Executive Summary

State child protective services (CPS) agencies are charged with protecting children from abuse and neglect. CPS is widely viewed as a system in crisis. In many cases, CPS is not protecting children from abuse and is not supporting families that need help. Nationwide, most resources devoted to child protection are being used in an attempt to screen, investigate and substantiate the millions of abuse reports received by states each year, leaving few resources for services to troubled families. As a result, the CPS system is not addressing the conditions associated with child maltreatment, including poverty, single parenthood, substance abuse and social isolation. Most states respond to reports of child maltreatment with a standardized investigation, regardless of the severity of the alleged abuse. Accordingly, CPS is criticized for not being sufficiently proactive in some cases, and for being overzealous and intrusive in others.

In response to these problems, a new vision of CPS is emerging among child welfare experts and policymakers. A few states are attempting to link CPS with community-based family support systems and to give CPS agencies the flexibility to respond to less serious cases of child maltreatment with an assessment of family needs, rather than an investigation that focuses only on identifying perpetrators and fixing blame. Underlying this new vision of CPS is the premise that the best way to protect children is to support and nurture families and the communities in which they live.

Reports of child abuse and neglect have increased significantly during the past three decades. Most reports of child abuse concern neglect, as opposed to physical or sexual abuse. Approximately 1,000 children die each year as the result of severe abuse. Although incidents of abuse have increased, the percentage of reports investigated by CPS agencies has declined. The total yearly cost of these investigations nationwide is estimated at approximately $2.9 billion.

State legislatures play an important role in CPS. They define child abuse and neglect, mandate who must report child maltreatment, structure and appropriate funds for child welfare agencies, and prescribe CPS functions. State law regarding CPS is influenced by federal funding statutes that prescribe standards for identifying, reporting and responding to child abuse.

The functions of CPS are remarkably uniform from state to state. CPS agencies accept and investigate reports of child maltreatment. Investigated cases are classified as substantiated or unsubstantiated. Substantiated reports may result in some form of coercive state action and usually are placed on a central child abuse registry. CPS agencies also deliver some services to families, including intensive family preservation services designed to resolve crises and prevent out-of-home placements of children. The current CPS system has been criticized for being overly rigid, crisis-oriented, fragmented, isolated and unresponsive to the needs of troubled families. These problems result partly from an increasing number of abuse reports in the wake of broadened definitions of maltreatment, expanded lists of mandatory reporters of child maltreatment, increases in poverty, a growing number of single-parent families and an increase in substance abuse. Some observers are concerned that welfare reform will lead to even higher rates of child abuse and neglect, further straining the CPS system.

Most recent initiatives in comprehensive CPS reform consist of several key components:

Planning for legislative change. Planning for CPS reform involves determining the views and concerns of a wide array of stakeholders, including families and CPS workers, and identifying community values.

Use of family-centered assessments. Central to CPS reform is legislative authorization for flexibility in responding to reports of abuse and neglect. On the one hand, serious criminal offenses against children remain subject to investigation and prosecution. On the other hand, CPS may respond to less serious allegations with an assessment of family strengths and needs and an offer of services.

Changes to the central abuse registry. Registries are controversial because they often label caretakers as abusers, regardless of the severity of the maltreatment or the circumstances under which it occurred. Legislatures in some states are limiting the use of central registries, in keeping with the new role of CPS as a family-serving agency.

Clarification of the role of law enforcement agencies in the investigation of child abuse. In many cases, CPS reform legislation addresses a lack of coordination between police and CPS agencies in the investigation of criminal child abuse. Some states are referring child protective investigations to law enforcement agencies, freeing CPS agencies from the role conflict inherent in being both investigator and helper.

Collaboration between CPS agencies and communities. Legislatures in a few states are calling for partnerships between CPS agencies and neighborhood-based systems of family support, such as schools, churches, community organizations and mental health providers. The premise underlying these initiatives is that the responsibility for child protection should be shared by the various individuals and organizations that are in contact with children and families.

Implementation strategies. Some states are experimenting with CPS reform through pilot programs, while others have enacted immediate statewide change. The choice between these two implementation strategies depends upon the political environment, the capacity of the CPS system and other factors.

Outcome evaluation. Legislators need information about the results of experiments in CPS reform to make intelligent decisions about expanding, continuing or terminating new programs. Accordingly, most state legislatures that have enacted CPS reform have included an evaluation component.

This publication examines the CPS reforms enacted by six states--Florida, Missouri, Iowa, Virginia, North Dakota and Hawaii. Each state took a somewhat different approach to the reform components previously identified.

In planning for CPS reform, Florida embarked on a lengthy and comprehensive effort to obtain the views of a wide array of stakeholders. The resulting family services response system features a nonadversarial approach to most reports of child maltreatment, decentralization of many CPS functions, delegation of criminal fact-finding activities to local law enforcement agencies, promotion of partnerships between CPS and local communities and an evaluation of specified outcome measures. Florida also eliminated classification of abuse reports as either substantiated or unsubstantiated, and abolished use of the central registry for background screening.

The Missouri legislature authorized a pilot program for experimentation with a dual-track program, in which the state CPS agency can refer abuse reports to either an investigative track or an assessment track, with the option to reassign cases from one track to the other if circumstances warrant. Assessment cases in pilot areas no longer are classified as probable cause or insufficient probable cause, nor are they placed on the central registry. CPS and law enforcement agencies jointly investigate cases of serious abuse in accordance with local protocols. Like Florida, the Missouri legislation directs CPS to collaborate with local communities to better protect children from maltreatment. Finally, the law calls for an independent evaluation of the pilot program.

Iowa began its reform initiative with an approach to abuse reports that combines elements of a family-centered assessment and an investigation. The initial legislation authorized a pilot program; legislation enacted in 1997 provides for statewide implementation of the new approach by mid-1998. Iowa also changed the central registry to exclude cases of minor physical injury that are considered isolated and unlikely to recur.

North Dakota enacted a single-track CPS system, in which all reports of child maltreatment are subject to an assessment, rather than an investigation. The legislation also eliminated classification of reports in terms of probable cause; however, assessment cases still are entered on the central registry.

Virginia recently enacted a pilot program similar to Missouri's, featuring a dual-track approach to abuse reports, elimination of report classification, joint investigations with law enforcement agencies, a call for the use of community resources in responding to child abuse and neglect, and an evaluation of outcomes.

Hawaii passed reform legislation authorizing the creation of two neighborhood places to serve as the base for multidisciplinary teams that could include CPS workers, health professionals and community educators. In response to reports of child maltreatment, these teams will assess the strengths and needs of families, identify desired outcomes and formulate action plans.

Although many of the legislative initiatives discussed in this report have not yet been fully implemented or evaluated, research in Missouri and Florida indicates that the CPS reforms in those states are yielding positive results. In both states, families respond more positively to assessments that attempt to identify strengths, needs and resources than to traditional child protective investigations. CPS agencies are including family members in the process of planning and delivering services and are linking families with community-based resources. Particularly important is the finding that these reforms have not compromised child safety.

For additional information regarding Child Welfare, please contact the Child Welfare Project at 303/364-7700.

Back to the Child Welfare Home Page