county-administered systems were more likely to share lead responsibility with other, nonlaw enforcement agencies when the perpetrator was a staff person at a group home or institution than were other agencies.
[Go To Contents]
Differences in the patterns of implemented change or considered change by administrative structure were also examined.
State- and county-administered agencies had less stable processes than agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure in terms of the investigation and alternative response functions (Table 7-33). For more than one-quarter (29%) of CPS agencies in State-administered systems and 21 percent of agencies in county-administered systems, the investigative process had been in place for just 1 to 2 years. Agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure had more longstanding investigative processes, as just 9 percent of these agencies reported that their investigative process had been in place for 1 to 2 years. Instead, for 43 percent of CPS agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure their investigative process had been in place 5 to 10 years.
A similar pattern is seen for the alternative response function. The alternative response process had been in place for 1 to 2 years for higher percentages of agencies in State-administered (18%) and county-administered systems (21%), compared to just 8 percent of agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure. Moreover, the alternative response process had been in place for 5 to 10 years for one-half of agencies in this latter group.
| Process | State-administered | County -administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Investigation processa | ||||||
| Process in place 1-2 years | 320 (220-420) |
29% | 210 (140-280) |
21% | 50 (0-100) |
9% |
| Process in place 3-4 years | 80 (20-140) |
7% | 200 (130-270) |
21% | 110 (30-190) |
21% |
| Process in place 5-10 years | 270 (180-350) |
24% | 370 (280-450) |
38% | 240 (130-240) |
43% |
| Process in place more than 10 years | 250 (130-270) |
23% | 110 (70-160) |
12% | 30 (0-70) |
5% |
| Missing | 180 (100-250) |
16% | 80 (40-120) |
8% | 120 (40-200) |
22% |
| Total | 1,100 | 100% | 960 | 100% | 550 | 100% |
| Alternative response processb | ||||||
| Process in place 1-2 years | 140 (70-210) |
18% | 120 (80-160) |
21% | 30 (0-70) |
8% |
| Process in place 3-4 years | 70 (30-110) |
9% | 110 (70-160) |
20% | 40 (0-80) |
11% |
| Process in place 5-10 years | 230 (150-300) |
30% | 200 (140-250) |
35% | 170 (80-260) |
50% |
| Process in place more than 10 years | 230 (120-330) |
30% | 60 (20-110) |
11% | 20 (0-60) |
6% |
| Missing | 100 (40-150) |
13% | 70 (40-110) |
13% | 90 (20-150) |
25% |
| Total | 760 | 100% | 570 | 100% | 340 | 100% |
| a X2=22.59, p<.001
(excludes missing) b X2=15.16, p<.01 (excludes missing) Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
The recent implementation of some specific changes differed depending on the administrative structure of the agencies (Table 7-34). In terms of changes related to staff training, it was more common for agencies in State-administered systems (35%) to report implementing changes in the last 6 months than it was for agencies in county-administered systems (19%) or for agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (23%).
Some implemented changes were more common among county-administered agencies. For example, agencies in county-administered systems (9%) had implemented more changes during screening in the amount of interaction with reporter and collaterals than had agencies in either State-administered systems (3%) or State-administered systems with strong county structure (3%). Likewise, it was more common for agencies in county-administered systems (14%) to have implemented changes in the use of multidisciplinary teams than it was for agencies in either State-administered systems (7%) or State-administered systems with strong county structure (5%).
| Change implemented | State-administered | County-administered | State-administered with strong county structure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | Estimate (C.I.) |
Percent | |
| Staff traininga | 380 (260-510) |
35% | 190 (130-250) |
19% | 130 (50-210) |
23% |
| Amount of interaction with reporter and collateralsa | 30 (0-60) |
3% | 90 (40-130) |
9% | 20 (0-40) |
3% |
| Use of multidisciplinary teams during the investigationc | 80 (21-140) |
7% | 140 (90-180) |
14% | 30 (0-70) |
5% |
| a X2=6.94, p<.05 a X2=6.22, p<.05 a X2=6.75, p<.05 Note: Numbers in italics are based on 10 or fewer agencies. |
||||||
Differences depending on administrative structure also emerged for a few of the changes that agencies had considered during the preceding 6 months (Table 7-35). Agencies in county-administered systems (19%) were more likely to have considered changes during the past 6 months related to screening/intake responses options than were State-administered agencies (11%) or agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure (2%). The same pattern emerged for changes related to the processing of referrals, the amount of interaction with family and/or child during the investigation, and the use of multidisciplinary teams during the investigation response. More county-administered agencies had considered changes in each of these areas when compared to either State-administered agencies or agencies in State-administered systems with strong county structure.