[ Main page of Report | Contents of Report ]
The overall goal of the National Study of Child Protective Services Systems and Reform Efforts (National Study) was to describe the current landscape of the child protective services (CPS) across the United States and the future directions or systems improvement efforts underway within this landscape.(1) The study focused on such front-end functions as screening, intake, and investigation with particular attention given to the identification and description of emerging alternatives to what is considered the traditional CPS investigation function.
The National Study was designed to present a general representation of the similarities and differences in the ways that CPS functions, as delineated in policy and carried out in practice. To accomplish this objective, the National Study collected data from several sources. These sources included a literature review, written policy materials from each State, interviews with State CPS administrators to confirm and expand upon the information obtained from the policy materials, a mail survey to a random sample of local CPS agencies, and site visits to local CPS agencies identified as implementing new and innovative approaches.
This report presents the findings from the State policy review component of the National Study. Information was gleaned from written policies and interviews with State administrators. In addition, the organizational and administrative structure for CPS policy implementation was examined and is discussed in detail.
This report is based upon policy summaries that were derived from both written materials and interviews. (See Appendix A, Methodology.) A topical outline was developed that focused on administrative structure, screening and intake, investigation, and alternative response. Items of interest were identified for each broad category. The most recent State policy manuals as of 2001 were examined for all 50 States and the District of Columbia, and data were extracted for each item of interest.(2) (See Appendix B, List of State Policy Manuals.)
Some topics were supplemented by additional data sources. For example, information concerning the role of law enforcement in front-end functions of CPS was abstracted from a project conducted by the American Humane Association.(3) Data concerning Central Registries and due process requirements were abstracted from State statutes from the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information. These data were also added to the topical outline, and then policy summaries were developed for each State. (See Appendix C, Blank State CPS Policy Review Form.)
During spring 2002, State-level administrators were asked to review their policy summary and were interviewed in order to confirm its accuracy and provide updates and corrections as needed. Revised manuals were collected if the original manuals had been updated. Forty-eight States took part in these interviews.(4) The confirmation interviews with the State administrators served to update information that had been gathered, clarify definitions of terms, and in some instances to discuss the intent of State statutes that were the foundation of departmental policy. During March 2003, State administrators were invited to review a draft copy of this report—11 States submitted corrections, which were subsequently incorporated into the final document.
This report focuses on specific CPS functions and crosscutting themes. These functions are those that comprise the child protection response to allegations of abuse and neglect. Because the responsibilities for these functions may reside within one or more of several agencies—the State CPS agency, the local CPS agency, State or local law enforcement, and various other governmental or nongovernmental agencies—the locus of authority also was examined from the perspective of the State CPS agency’s policy manual.
Operational definitions described in this report include:
For each function, several different features are discussed in depth. Commonalities and differences among States are discussed, with an overall objective of ascertaining the core policy similarities among State CPS systems.
Supplementary tables, which are located at the end of each chapter, provide supporting data. The appendices include a more detailed discussion of methodology, a list of State policy manuals, a blank State CPS Policy Profile form, and a list of references.
(1) Walter R. McDonald & Associates, Inc., and its partners Westat, Inc., the American Humane Association, and KRA Corporation conducted the National Study on behalf of the Children’s Bureau, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Administration for Children and Families, and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
(2) The District of Columbia will be referred to as a State throughout this report.
(3) This study Law Enforcement, Child Protection Agencies and Hybrids: A Guide to the Field was funded by the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation and had the goal of differentiating child protection systems by the level of use of law enforcement in addressing child abuse and neglect.
(4) The States that participated in the interview component of the National Study included Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
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)