The
Summit Initiative on Child Protection and Family Support
Summit
Work Groups
To accomplish
the goals of the Summit Initiative, five Summit Working
Groups were convened and met regularly over the six-month
period from January through June, 2001.
Work
Group on Dual Track
Premise:
The current child protection system does not allow for differential
responses to reports of serious and less serious reports
of abuse and neglect. Though serious cases are screened
in and investigated, the majority of reports (70% or more)
are screened out with no services offered. Significant resources
are expended in this process, while few or no benefits accrue
to the families and children whose cases are screened out.
Massachusetts should explore the dual track systems currently
operating in over 10 states and determine if adopting such
a strategy would result in a more efficient use of resources
and better outcomes for children and families.
Scope
of Work:
- Review Massachusetts' uniform approach to screening,
assessing, investigating, and servicing reports/cases
of abuse and neglect.
- Compile data regarding costs associated with screening
out cases that are not deemed to require state agency
involvement.
- Compile data, including cost data, outcome measures,
related to dual track systems in other states.
- Identify child protection system improvements in dual
track states. · Explore identified barriers and challenges
posed by dual track systems.
- Identify implication of dual track systems on current
mandated reporting laws.
Work
Group on Multidisciplinary Assessment
Premise:
Approximately 30% of children reported to the state child
protection system have experienced serious abuse or neglect.
These children require timely and comprehensive clinical
assessments to determine their status, i.e. medical, psychosocial,
legal, etc., and to develop an effective plan for treatment
and intervention. These assessments can best be provided
through permanent, community-based multidisciplinary child
protection teams that operate under a statewide system grounded
in uniform standards of practice and accountability.
Scope
of Work:
- Document the current composition, location, referral
mechanisms and overall functions of multidisciplinary
teams in Massachusetts, i.e. Child Advocacy Centers (CACs),
Sexual Assault Intervention Teams (SAIN teams), Multidisciplinary
Assessment Teams (MDATs), hospital-based Child Protection
Teams (CPTs).
- Document extent and sources of funding for the above.
- Compile and review data on multidisciplinary assessment
teams in other states, e.g. types of cases referred; recidivism
rates, prosecution rates, child fatality rates among teamed
cases; satisfaction rates among mandatory reporters and
families; etc.
- Examine legislation that authorizes the functioning
and funding of teams, and the roles of state and community
partners.
- Explore political and other elements that have contributed
to the establishment and maintenance of effective team
systems across the country.
Work
Group on Family & Community Supports
Premise:
Approximately 70 percent of child abuse and neglect reports
received by the child protection agency do not warrant court
or law enforcement involvement. Children and families involved
in these reports are generally screened out and away from
the system without being offered any services or supports.
Without an opportunity to have their needs assessed and
addressed, many may experience further difficulty that could
result in future reports. These cases could better be handled
through a non-adversarial, community-based response system
grounded in family support principles and practice.
Currently,
Massachusetts has the beginnings of such a response system,
however it is fragmented and lacks coordination. This system
could be organized to serve both children and families reported
to and screened away from the state agency, and families
at-large who voluntarily seek a range of community-based
supports. A coordinated, statewide system of family supports
and services would promote strong families and prevent child
abuse and neglect.
Scope
of Work:
- Document the number of reports to DSS that are screened-out
and unsupported, and the range of services provided/offered
to this population.
- Document services provided to families and children
involved in substantiated cases of abuse and neglect,
including services provided through mental health managed
care.
- Identify Massachusetts data from the Urban Institute's
National Survey of America's Families and from other sources
that document the need for family supports.
- Explore how a statewide, coordinated system would impact
current family support/prevention partnerships and programs
involving the Department of Social Services, the Children's
Trust Fund, the Department of Public Health, the Department
of Education, and local schools.
- Explore models of community partnerships in other states,
including mechanisms available to children and families
that can both assess and address their identified needs.
- Document current Federal, State and local funding for
child and family services and community supports.
Work
Group on Treatment and Intervention
Premise:
Most current clinical practice involving child victims of
serious abuse and neglect does not reflect the latest research
and data on the effects of trauma on the developing brain.
Implications of this research must be more fully understood
by policymakers and practitioners so child victims can benefit
from effective state-of-the-art treatment and interventions
that address both immediate safety risk and long-term developmental
risk.
Scope
of Work:
- Compile a comprehensive library of the most current
data about the effects of child abuse/neglect trauma on
children's brain development, e.g. articles, studies,
etc.
- Compile research data concerning the links between
poor scholastic performance, low MCAS test scores, behavioral
problems, etc. and exposure to family violence and/or
abuse.
- Convene a series of symposia for Summit work group
members and other policymakers and practitioners aimed
at imparting the new data, documenting its impact on children's
medical, psychological, behavioral and educational status,
and distilling policy and programmatic recommendations.
- Document the current network of treatment services
for Massachusetts' abused and neglected children, and
its associated costs.
- Identify gaps in the provision of treatment services,
including types of specialized services, availability
of trained practitioners, geographic limitations, etc.
- Document the costs associated with not developing and
providing effective treatment and interventions for abused/neglected
children in Massachusetts.
Work
Group on Workforce/Workload
Premise:
An effective and efficient child protection system requires
a competent, adequately staffed and professionally trained
work force, and a manageable workload that supports quality
casework.
Scope
of Work:
- Review Massachusetts data regarding number of workers
in workforce, turnover rate, percentage of workers/supervisors
with advanced degrees, in-service training, etc.
- Compile budgetary information about current level of
support.
- Compile information about current recruitment practices,
including roles of schools of social work, NASW, etc.
- Identify barriers to maintaining a competent workforce.
- Compile and examine data on innovative workforce/workload
practices from other states.
- Review related legislation supporting improved workforce/workload
practices in other states.
- Explore how identified best practices can be incorporated
into the Massachusetts child protection system.
|
