⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 7 findings
F1
Since 2012, the percentage of dropped calls has increased significantly to an unacceptable level.
F2
Significant improvement in dropped call rates is a reasonable expectation because during the last three years, there have been months when the Child Abuse Registry achieved dropped call rates in the range of 5%-7%.
F3
The new requirement to document all Information-Only calls from mandated reporters contributed to increased waiting time on Child Abuse Registry calls because most social workers do not answer waiting calls while doing the additional documentation.
F4
The volume of child abuse calls coming into the Child Abuse Registry has significantly increased, which necessitates changing management strategies for dealing with the increased amount and complexity of the activity.
F5
The Adult Protective Services hotline was absorbed into the Child Abuse Registry. Most social workers interviewed reported that they felt competent and enjoyed taking the calls for the agency from which they came (child or adult), but still felt unsure, slower, and less confident taking calls for the other agency.
F6
Hotline social workers are required to input the same repeated data on multiple forms for the same call. Manual data entry is duplicated, which requires additional time away from being available to take waiting calls.
F7
CAR management does not appear to have specific policies or strategies for dealing with peak periods when there are long wait times and high dropped call rates. RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, the 2014- 2015 Grand Jury requires responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Child Abuse Hotline: Unanswered Cries for Help Based on its investigation titled "Child Abuse Hotline - Unanswered Cries for Help," the 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following four recommendations: The Child Abuse Registry should examine the feasibility of utilizing an
Recommendations 4
-
R1abbreviated report for mandated Information-Only calls to expedite completion of these reports, thus freeing up the hotline worker to take waiting calls. (F.3.)
-
R2Additional training of all Child Abuse Registry social workers should continue until all workers feel equally competent taking both adult and child calls. While training is disruptive and time consuming, the formal training should continue as a priority. (F.5.)
-
R3All documentation completed by hotline social workers should be examined with the goal of eliminating redundancies in order to allow quicker completion of the paperwork, thus freeing up social workers for waiting calls. (F.6.)
-
R4The Social Services Agency and the Child Abuse Registry should become more proactive in addressing the excessive number of dropped calls and establish strategies and policies to reduce the dropped-call rate with an initial goal of returning to less than 5%. A partial list of strategies that could be considered for dealing with spike volume periods include: a) training and requiring staff to multitask (taking a waiting call prior to completing the post-call work on the previous call); b) designating supervisors to answer waiting calls; and c) specifying staff members to triage calls to determine the level of urgency and potentially taking a message for call-back. (F.1., F.2., F.4., F.7)
Commendations 18
-
CM1Interviews of managers from: LA County Department of Children & Family Services
-
CM2Documents: CA Department of Social Services; Child Welfare Services/Case Management System (CWS/CMS) pp. 1-3. Child and Family Services Operations Manual: Child Abuse Registry, Number
-
CM3M0109. Review of random sample of 100 cases of the 2203 that were initially not referred
-
CM4for investigation but at a subsequent hotline call, were referred, mostly as a 10- day referral (a referral where the social worker must visit home within 10 days). CAR graph presenting total number of calls, number of reports, number of
-
CM5dropped calls, and number of reports for the period from January 2013 to July,
-
CM6indicating calls answered, longest waiting times, number of dropped calls, and total calls answered. Summary of California Child Welfare Services: Report 2013-110 Summary-April 7. 2014. (Audit of Butte, Orange, and San Francisco County.) California State Auditor's Report: Child Welfare Services. Report #2013-110 (Full
-
CM72014. (Audit of Butte, Orange, and San Francisco County.) California State Auditor's Report: Child Welfare Services. Report #2013-110 (Full
-
CM8Report.). April, 2014.
-
CM9Interviews with staff members at all levels of the Child Abuse Registry and the Social Services Agency. Interviews with child and adult abuse hotline social workers. 10.
-
CM1011. Review of Structured Decision Making (SDM) assessment tools (documents).
-
CM11Review of Structured Decision Making (SDM) assessment tools (documents).
-
CM12Interview of supervisors/managers of Child Protective Services Divisions of Los Angeles, San Diego, Riverside, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and San Bernardino. Review of OC CAR website discussion on "Abuse Report." Retrieved from
-
CM13http://ssa.ocgov.com/abuse/. Review of CFS Operations Manual Sections on:
-
CM14Sexual Abuse Allegations-Child Abuse Registry (CAR) Number: A-0205
-
CM15Human Services Committee members sat in with Senior Social Workers to observe as calls came into the hotline. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
-
CM16Families, Children's Bureau (2003). Decision-making in Unsubstantiated Child Protective Services Cases. Washington, DC. Child Abuse Hotline: Unanswered Cries for Help
-
CM17Virginia Board of Social Sciences (June, 2009). Adult Protective Services Minimum Training Standards. Review of past Grand Jury Reports 18. • 1993-1994, Child Abuse Registry • 2003-2004, A Child At Risk: Missed Opportunities To Save a Life • 2005-2006, Improving Child Abuse Response • 2006-2007, Death By Abuse: One Death is Too Many Child Abuse Hotline: Unanswered Cries for Help REFERENCES CA Codes (Penal Code sections: 116-1174.3). Retrieved 12/31/2014 from: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&grouop=11001- 12000&file= California Child Abuse & Neglect Reporting Law, Condensed Version, 2006. P1 CFS Operations Manual, 2014 M-0109, Child Abuse Registry (CAR). Orange County Grand Jury Report, 1993-1994. Child Abuse Registry. Schweble, S. (2014, July 2). Parents accused of caging autistic son. The Orange County Register. Retrieved from https://www.ocregister.com/articles/boy-627707- police-dunn.html
-
CM18• 1993-1994, Child Abuse Registry • 2003-2004, A Child At Risk: Missed Opportunities To Save a Life • 2005-2006, Improving Child Abuse Response • 2006-2007, Death By Abuse: One Death is Too Many Child Abuse Hotline: Unanswered Cries for Help REFERENCES CA Codes (Penal Code sections: 116-1174.3). Retrieved 12/31/2014 from: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&grouop=11001- 12000&file= California Child Abuse & Neglect Reporting Law, Condensed Version, 2006. P1 CFS Operations Manual, 2014 M-0109, Child Abuse Registry (CAR). Orange County Grand Jury Report, 1993-1994. Child Abuse Registry. Schweble, S. (2014, July 2). Parents accused of caging autistic son. The Orange County Register. Retrieved from https://www.ocregister.com/articles/boy-627707- police-dunn.html
Agency Responses 1
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.