cja task force meeting - yourhonor.com · v isidro alaniz x tym belseth x tony bradley x irene...

CJA TASK FORCE MEETING

April 22, 2016, 9:00 am-1:00 pm Texas Center for the Judiciary

1210 San Antonio St, St. Austin, TX 78701

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Agenda……………………………………………………………………………… 1

Task Force Roster…………………………………………………………………. 2

Meeting Minutes (01/15/16)…………………………………………………..…… 4

Membership Committee Materials…………………..…………………………….. 6

Grants Committee Report……...………………...………………………………… 15

FY2017 Grant Proposal Summaries………………………………………………... 22

FY2016 First Quarter Reports…...…………………………………………………. 38

FY2016 Second Quarter Reports..…………………………………………………... 43

FY2016 Budget………..………………………………………………………………. 49

CJA Program Instructions...…………………………………………………………. 50

FY2016 Committee Scope of Work…….……………………………………….……. 73

FY2016 Committee Rosters…….……………………………………….……………. 76

Children’s Justice Act Task Force

Quarterly Task Force Meeting April 22, 2016

9:00 AM‐ 1:00 PM

AGENDA

8:30 Networking Breakfast

9:00 Welcome and Introductions – Kris Linenberger

9:10 Approval of January 15, 2016 meeting minutes – Action Item

9:10 CACTX Multidisciplinary Team Enhancement Program Presentation – Joy Rauls

and Catherine Bass

9:30 Task Force Education: Cook Children’s Hospital – Dyann Daley, MD, Executive

Director of Cook Children’s Center for the Prevention of Child Maltreatment

10:30 Break

10:45 Task Force Membership Update (Action Item) – Heidi Penix

11:00 FY17 Grants Discussion

12:00 Grantee/Budget Update – Heidi Penix

12:15 Committee Breakouts/Working lunch

1:00 Adjourn

1

TX Children’s Justice Act Task Force Members 2015‐2016

Kris Linenberger, Chair Training Manager Texas Homeless Network Austin, TX (512) 482‐8270 [email protected]

Dan Powers, Vice ChairSenior Vice President/Clinical Director Collin County CAC Plano, TX 972‐633‐6615 [email protected]

Laura Wolf, Chair‐ElectExecutive Director CASA of Travis County Austin, TX 512‐539‐2665 [email protected]

Isidro Alaniz District Attorney Webb Country District Attorney’s Office Laredo, TX 956‐523‐4912 [email protected]

Tymothy BelsethETV/Youth Specialist Texas Department of Family and Protective Services Austin, TX 512‐438‐3769 [email protected]

Tony Bradley Collin County Sheriff’s Office (retired) Plano, TX 972‐633‐6626 [email protected]

Irene Clements Executive Director National Foster Parent Association Pflugerville, TX 512‐775‐1024 [email protected]

Dr. Jamye CoffmanMedical Director Cook Children’s Center for Prevention of Child Maltreatment and CARE Team Fort Worth, TX [email protected]

Cathy Crabtree Special Projects Consultant National Children’s Alliance Austin, TX (512) 258‐9920 [email protected]

Jon Evans Attorney and Counselor at Law Austin, TX 512‐476‐4075 [email protected]

Jesse Gonzales, Jr.Attorney at Law Fort Stockton, TX (432) 940‐5646 [email protected]

Angela Goodwin, JD Director of Investigations CPS Austin, TX 512‐438‐4746 [email protected]

Denise Hyde Attorney at Law 812 San Antonio Street, Suite 304 Austin, TX 78701 512‐474‐9911 denise@hyde‐law.com

Aurora Martinez JonesAssociate Court Judge Travis County Civil Associate Courts Austin, TX 512‐854‐2484 [email protected]

Gabriel E. Martinez, Jr.Captain, Special Projects City of Laredo Police Department Laredo, TX 956‐795‐2899 [email protected]

Lindsay Mullins Executive Director, State Government Affairs BNSF Railway Austin, TX 512‐473‐2823 [email protected]

Julie PrudhomeClinical Director Garth House, Mickey Mehaffy CAC Beaumont, TX 409‐838‐9084 [email protected]

Joy Rauls Executive Director Children Advocacy Centers of Texas Austin, TX 512‐258‐9920 [email protected]

2

TX Children’s Justice Act Task Force Members 2015‐2016

Monica Reyes Parent Liaison The Children’s Partnership/Travis County Health and Human Services Austin, TX 512‐854‐7872 [email protected]

Craig SpinnDeputy Executive Director of Administrative Services Region 13 Education Service Center Austin, TX 512‐919‐5313 [email protected]

Vicki Spriggs CEO Texas CASA, Inc. Austin, TX (512) 473‐2627 [email protected]

Stephanie Stephens Assistant County Attorney Nacogdoches County Attorney’s Office Nacogdoches, TX 936‐560‐7788 [email protected]

Nhung TranDevelopmental‐Behavioral Pediatrician Scott and White Healthcare Department of Pediatrics Temple, TX 254‐724‐6060 [email protected]

Hon. Angela Tucker Judge 199th Judicial District Court – Collin County McKinney, TX 972‐548‐4415 [email protected]

Staff

Heidi Penix Program Director (512) 482‐8986 (517) 974‐8009 cell [email protected]

3

MINUTES of Texas Children’s Justice Act Task Force Meeting Date: January 15, 2016

Call to order: A regular meeting of the Texas Children’s Justice Act (CJA) Task Force was held at the Texas Association of Counties Building in Austin, TX on January 16th, 2016. The meeting convened at 9:03 a.m. with Kris Linenberger, CJA Task Force Chair, presiding. Members in attendance: Isidro Alaniz, Tym Belseth, Tony Bradley, Irene Clements, Jamye Coffman, Cathy Crabtree, Jesse Gonzales, Jr., Angela Goodwin, Aurora Martinez‐Jones, Kris Linenberger, Gabriel Martinez, Dan Powers, Julie Prudhome, Joy Rauls, Monica Reyes, Vicki Spriggs, Craig Spinn, Stephanie Stephens, Angela Tucker, Nhung Tran Members not in attendance: Jon Evans, Denise Hyde, Diana Martinez, Lindsay Mullins, Laura Wolf Also in attendance: Catherine Bass, Miriam Soto Martinez, Heidi Penix, Tiffany Roper, Shell Schwartz Welcome and Introductions by Kris Linenberger. Kris Linenberger welcomed members and guests. Introductions were made around the room. Approval of past meeting minutes: CJA meeting minutes from October 15, 2015 were disseminated to Task Force members for review via email on October 12. Minutes were approved without objection. Project Spotlight – Harris County: Miriam Soto Martinez, Forensic Anthropology Research Fellow from the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences, presented on their most recent CJA research project and the Infant Injury Database. The Infant Injury Database is a long‐term data collection project intended to contribute to the assessment and understanding of infant death. The data collected in the database includes circumstances surrounding death, law enforcement investigation, medical findings and autopsy results. The potential uses of the database include research, the development of screening protocols and tests, and the development of diagnostic strategies. There are currently 363 infants included in the database. Dr. Soto Martinez also discussed the results of Harris County’s FY15 project Nerve Root and Dorsal Root Ganglia Hemorrhage as an Indicator of Traumatic Head Injury. The project found that prominent nerve root and ganglia hemorrhage is a valid indicator of traumatic head injury. Project Spotlight – SafePlace: Shell Schwartz, Director of Disability Services, presented on the progress that has been made with the project Promoting Justice: Responding to Abuse Against Children with Disabilities. SafePlace will create a website that will provide information and resources to professionals and caregivers on working with child abuse victims with disabilities. Ms. Schwartz reviewed the planned website outline with CJA Task Force members and requested feedback from members. Members recommendations included changing one of the website headings from “criminal justice staff” to “investigators & prosecutors” and changing “child welfare” to “child protection”. Task Force members got in touch with Shell after the meeting as well to offer specific content suggestions and put her in touch with others who could assist with content review. FY17 Grant Process Overview: Heidi Penix directed members the draft of FY2017 CJA Request for Applications on page 73 of the meeting materials. She briefly reviewed the updated RFA noting that the due date for applications would be Friday, March 18th and that the goal for the public release of the RFA was January 18th (Note: the actual release date was January 22nd and the application due date was March 22nd). The Grants Committee met by conference call on December 16th to review the content of the RFA. The Committee agreed to include page limits for each of the sections of the grants proposal. Other than some minor updates to wording and projects, this was the only substantive change to the grants process in FY17.

4

Ms. Penix informed the Task Force that she would email them the Request for Applications when it was released to the public and requested that members share the document widely with organizations and individuals across the state. Committee Breakout: The Membership and Grants Committees met separately. The Membership Committee discussed gaps in knowledge on the Task Force as well as regional gaps and possible individuals to fill these vacancies. Additionally, Membership discussed topics for presentations at upcoming Task Force meetings. The Grants Committee discussed ideas for possible projects based on Task Force Priorities that might be appropriate for CJA or organizations that CJA might collaborate with that we have not considered before. The meeting adjourned at 1:15 pm.

5

SLATE OF NOMINEES FOR TASK FOR MEMBERSHIP

Key Criteria

Primary Expertise Relevant ExperiencePrimary

Ethnic/Racial/Geographic

Meredith ChaconAssistant District

AttorneyBexar County Angela Goodwin Prosecuting Attorney

Ms. Chacon has been prosecuting CPS and

criminal cases in Bexar county for 12 years.

She was recently appointed by D.A. Nico

Hood to a new position wherein her sole

function is to be a liaison between law

enforcement and CPS. Part of her position

will be training both groups on what is

important when working with the other

group to best ensure child safety and

obtain a successful prosecution.

San Antonio/South

Ann Johnson

Human Trafficking

Section Chief and

Assistant District

Attorney

Harris County Angela Goodwin

Prosecuting

Attorney/Human

Trafficking

Ms. Johnson has been practicing law for

fifteen years. She began working for the

Harris County DA's office in 2001 where

she worked in the juvenile courts. In 2005,

she went into private practice defending

children, including many child victims of

prostitution. Ann also had an active

appellate practice and one of her most

significant cases was In re B.W. , in which

the Texas Supreme Court reserved the

Harris County DA's prosecution of a 13‐year

old for prostitution and created a

framework for protecting child victims of

exploitation and human trafficking. Ann

returned to Harris County DA's Office in

2013 where she now leads their human

trafficking division

Harris County/Gulf Coast

Candidate Name Candidate Title Agency/Org. Affiliation

Name of Individual

Making

Recommendation

6

Bylaw

Name Law

Enf

orce

men

t Com

mun

ity

Crim

inal

Cou

rt J

udge

Civ

il C

ourt

Jud

ge

Crim

inal

Pro

secu

ting

Atto

rney

Civ

il Pr

osec

utin

g A

ttorn

ey

Def

ense

Atto

rney

Chi

ld A

dvoc

ate

(Leg

al)

CA

SA R

epre

sent

ativ

e

Hea

lth P

rofe

ssio

nal

Men

tal H

ealth

Pro

fess

iona

l

Chi

ld P

rote

ctiv

e Se

rvic

e A

genc

ies

Wor

king

w/ H

omel

ess

Yout

h

Wor

king

w/ C

hild

ren

w/ D

isab

ilitie

s

Fost

er Y

outh

Rep

rese

ntat

ive

Pare

nt G

roup

Rep

rese

ntat

ive

Rep

rese

ntat

ive

of C

AC

TX

Educ

atio

n R

epre

sent

ativ

e

Gov

ernm

ent A

ffairs

Rep

rese

ntat

iv

Isidro Alaniz xTym Belseth xTony Bradley xIrene Clements xJamye Coffman xCathy Crabtree xJon Evans xJesse Gonzales xAngela Goodwin xDenise Hyde xAurora Martinez-Jones xKris Linenberger xGabriel Martinez, Jr. xDiana Martinez xLindsay Mullins xDan Powers xJulie Prudhome xJoy Rauls xMonica Reyes xCraig Spinn xVicki Spriggs xStephanie Stephens xNhung Tran xAngela Tucker xLaura Wolf x

`

E

NC

HCHC

HC

GC

STHC

HC

S

ST

ST

S

STST

NC

HCW

ST

ST

NC

ST

ST

HC

NC

1Total 21 2 1 1 2 21 11 2 1 22 1 1 1

Interest/Experience

TF Interest

CJA Task Force Profile

Grant-Required CategoriesRegion

9

W= 1 West

HC= 7 Hill Country

S= 2 South

E= 1 East

NC= 4 North Central

P 0 Panhandle

GC 1 Gulf Coast

St 9 Statewide

10

CJA TASK FORCE STAGGERED TERMS AS OF 01/14/15

July 2016 July 2017 July 2018 July 2019 July 2020

3rd Term Expires 1. Cathy

Crabtree

3rd Term Expires 1. Kris

Linenberger

3rd Term Expires 1. Tony

Bradley 2. Irene

Clements 3. Gabriel

Martinez 4. Julie

Prudhome 5. Craig Spinn 6. Nhung

Tran 7. Laura Wolf

3rd Term Expires 1. Isidro Alaniz 2. Aurora

Martinez Jones

3. Lindsay Mullins

4. Monica Reyes

3rd Term Expires 1. Tym

Belseth 2. Jesse

Gonzales 3. Diana

Martinez 4. Dan

Powers

Up for re‐election 2. Tony

Bradley (3rd)

3. Irene Clements (3rd)

4. Gabriel Martinez (3rd)

5. Julie Prudhome (3rd)

6. Craig Spinn (3rd)

7. Nhung Tran (3rd)

8. Laura Wolf (3rd)

9. Tym Belseth (2nd)

10. Jesse Gonzales (2nd)

11. Diana Martinez (2nd)

12. Dan Powers (2nd)

Up for re‐election 2. Isidro Alaniz

(3rd) 3. Aurora

Martinez Jones (3rd)

4. Lindsay Mullins (3rd)

5. Monica Reyes (3rd)

6. Denise Hyde (2nd)

7. Jamye Coffman (2nd)

8. Jon Evans (2nd)

9. Angela Goodwin (2nd)

10. Stephanie Stephens (2nd)

11. Angela Tucker (2nd)

Up for re‐election 8. Tym

Belseth (3rd)

9. Jesse Gonzales (3rd)

10. Diana Martinez (3rd)

11. Dan Powers (3rd)

Up for re‐election 5. Denise Hyde

(3rd) 6. Jamye

Coffman (3rd) 7. Jon Evans

(3rd) 8. Angela

Goodwin (3rd) 9. Stephanie

Stephens (3rd) 10. Angela

Tucker (3rd)

Up for re‐election

11

1

CJA Task Force – Grants Committee Report

Grants Committee: – Isidro Alaniz, Tym Belseth, Irene Clements, Jamye Coffman, Cathy Crabtree, Denise Hyde, Julie Prudhome, Monica Reyes, Craig Spinn, Stephanie Stephens, Nhung Tran, Laura Wolf

Background:

• January 22nd ‐ Staff posted program instructions to CJA website

• March 22nd ‐ Applications were due

• March 22nd – March 28th – Staff completed preliminary screening and conducted full reviews and scoring

• March 28th – April 11th – Grants Committee reviewed applications

• April 11th and 12th – Grants Committee submitted completed grant proposal review forms to

CJA staff

• April 14th ‐ Grants Committee to discuss proposals

Review and Selection Process

1. CJA Project Grant Program – Competitive ‐ $1,000,000.

2. The Task Force received 9 applications totaling $1,132,936.67

3. CJA staff conducted an initial screening to determine whether: a. The application is complete b. The applicant is an eligible entity c. The application is responsive to one or more of the Task Force priority areas

4. Applications which met the initial screening criteria were fully evaluated and scored by CJA staff.

5. Staff forwarded all 9 applications to the Grants Committee.

6. The Grants Committee completed review forms for each grant proposal. A blank template of this form is included as an attachment to this report. Committee members abstained from reviewing proposals if they had a conflict of interest. The review forms yielded scores for each proposal between 1‐100. Prior to the Grants Committee meeting, staff averaged the scores for all proposals.

7. The Committee recommendations are included as an attachment to this report. The proposals that received average scores above 80 were recommended for funding. The projects that received scores below 80 were not recommended for funding. The total amount recommended for funding is $758,909.67.

15

Children’s Justice Act FY2017

Grants Committee Application Scoring Form

Applicant Agency:

Project Name:

Priority Area:

Amount Requested:

Reviewer Name:

Scoring Directions: Score each numbered evaluation factor using a scale of 0‐5 or 0‐10. Record the score

for each section and then calculate Total Score and record on page. In the “Comments” section, please be

specific. If you have questions about aspects of an application, you may include this in the “Comments”

section.

1. Project Narrative ‐ 65 Possible Points

The content of the proposal is well organized, coherent, and complete _____ (0‐5)

The project has a clear fit with CJA priorities ______ (0‐5)

The problem to be addressed is clearly defined ______ (0‐5)

The problem to be addressed is clearly defined by data ______ (0‐5)

The target population is clearly identified and the problem to be addressed is prevalent

in the target population ______ (0‐5)

Project is innovative and not redundant with other projects ______ (0‐5)

Narrative clearly and concisely explains rationale for selecting proposed program or

approach ______(0‐5)

Project goals and objectives have merit and have the potential to result in sustainable

benefit for the target population ______ (0‐10)

The project goals and objectives, and the plans and procedures for achieving them, are

appropriate for CJA as well as specific, measurable, well‐developed and realistically

achievable ______ (0‐10)

The project activities logically support the objectives and are explained in detail

______(0‐5)

The project timeline makes sense to ensure quality project implementation ______ (0‐5)

Score ________(0‐65)

Comments:

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

16

2. Project Evaluation – 10 Possible Points

There are clearly articulated and appropriate evaluation measures for each project

activity and each project objective ______ (0‐5)

The time‐lines and methods for collecting and analyzing data are reasonable and clearly

defined ______ (0‐5)

Score ________ (0‐10)

Comments:

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. Agency Qualifications – 10 Possible Points

The agency’s resources and skills are adequate to manage the proposed project ______

(0‐5)

The roles and responsibilities of project staff are specifically stated and staff has

expertise necessary to carry out proposed activities ______ (0‐5)

Score ________ (0‐10)

Comments:

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. Budget – 15 Possible Points

The budget is well‐supported, reasonable, and necessary _______ (0‐5)

The budget directly supports the project activities _______ (0‐5)

The budget narrative clearly explains and justifies the requested funds _______(0‐5)

Score ________ (0‐15)

Comments:

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

17

Total Score ______ (0‐100)

Overall Comments

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

18

FY17 Grants Committee Recommendations

Organization Project Title Amount

Requested

Amount

Approved

TF Priority

1. MDT

2. Victim Advocacy

3. Disabilities

4. Fatalities

5. Medical

Assessments

Average

Grant Score

Funding

Recommended

Notes

Center for Child

Protection

Multidisciplinary Team

Coordination and

Response $ 184,260.00 $ ‐ 1 74 No

Children's

Advocacy Centers

of Texas

Evaluating the MDT

Approach to Investigating

Child Abuse Cases and the

Impact of the MDT

Enhancement Program $ 97,458.00 $ 97,458.00 1 87 Yes

Children's

Advocacy Centers

of Texas

Enhancing Children's

Advocacy Centers and

Multidisciplinary Teams to

Ensure Services for Abused

Children Statewide $200,000 $200,000 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 92 Yes

DFPS Office of

Child Safety

Child Safety: Improving

Physical Abuse and Sexual

Abuse Investigations and

Interventions $ 72,000.00 $ 72,000.00 1,2,4 83 Yes

Talk with DFPS to make sure

this project will still go

forward given the changes in

the agency. Also make sure

that DFPS and and TMPA

work together to coordinate

information in their

respective trainings to

19

FY17 Grants Committee Recommendations

Harris County

Multidisciplinary Team

Approach to Infant Death

Scene Investigation $ 143,290.67 $ 143,290.67 1,4,5 91 Yes

Make sure that the outcome

of this project is a training

that can be replicated and

disseminated.

SafePlace

Training for Effective

Response to Child

Maltreatment Victims with

Disabilities $ 46,161.00 $ 46,161.00 3 85 Yes

Recommend that Task Force

members (Monica, Irene,

Nhung) participate in the

development of the training

Texas Council on

Family Violence

Building Blocks: Supporting

Project SAFE $ 50,000.00 $ ‐ 1,2 78 No

TMPA

Analysis of Patterns of

Deception $ 140,000.00 $ ‐ 1 75 No

TMPA

Law Enforcement and CPS

Joint Training $ 200,000.00 $ 200,000.00 1 86 Yes

Recommend that TMPA

more actively seek out

training partners. Also talk

with TMPA about the

discontinuation of this grant

after FY17 and the future of

this project. Possibly fund at

a lower amount and require

TMPA to fund a portion

$ 1,133,169.67 $ 758,909.67

20

CACTX FY16 PROJECT SUMMARY

Organization: Children’s Advocacy Centers of Texas, Inc. (CACTX)

Project Title: Evaluating the MDT Approach to Investigating Child Abuse Cases and the Impact

of the MDT Enhancement Program

Project Budget: $390,791

FY16 Budget: $97,458

Over 25 years ago, the children’s advocacy center (CAC) model was created as a multidisciplinary

approach for child abuse cases in an effort to enhance collaboration and information sharing and

ultimately ensure safety, justice and healing for child abuse victims. The success of the multidisciplinary

team (MDT) approach, including the joint investigation, is shaped by the quality and timeliness of

communication among team members, all of whom come from different agencies and professions. A

number of organizational and institutional factors come together to facilitate effective communication

within the MDT; however, barriers may exist that impede the efficiency of this process. In order to

identify these barriers and develop specific recommendations to overcome them, Children’s Advocacy

Centers of Texas (CACTX) has engaged the University of Texas at Austin Moody College of

Communication to conduct a comprehensive, communication‐based study of the MDT model.

This proposal addresses the second year of a two‐year project that began in the fall of 2015 under a previously awarded CJA grant. The goal of this project is to conduct research in order to identify barriers and develop recommendations, tools, and strategies to strengthen the MDT approach to investigating and prosecuting child abuse cases within CACs.

Objectives of this project are to:

Identify systemic barriers to effective collaboration and information sharing;

Highlight existing practices associated with strong case development and positive case

outcomes across diverse CACTX member organizations;

Evaluate the multiple impacts of the MDT Enhancement Program on case development and

child‐family outcomes; and

Make specific recommendations for policy modifications and team process interventions across

three elements, including: Time‐Sensitive Coordination, Interagency Relationships, and Team

Interaction Processes.

o Time‐Sensitive Coordination

Support timely coordinative responses with the MDT Model.

Cultivate greater understanding among the MDT members of other team

members’ work‐time constraints.

o Interagency Relationships

Capture the unique perspectives of MDT members based on the diverse

agencies they represent.

Understand how agency perspectives shape communication behaviors,

including group norms, information sharing, cohesion, and collaboration.

o Team Interaction Processes

Capture MDT interaction (via recorded meetings) to evaluate MDT Coordinator

impact and team effectiveness.

21


Capture, over time, dynamics in team development and change.

Identify specific communicative (linguistic, paralinguistic, persuasive, and

stereotype threat) behaviors that degrade or support collaborative efforts.

Activities include:

Begin qualitative data collection: interviews (up to 5), occupational (homogenous) focus groups

(6), MDT focus groups (18), on‐site observation.

Continue archival data collection: communication artifact, policies, procedures, and timelines.

Have interview, focus groups, and audio recordings transcribed for analysis via Limetree

Research consultants

Analyze focus group (simulation) and interview data along with communication artifacts,

policies, procedures, timelines, and on‐site observation.

Develop and finalize a comprehensive survey questionnaire for MDT members based on

qualitative data.

Present CACTX with finalized survey for distribution.

Pilot and launch survey and analyze survey data.

Conduct follow‐up interviews to help better understand study findings.

Draft initial report for CACTX and handoff to Limetree for feedback for digitization.

Submit final study report to CACTX.

Draft initial MDT Coordinator Handbook and handoff to Limetree for feedback for digitization.

Submit MDT Coordinator Handbook for CACTX.

The final report will evaluate the multiple impacts of the MDT Enhancement Program on case

development and child‐family outcomes; identify specific predictors of positive case outcomes

associated with the MDT Enhancement Program; depict how the work of various professional groups is

impacted by the MDT Enhancement Program, as well as groups’ attitudes and perceptions of the MDT

model and Enhancement Program; offer specific recommendations to increase effectiveness of the MDT

Coordinator role in facilitating a collaborative team environment and time‐sensitive information sharing;

and make specific recommendations to effect better overall MDT coordination, commitment, and open

information sharing. The final grant product will also include a Handbook for dedicated CAC MDT

Coordinators.

22


Organization: Children’s Advocacy Centers of Texas, Inc. (CACTX)

Project Title: Enhancing Children’s Advocacy Centers and Multidisciplinary Teams to Ensure

Services for Abused Children Statewide


FY16 Budget: $200,000

The Multidisciplinary Team Enhancement Program (MEP) was recently launched statewide. The main

goals of this initiative are to 1) fortify the overall MDT components within CACs to ensure effective

communication, coordination and collaboration at all stages of child abuse cases; and 2) ensure timely

access to the full array of MDT/CAC services for all children within a CAC’s official service area and

existing protocol case criteria. The process of implementing MEP has resulted in the positive outcome of

significantly increasing the number of cases being brought to CACs; however, it has also tested the

capacity of the centers and their MDTs to meet the growing demand for services. Additionally, within

the last 6‐8 months, the total number of CAC staff members throughout the state has increased by 26%.

CACs have hired MDT coordinators, forensic interviewers, family advocates, and mental health clinicians

to ensure they have the capacity to provide core services to all children. These new staff members

require training before they can begin working.

The goal of this proposed project is to proactively strengthen and sustain high‐functioning CAC MDTs

and to ensure a collaborative and coordinated approach to the investigation and prosecution of child

abuse cases. In addition, this project will increase the skills and capacity of the frontline professionals

who provide crisis intervention, stabilization and recovery services for the child victims and their non‐

offending family members who come through the 69 Texas CACs.

Objectives: CACTX will meet these goals by developing and/or providing specialized, targeted training and technical assistance to the MDT members from the nearly 1,000 partner agencies throughout the state and the CAC leadership/staff from the 69 Texas centers. These comprehensive support activities will focus on the following areas:

Expansion of the MDT Enhancement Program (MEP), which includes orienting CACs on the

technical aspects of the Statewide Intake process; providing strategies for recognizing and

managing the impact to the systems involved in investigating and prosecuting child abuse cases;

and proactively addressing the confusion and conflict inherent in large scale systemic changes.

Developing and sustaining high‐functioning MDTs, which includes strategies to manage ongoing

changes in team composition and still maintain team integrity; cross training team members on

partner agency mandates, functions, and timelines; and improving communication and

collaboration among team members.

MDT fundamentals, which includes the evolution of the CAC model; the processes of child abuse

investigation, prosecution, and intervention; and effective case review and coordination

strategies.

Coordination and delivery of advocacy services, which includes implementing trauma‐informed,

evidence‐based approaches to crisis intervention, family safety and stabilization, and recovery

for children and their non‐offending family‐members/caregivers. (Due to the significant

expansion of family advocate programming at the local level, CACTX will work with tenured CAC

23


staff to develop a new Family Advocate Training Faculty that will assist in providing the core

curriculum.)

Forensic interviewing techniques, which includes integrating current research and best practices

to ensure a legally sound, non‐leading process; the use of multi‐session forensic interview with

special populations of children; and ongoing support to ensure fidelity to the model.

Medical evaluations, which includes the importance of the evaluation from an MDT perspective;

technical aspects of conducting sexual abuse and physical abuse examinations; the benefit to

the child and family; and the value of medical provider testimony in court proceedings.

Intervention and treatment services for child victims and their non‐offending family

members/caregivers, which includes applying trauma‐informed, evidence‐based practices;

incorporating the use of standardized assessments for case conceptualization and treatment

planning; and the role of the clinician on the MDT.

24

CENTER FOR CHILD PROTECTION FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Organization: Center for Child Protection

Project Title: Multidisciplinary Team Coordination and Response


FY16 Budget: $198,422

The Center’s Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) began as a pilot funded by the Children’s Justice Act Program (CJA) in FY15. In FY16, the Center moved out of the pilot phase and into official implementation. In FY17, we will continue to expand the program with the goal of ensuring that all alleged victims of child abuse and neglect in Travis County receive the protection and justice that they need and deserve. Although the pilot was a great success, it shined a light on cracks within the system. Learning about these cracks was part of the goal of the initial pilot, but now it’s time to move on to seal up these cracks and further enhance our ability to protect the children of Travis County. The four primary challenges that remain are 1) not having the resources to coordinate cases from all of the CPS units in Travis County, 2) not all children who meet criteria are receiving a forensic interview, 3) not all children who meet criteria are receiving a forensic medical exam, and 4) we are not making use of our MDT data for research, education, and prevention purposes.

The goals of the expansion of the MDT program are as follows:

1) Coordinate cases for all eighteen CPS investigations units in Travis County. 2) Ensure that children who need a forensic interview receive one. 3) Ensure that children who need a forensic medical exam receive one. 4) Improve our current processes for collecting, analyzing, and using data. 5) Improve the child welfare system throughout Texas by providing consultation, support, and

resources to other CACs.

These goals can be further broken down into the following measurable objectives:

1) Coordinate cases for all eighteen CPS investigations units in Travis County by the end of the grant period.

2) During the grant period, forensic interviews will be conducted with at least 50% of the cases flagged as meeting criteria at intake.

3) Formally adopt medical evaluation guidelines in MDT Working Protocols by the end of 2016. 4) Provide training to 100% of primary, investigative MDT on medical evaluation guidelines by the

end of the grant period. 5) After training, 80% of attendees will report a better understanding of medical exam guidelines

as measured by a survey. 6) Once medical evaluation guidelines are implemented, the CPT Coordinator will flag cases that

meet the criteria for medical exam so that we may track progress toward objective #7. 7) By the end of the grant period, forensic medical exams will be conducted with at least 20% of

the cases that meet criteria. 8) Work with University of Texas Management Information System students to create a new

reporting database for the MDT program, which will be in use by the end of 2016. 9) Provide reports on how many abuse cases have co‐occurring substance abuse, domestic

violence, and mental health concerns, by the end of the grant period. 10) Provide reports on where abuse is most prevalent in Travis County by zip code and share this

information with the education and marketing departments, by the end of the grant period.

25

CENTER FOR CHILD PROTECTION FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

11) Provide consultation, support, and/or resources to at least four other CACs in Texas during the grant period, including at least one site visit.

Outputs: 1) Review all initial intakes alleging abuse/neglect during the grant period (approximately 13,500

intakes). 2) Coordinate a total of 450 cases during the grant period. 3) By the end of the grant period, coordinate all cases flagged at intake (approximately 55 cases a

month). 4) 70 cases will be served at multi‐disciplinary staffing during the grant period. 5) 80 cases will be served at CARE staffing during the grant period. 6) 100% of primary, investigative MDT will be trained on medical evaluation guidelines by the end

of the grant period. Outcomes:

7) During the grant period, forensic interviews will be conducted with at least 50% of the cases flagged as meeting criteria at intake that are assigned to investigation.

8) Once medical criteria are established, during the remaining grant period, forensic medical exams will be conducted with at least 20% of the cases that meet criteria.

9) After training, 80% of MDT attendees will report a better understanding of medical exam guidelines as measured by a survey.

26

HARRIS COUNTY FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Organization: Harris County

Project Title: Multidisciplinary Approach to Infant Death Investigation

Project Budget: $143,290.67

FY16 Budget: $143,290.67

Prior to the autopsy, a broad range of information pertaining to the child, the family or caregivers, the environment in which the death occurred, as well as the circumstances surrounding the death is obtained during the death investigation. This information is paramount for forensic pathologists to assist with the determination of cause and manner of death. There is currently insufficient guidance available regarding appropriate techniques for gathering this information from caretakers and family. Death investigators are also deficient in their specific understanding of injury patterns and interpretations as determined through the postmortem examination by forensic pathologists.

The Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences, through support from CJA, has developed the Infant Injury Database. The database is a repository for detailed data regarding the external and internal injuries associated with inflicted trauma and for this reason is of considerable value to clinicians, forensic pathologists and medicolegal death investigators. The IID can be used to inform and train death investigators regarding the external evaluation of deceased children by increasing understanding in not only how forensic pathologists characterize external injuries, but also how these injuries may manifest internally.

The goal of the proposed project is to enhance surveillance for and recognition of child abuse related injuries and fatalities in Texas by: 1) maximizing the effectiveness of the child fatality medicolegal (death) investigation process and, 2) improving and making the Infant Injury Database (IID) available as a tool for use by clinical and medicolegal practitioners around Texas.

The objectives of the proposed project are as follows: 1) identify the optimal strategy for conducting interviews with the families of recently deceased children such that the data required to inform the death investigation is gathered in a manner that both ensures the value of the data and the appropriate treatment of the family members being interviewed, 2) augment the IID to improve the consistency and accuracy of infant death investigations and child abuse recognition/diagnosis by providing clear observational categories and adding selected images of external and internal injuries (including radiographs) as exemplars, and 3) continue to add data from current infant fatality cases to IID.

In summary, the proposed project will examine death investigation procedures and the family interview process at HCIFS, as well as develop a training program for death investigators regarding the examination process by the forensic pathologist. The results of the analysis will be used to develop training for death investigators to improve and standardize operational procedures. The training will provide investigators with a better understanding of how to document and characterize observed injuries and provide insight into how the collected information is utilized by the forensic pathologist and its importance at the autopsy. The project will include the expansion and enhancement of the IID. In additional to injury documentation, the IID contains important information regarding the circumstances surrounding death, autopsy findings, and medical history. These data can be used to research and identify injury patterns and social risk factors associated with fatal child maltreatment.

The specific deliverables of this project are: 1) to identify the preferred training/background of those conducting family interviews, 2) provide best practice recommendations for conducting post child‐fatality family interviews, 3) develop a data informed computer‐based family interview training program for death investigators with an associated child fatality interview guide for use by those conducting

27

HARRIS COUNTY FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

these interviews, and 4) develop an expanded and releasable version of the IID to clinical and medicolegal practitioners.

28

OFFICE OF CHILD SAFETY FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Organization: Office of Child Safety

Project Title: Child Safety: Improving Physical Abuse and Sexual Abuse Investigations and

Interventions



Child Protective Services (CPS) is tasked with investigating child maltreatment allegations, including physical abuse and sexual abuse allegations. These investigations often involve nonverbal children and those who may be fearful to make an outcry against a perpetrator. In order to investigate these very complex cases of child maltreatment, it requires a skill set and real‐time collaboration with law enforcement, child advocacy centers (CAC) and medical professionals to interview, assess risk factors and protective factors in the home, and utilize appropriate safety measures and services to maintain child safety. While CPS staff receive initial training in physical abuse and sexual abuse investigations, ongoing training is provided through on‐the‐job experiences and limited classroom hours. An investigator may rarely be assigned extreme physical abuse or sexual abuse investigations. Alternatively, an investigator may have several years of experience and has not had in‐depth ongoing training in these specific areas. Resources are needed in order to support a statewide, regional based training effort to build enhanced knowledge, skill sets, and collaboration across CPS staff and community partners to address physical abuse and sexual abuse investigations.

The Children's Justice Act (CJA) grant will be utilized to provide regional‐based training for CPS investigation staff to support quality investigations and interventions when physical abuse and sexual abuse is alleged. With over two thousand investigators, plus their supervisors and management teams, these regional trainings will have significant influence on how CPS investigates and addresses child safety overall. The Child Safety: Improving Physical Abuse and Sexual Abuse Investigations and Interventions training is designed to improve child abuse investigations where physical abuse or sexual abuse is alleged, improve child outcomes, and increase collaboration with community partners.

The objectives of the proposed project are as follows:

1. Develop collaborative relationships between law enforcement, medical professionals, child abuse pediatricians, and service providers to coordinate physical abuse and sexual abuse investigations

2. Utilize child advocacy centers to support coordinated investigations, multidisciplinary team involvement, and service delivery to reduce trauma for alleged victims and protective parents/caregivers

3. Coordinate and complete joint investigations with law enforcement on physical abuse and sexual abuse investigations

4. Identify and utilize medical assessments and forensic interviews when there are concerns for physical abuse or sexual abuse

5. Identify, utilize, and act timely upon medical findings of physical abuse, sexual abuse, or concerns for a child's safety or wellbeing

6. Identify gaps in staff knowledge, training, and coordination with community partners.

29

OFFICE OF CHILD SAFETY FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Outputs

1. Develop quality curriculum with the input of community partners 2. Develop and have staff complete pre‐test survey to identify current staff knowledge, use of child

advocacy centers, multidisciplinary teams, and child abuse pediatricians to inform investigations 3. Provide regional training for CPS investigation staff in all regions 4. Complete post‐test survey

Outcomes

Short‐term

- Training will engage staff, community partners - Increase in pre/post knowledge. Staff will be able to identify when to complete joint

investigations, forensic interviews, and/or medical assessments/Forensic Assessment Center Network (FACN)

- Satisfaction of staff attending training as measured by staff survey

Medium

- Increase the use of FACN and child abuse pediatricians - Increase in completed joint investigations with law enforcement - Increase in the use of child advocacy centers for forensic interviews and ongoing services - Increase in the use of professional/significant collateral contacts to inform investigations

and utilize safety measures - Utilize gaps identified during the pre/post‐test process to update policy, protocols, and

training needs

Long‐term

- Children who are alleged victims of physical or sexual abuse, will be safe either through residing with their families or, if needed, brought into Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) conservatorship

- Children who are alleged victims of physical or sexual abuse will not be revictimized during an open investigation or ongoing stage of service

- Recidivism involving repeat physical or sexual abuse will be reduced.

30

SAFEPLACE FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Organization: SafePlace

Project Title: All Children – Safe at Home



Children and youth with disabilities and/or who have significant healthcare needs are at an increased risk for abuse and neglect, tend to wait longer than peers before reporting abuse, and are often not considered to be credible witnesses when they do report abuse. Residential and other care providers do not receive adequate, if any, training on the disability‐related risks for how to recognize the unique signs and indicators of current abuse or neglect to children and youth with disabilities/significant healthcare needs and/or with emotional behavioral symptoms of trauma. Early recognition and reporting of physical, sexual, disability‐related, or emotional/psychological abuse becomes even more critical for children with more severe disabilities or critical medical and/or mental health needs.

The project goal is to review best practice training resources, and develop and pilot training and resources for residential service and other care provider staff providing services to children with disabilities/health care needs (i.e., foster homes, social service agencies, in‐home visitation programs, etc.). Project objectives and activities are designed to: 1) improve stakeholder awareness of the increased risks for abuse and the safety needs of children with disabilities, children with significant health‐related needs, and children with emotional/behavioral symptoms of abuse; and 2) recognize and respond to unique signs and indicators of abuse/neglect of the children they are serving.

The proposed project will complete the following activities:

1. Conduct literature/resource review of relevant and available curricular materials, including required or routinely provided training for Texas residential service staff on topics related to risks for abuse, typical and disability‐related signs and indicators of abuse, and reporting abuse of children with disabilities and/or significant healthcare needs.

2. Create key questions and protocol for conducting focus groups in up to 6 residential provider settings serving children with disabilities, primary health care needs and emotional behavior symptoms of trauma (such as children’s shelters, foster homes, group homes, etc.). Focus groups will provide a forum where staff can explore what kinds of training and resource materials would be needed in identifying disability related risks and safety factors; recognizing signs and indicators of current abuse; and responding to abuse in ways that reduce trauma among the children and youth with disabilities, and/or significant healthcare needs.

3. Conduct up to 6 focus groups with residential provider agencies and foster parents. For each site, one focus group will be held with residential staff and one will be held with foster parents (for those providers that have foster parent programs).

4. Based on the results of the focus groups, SafePlace will develop the training content, building on content already routinely provided to residential service staff/foster parents on risk factors; signs and indicators of abuse unique to children with disabilities and/or have significant health care needs; responding to disclosures and reporting; and trauma‐informed interactions and response to child abuse/neglect victims.

5. Pilot‐test training with 3‐5 residential provider agencies and sets of foster parents, including some of those who participated in the focus groups. Pilot training participants will provide feedback and input on training content, activities, and resources.

6. Summarize results of training evaluation, participant input and feedback.

31

SAFEPLACE FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

7. Based on evaluation results, revise and finalize training module and translate into a format that can be posted for electronic access and distribution.

8. Develop a facilitator’s guide for the training; Power Point presentation with detailed notes for facilitators; and 3‐5 informational fact sheets for use in the training.

32

TEXAS COUNCIL ON FAMILY VIOLENCE FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Organization: Texas Council on Family Violence

Project Title: Building Blocks – Supporting Project SAFE



The finalization of the CPS Disposition Guidelines on Domestic Violence represents several years of

collective work between the Texas Council on Family Violence (TCFV), CPS and other important

stakeholders. TCFV’s CPS Liaison, other TCFV staff and CPS’ Domestic Violence Liaison have worked to

train CPS Leadership during the current fiscal year; the same TCFV and CPS staff continue providing

intensive instruction related to all guidelines and the perspective and philosophical shift that underlies

this approach to working with parent survivors of domestic violence and children exposed. These

groundbreaking Guidelines will take effect as CPS policy May 1st. With this effort as a necessary base,

TCFV now stands poised to shift our focus and efforts to three additional key areas: Multi‐Disciplinary

Teams, Statewide Intake and further education and training for family violence service providers.

Work with Multidisciplinary Teams: Goal: Re‐enforce and build on the strengths of MDT members and domestic violence programs when responding to survivors of domestic violence and their children.

Objective 1: TCFV and CAC of Texas meet quarterly to explore challenges between MDT Partners and

domestic violence programs across the state.

Objective 2: TCFV provides training to CAC Family Advocates and other staff as requested.

Objective 3: TCFV promotes greater understand of the CAC Family Advocate role and facilitate enhanced

collaboration between CAC’s and domestic violence programs at the local level.

Objective 4: TCFV communicates with TMPA ACAIC staff and provides review and any updates to the

Advanced Child Abuse curriculum and resources.

Objective 5: TCFV works with TMPA ACAIC to develop a new elective for their customized training

option: Children Exposed to Family Violence, providing an educational opportunity for MDT first

responders, such as LE and CPS, to better recognize and properly intervene when a child is present

during a family violence situation.

Objective 6: TCFV will create and offer a module that focuses on the intersection of domestic violence

and child abuse related to TCFV’s At the Table project – coordinated community response training to

domestic violence agencies and other allies who serve on the local MDT including members of the

justice system, child advocacy center staff, and other professionals working with child victims.

Work with Statewide Intake: Goal: Align the knowledge base and approach taken by SWI Intake Specialists with that of CPS Investigations pursuant to the roll out of the Disposition Guidelines.

33

TEXAS COUNCIL ON FAMILY VIOLENCE FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Objective 1: TCFV meets with the newly formed working group of SWI Leadership and Training and CPS stakeholders. Objective 2: TCFV provides expertise and assistance in the development of Domestic Violence Guidelines for Intake Specialists, an accompanying assessment tool that would provide interview questions specific to domestic violence cases. Objective 3: TCFV assists in the development and review of training for SWI Intake Specialists for utilizing these tools with cases involving domestic violence. Work with Family Violence Programs: Goal: Promote competency, high level advocacy and community collaboration among Texas dv programs regarding intersections with child abuse and child welfare practitioners. Objective 1: Train domestic violence program staff on the disposition guidelines and other relevant shifts in CPS practice. Objective 2: Continue to provide consultation as needed to ensure a consistent knowledge base at domestic violence programs regarding the Memorandum of Understand and DV program’s role and best practices relating to making reports to Statewide Intake as well as participating appropriately in child abuse and neglect investigations. Objective 3: Offer information and updates for Texas domestic violence program staff via a web page on TCFV’s site regarding these intersections and advocacy. Objective 4: Provide intensive technical assistance, consultation, and facilitation of dialogue between domestic violence program staff and child welfare staff locally when challenges arise. Overarching Goal: TCFV will remain an accessible clearinghouse of expertise on intersections of domestic violence and child abuse, promoting resiliency among children exposed, and working with survivor parents to promote protective capacities. Objective 1: Remain up to date on shifts at CPS, including the roll out of Alternative Response, and provide consultation to both CPS and domestic violence program staff on this promising practice working with families where there has been domestic violence. Objective 2: Meet quarterly with Office of Child Safety and DFPS Prevention and Early Intervention Leadership and participate in trainings and the development of resources as requested. Promote an understanding of these resources and programs among Texas domestic violence programs. Objective 3: Monitor research and promising practices in the arena of promoting child resiliency and the

impact of Investigations and differing approaches with survivor and perpetrator parents.

34

TEXAS MUNICIPAL POLICE ASSOCIATION JOINT TRAINING FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Organization: Texas Municipal Police Association (TMPA)

Project Title: Law Enforcement and CPS Joint Training


FY16 Budget: $200,000

Although statewide mandates for joint investigations and joint training were implemented over a decade ago, collaboration and communication between law enforcement (LE) and Department of Family & Protective Services (DFPS) investigative staff is not occurring consistently throughout the state. Currently, there is limited joint training available for LEs and DFPS investigative staff. The current available training is costly, not easily accessible, and does not cover the necessary topics to ensure a

successful multidisciplinary team approach to cases involving crimes against children.

The Law Enforcement & CPS Joint Training project will provide free training to both LE agencies and DFPS investigative staff that is specific to the needs of the local region. The Program will identify LE instructors who are experienced presenters and are proven to have positive working relationships with their CPS counterparts. The Program will also identify guest speakers who are experts in CPS investigations, child advocacy, and the medical field to co‐present alongside the LE instructor.

The joint training will provide a space for both disciplines to meet and discuss current crime trends, as well as enhance future collaboration and communication. LE and DFPS staff, specifically CPS and CPS Special Investigators, who receive this training will be able to use the investigative skills and knowledge learned to complete future successful joint investigations. The Program will provide training materials and investigative tools to students who attend the joint training events for use in future child abuse and neglect investigations and prosecutions.

The goal of the Law Enforcement & CPS Joint Training project is to improve the response of LE and CPS response when jointly investigating crimes against children. In particular, the training will focus on protocols, investigative processes, roles/responsibilities, and improving communication and collaboration between LE and CPS. The goal of will be achieved by executing free joint training events to LE agencies, DFPS investigative staff, and other members of the MDTs in various DFPS Regions across the state, as well as provide joint training tailored to the region’s specific needs. The Program will identify LE experts who will be certified to instruct the joint training across the state. Program Staff will coordinate an Instructor Training to properly train the new instructors on the joint training topics. Program Staff will coordinate with interested LE agencies, DFPS Regional Offices, and local CAC’s to host the joint training events across Texas. Joint training events will be scheduled across the state and free of charge for LE, CPS, and members of the MDT to attend. The Program will host at least 39 joint trainings across the state of Texas, specifically focusing on identified DFPS targeted regions. Through these joint trainings, the Program expects to train at least 525 students, specifically at least 350 LE students and 175 DFPS students. Guest speakers from various disciplines will be invited to speak to students during the joint training events about their role in the MDTs and joint investigations of crimes against children.

35

TEXAS MUNICIPAL POLICE ASSOCIATION PATTERNS OF DECEPTION FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Organization: Texas Municipal Police Association (TMPA)

Project Title: Patterns of Deception


FY16 Budget: $140,000

Too often, adults who sexually abuse children are able to go undetected because of their ability to use deception to deny their offenses to law enforcement (LE) and other first responders, such as Child Protective Services (CPS). Research shows the vast majority of offenders (more than 50%) who sexually abuse children have undetected offenses. Without a tool to use during an initial interview with an adult suspect accused of a sexual offense against a child, the Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) may not obtain the necessary information to successfully investigate and prosecute the guilty offenders and may not be able to determine if the accused adult is actually not‐guilty. Overall, interviewers currently have no empirically supported means of analyzing a suspect’s statements for possible deception The proposed research study, Analysis of Patterns of Deception Research Study, will scientifically analyze LE recorded (audio, video) interviews, interrogations, and written statements made by adult suspects accused of a sexual offense against a child and will, through detailed and thorough statistical analysis, differentiate between denial of offenses made by non‐guilty suspects and denial made through deception by guilty suspects. The process of interviewing suspects may be currently guided by theories and approaches created by experience from LE officers, but there is no scientifically sound means of determining deception among child sex offenders. By comparing the interviews of guilty offenders to interviews of non‐guilty suspects (persons accused of sex offenses for which they were not charged), the proposed research study will determine if there is a significant statistical difference in the denial method of guilty offenders in comparison to non‐guilty suspects. The initial goal (Year 1 – FY17) is to identify law enforcement agencies across Texas who maintain recorded interviews (audio and/or video) of adults accused but not charged of sex offense(s) against a child. The Program Analyst, with the guidance of the Contract Researcher, will travel to these LE agencies to view and code the recorded interviews and thus compare the results of the interviews of guilty offenders to interviews of non‐guilty suspects (persons accused of sex offenses but not charged). The research study is to determine if there is a significant statistical difference in the denial method of guilty offenders in comparison to non‐guilty suspects. The research findings and subsequent article (Year 2 – FY18) will be able to provide MDT members—consisting of LE, CPS, CAC staff, mental health professionals, and prosecutors—with information about denial patterns. The research would result in (Year 3 – FY19), depending on the findings, an easy‐to‐score instrument to help detectives, CPS workers, and other professionals identify what the pattern of an individual's responses indicate about culpability. The instrument will have scientific backing for a process that is currently void of such and, at its best, will allow costly investigations to focus on those most likely to be guilty. The ultimate goal is to provide a public domain tool to MDT members that is free to access which will assist in the investigations of sexual crimes against children. Objectives:

Year 1:

36

TEXAS MUNICIPAL POLICE ASSOCIATION PATTERNS OF DECEPTION FY17 PROJECT SUMMARY

Modify current Coding Instrument, which was originally developed by the Contract Researcher

Develop a Database to maintain research data and findings The Contract Researcher will train the Program Analyst how to properly code the suspect

interviews with the updated Coding Instrument Contact LE agencies about participating in research project Identify at least 40 LE agencies that currently maintain an archive of recorded interviews of

suspects of child sexual abuse Schedule 20 meetings with participating LE agencies to view and code interviews Execute an average of 3 coded interviews at each LE agency, totaling 50 interviews Collect data from coded interviews Analyze data from coded interviews Begin preparing research article and conducting preliminary research for literature review Year 2: Identify at least 20 additional LE agencies that maintain an archive of recorded interviews of

suspects of child sexual abuse Schedule 10 meetings with LE agencies to view and code interviews Execute an average of 3 coded interviews at each LE agency, totaling 30 interviews Collect data from additional coded interviews Analyze data collected from Year 1 Identify and develop MDT Steering Committee Prepare draft of research and submit manuscript to peer‐reviewed, social science academic

journal for publication Year 3: Continue to review and correct peer‐reviewed proofs of research article during publishing

process Update and Print Instrument Consult MDT Steering Committee in developing 4hr training Conduct an Instructor Training Train 12 Instructors to disseminate the training and instrument Develop 4hr training on how to use the instrument Submit 4hr training curriculum to TCOLE for review and approval of a Unique Course # Schedule trainings across the state and disseminate the instrument

o LE agencies who participate in sharing of their recorded interviews will receive training priority

37

CJAFY16FirstQuarterProgramUpdates Organization: Children’s Advocacy Centers of Texas (CACTX) (CJA‐16‐01)

Project: Ensuring a Coordinated Approach to the Investigation of Child Abuse by Supporting and Strengthening CAC MDTs Statewide

Total Award: $200,000

No changes to goals and objectives at this time

Completed the following trainings: Multidisciplinary Enhancement Program Regional Trainings: Plano, October 6, 43

participants; Rosenberg, October 21, 35 participants Regional Medical Evaluation Training: Wichita Falls, October 15, 43 participants Family Advocacy 101: Austin, November 17‐November 19, 28 participants Family Advocacy 201: Austin, October 27‐October 28, 25 participants Clinical Family Advocate Peer Review: December 11 Semi‐Structured Narrative Process – Practical Application for Forensic Interviewers:

Austin, November 2‐4, 12 participants Beyond the Sexual Abuse Interview (Forensic Interviewing Block II): Austin, December 7

‐9, 20 participants Multi‐Session Forensic Interview Training: Austin, October 5‐7, 17 participants Parent Child Interaction Therapy Training Initiative – weekly training with 32 clinicians

from 10 CACs with University of CA‐Davis via telehealth technology New Executive Director Orientation Training: Mineral Wells, October 8; Odessa,

December 3; Canton, December 8 Basic or Advanced Board Training: Kaufman, November 13, 9 participants; Bastrop,

December 14 TF‐CBT Consultation Webinars: October 6, October 15, November 3, November 19,

December 1, and December 17 Spanish‐speaking Forensic Interview Peer Review Session: December 4 Regional Forensic Interviewer Peer Review Sessions: Region 1, October 26; Region 2,

October 23; Region 3, October 22; Region 4, October 23; Region 5, November 6; Region 6, October 23

Regional Family Advocate Peer Review: Region 1, October 19; Region 2, November 6; Region 3, November 5; Region 4, October 14; Region 5, October 9; Region 6, November 13

The evaluations for every training were overwhelmingly positive. 100% of the participants who completed evaluations at every training reported that they found the training useful.

With the implementation of the Multidisciplinary Team Enhancement Program (MEP), CACs have hired additional forensic interviewers, family advocates and mental health staff. As a result, there has been an increased demand for training in each of these areas. To accommodate training requests in Quarter 1, CACTX expanded capacity at both Family Advocate trainings as well as Forensic Interviewing Block I and II.

CACTX has had to expand capacity for classes scheduled in Quarter Two as well add additional classes to Quarter Three because of high demand.

CACTX analyzed and compared the medical evaluation data for all CACs during FY14 and FY15 to determine if the Regional Medical Evaluation trainings and resources were having any effect on referrals. The data indicated a 10% increase in the overall number of evaluations from FY14 to FY15.

On September 1, 2016, Abigail’s Arms in Gainesville became the 69th CAC in Texas.

38

CJAFY16FirstQuarterProgramUpdates

CACTX presented at several state and national conferences during the first quarter including the National Children’s Alliance 2015 National Chapter Summit, the Driscoll Children’s Hospital’s 12th Annual Seminar in Forensic Sciences, National Association of Social Workers Conference, 32nd Annual Adult Protective Services Conference, DFPS Attorney Conference, and TMPA’s Advanced Child Abuse Investigation Instructor Training.

Organization: CACTX (CJA‐16‐02)

Project: Evaluating the MDT Approach to Investigating Child Abuse Cases and the Impact of the MDT Enhancement Program


On December 15th, CACTX contracted with the University of Texas at Austin’s Moody College of Communication to develop and launch the comprehensive evaluation of the CAC multidisciplinary team model. The evaluation will be approached from a comprehensive communication‐based lens and will be the first of its kind in both the state and the nation. The study will focus on team interaction processes, interagency relationships, and time‐sensitive coordination. This will allow for a fundamentally unique evaluation of CAC MDTs and will result in recommendations for CACs statewide to strengthen MDTs.

Organization: Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) (CJA‐16‐03)

Project: Child Fatality Review Team (CFRT) Local Coordinator Pilot Project


DSHS anticipates changes to the timeline of the grant. The contracting process at DSHS is undergoing modification which is affecting the timeliness of contracts being executed.

During Q1, the CFRT that was identified to receive a coordinator disbanded. DSHS is currently working with various agencies within the Hill Country CFRT to identify the contracting agency and move forward.

Bexar County was identified as the urban CFRT to receive the full time CFRT coordinator.

Organization: University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio (CJA‐16‐04)

Project: Child Protector: A Smart Phone Decision Tool for Medical and Investigative Personnel


New bruising content was completed and provided to Creative Media Services to create the new animations to accompany the content.

Preliminary burn content was created and will be provided to Creative Media Services by the end of January.

Previous content was reviewed, with updated narration and references completed.

Preliminary versions of 12 of the estimated 60 new animations are complete.

The project has also obtained a grant from the Missouri Children’s Justice Act Task Force to develop a Missouri specific version of the Child Protector App. Texas CJA will be credited with funding development of the animations used in the Missouri version.

39

CJAFY16FirstQuarterProgramUpdates Organization: Texas Municipal Police Association (CJA‐16‐05)

Project: Law Enforcement & CPS Joint Training


Held an Instructor Training on December 9‐11 to train 17 law enforcement officers on the new joint training curriculum.

TMPA worked with DFPS and conducted surveys to identify the regions where the training should be targeted. The trainings will be initially targeted to DFPS Regions 2 (Abilene), 3 (Arlington/Dallas), 6 (Houston), 7 (Austin, particularly north in the rural areas), 8 (San Antonio, particularly Hondo/Media), and 11 (Edinburg, particularly Alice/Eddie area).

Collaborated with DFPS on the new Coordinated Investigations chapter. CPS and Statewide Intake are reviewing the chapter to ensure that the training includes the most up‐to‐date and accurate responsibilities and protocols for DFPS investigative staff.

Started scheduling the first joint investigations trainings which will take place in quarters 2 and 3.

Organization: SafePlace (CJA‐16‐06)

Project: Seeking Justice for Child Victims with Disabilities


The website design was selected with input and feedback from the 13 member Statewide Advisory Committee. SafePlace’s Communications Department staff also met with accessibility experts at Knowbility who advised on the final selection of the site’s visual design from WordPress. Staff also received training from Knowbility consultants to help ensure the site is easy to navigate and has the necessary features to be accessible.

Staff began to locate and draft materials to be included on the website (i.e., tip sheets; fact sheets; FAQ’s; disability specific information; strategies for trauma‐informed practices; tips for interviewing and investigating, etc). Staff is also developing materials based on interviews with Advisory Committee members, the CJA Task Force and other stakeholders.

The website will be designed with four main portals of entry: 1) criminal justice and law enforcement, 2) child advocates and child welfare, 3) educators and disability service providers, and 4) parents/guardians/families.

Organization: Harris County (CJA‐16‐07)

Project: Using Quantitative Ultrasound to Evaluate Infant Bone Health and Fracture Risk in the Medical Examiner and Clinical Setting


During this quarter, all equipment necessary to carry out the project was ordered and received. All contracts with consultants and labs providing sample analyses were established. Data collection began on 12/1/15. Currently the sample consists of 10 infants, 6 males and 4 females. These specimens have been sent to the micro‐CT, Raman spectroscopy, and biomechanical testing labs for analysis.

The project is being conducted in collaboration with Dr. Catherine Ambrose, Director of Research in the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at the University of Texas Health Science

40


Center, and Dr. Xiaohong Bi, Assistant Professor in the Department of Nanomedicine and Biomedical Engineering. Both of these collaborators are active participants in the Rolanette and Berdon Lawrence Bone Disease Program of Texas.

Organization: Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) (CJA‐16‐08)

Project: Alternative Response: Better Outcomes Through Family and Community Partnering


Developed a contractual agreement with Kempe Center for specified deliverables for FY16. The contract was executed on November 10, 2015 with an effective date of October 1, 2015.

Alternative Response (AR) was fully implemented in Region 3 on November 2, 2015. In Sept/Oct, 9 caseworker and 2 supervisor trainings were conducted to prepare for implementation.

Alternative Response was fully implemented in Region 7. 20 AR 101 presentations were conducted over 10 days during October and November. Over 500 CPS staff attended those trainings.

On October 13‐16, 2015, a 4‐day coaching and technical assistance session was conducted for 4 AR units in Region 3. Coaching sessions included instruction on case‐mapping, case‐consultation, role‐play, and home visits with caseworkers in the field.

The Kempe Center and CPS State Office Staff are currently working together to align the Alternative Response curriculum with Signs of Safety. The field test trainings will occur during preparations for Region 9 implementation.

On November 4‐5, the first annual State‐wide Alternative Response meeting was held in Austin. The meeting included presentations on the use of data in supervision from the State Office Evaluation Team, technical assistance from the Kempe Center and workgroup sessions devoted to advancing group supervision and addressing challenges and barriers of AR.

A special caseworker training was provided on December 15‐17 for 26 caseworkers and supervisors from the 3 regions where AR had already been implemented. The additional caseworker training was needed to train staff recently hired for AR positions and to fill vacancies.

During this reporting period, 3,259 AR cases were opened in Texas and 2,314 cases were closed Organization: Texas Council on Family Violence

Project: Statewide Intake Pilot Project


TCFV assisted with training CPS’ leadership on the new disposition guidelines on 12/03‐12/04. In addition, TCFV, with assistance from the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, developed a research fact sheet as a handout for the training on the efficacy of partnering with survivors.

TCFV met with DFPS to review new developments regarding the Desk Reference Guide on 12/16/15. TCFV provided comprehensive feedback on the most recent draft of the reference guide for CPS caseworkers in late December.

TCFV trained on FV program staff and CPS caseworkers in New Braunfels on 10/23 on collaboration and the MOU.

41


Provided technical assistance to 3 of the 4 pilot sites on such topics as Statewide Intake, Family Group Decision Making, Administrative Review of Investigative Findings, and confidentiality and sample reporting best practices.

As needed, TCFV responded to technical assistance requests from family violence programs regarding working with CPS and survivors with open CPS cases which included sending resource documents and going through the MOU.

TCFV presented a workshop at the PEI Partners in Prevention Conference in Houston on October 1 called Promoting Resiliency Through the Life Course: The Role of Health Care Providers in Addressing Intimate Partner Violence. The workshop included information regarding promoting resiliency for children exposed to violence and was attended by a diverse group of participants including PEI contractors, home visitors and CPS staff.

42

CJAFY16SecondQuarterProgramUpdates Organization: Children’s Advocacy Centers of Texas (CACTX) (CJA‐16‐01)

Project: Ensuring a Coordinated Approach to the Investigation of Child Abuse by Supporting and Strengthening CAC MDTs Statewide


Completed the following trainings: o Strengthening MDTs: Austin, January 7‐8, 21 participants; Austin, February 18‐19, 21

participants o TF‐CBT Learning Session #1: Austin, January 12‐13, 36 participants o Semi‐Structured Narrative Process: Practical Application for Forensic Interviewers:

Austin, January 20‐22, 17 participants o Essential Issues of Forensic Interviewing and Preparing for Court (Block I): Austin,

January 27‐28, 24 participants o Family Advocate 101 Training: Austin, February 2‐4, 17 participants o Executive Director Leadership Summit: Austin, February 10‐12, 57 participants o Continuing Education for Forensic Interviewers: Austin, February 22‐23, 69 participants o Executive Director Media Training: Austin, March 1, 8 participants o Advanced MDT Training: San Angelo, March 2, 32 participants o Family Advocate 201 Training: Austin, March 22‐24, 24 participants o Regional Medical Evaluation Training: Victoria, March 29, 61 participants o Administering Mental Health Programs: Austin, March 31, 15 participants

The implementation of the Multidisciplinary Team Enhancement Program (MEP) has continued to lead to an increased demand for additional forensic interviewers, family advocates and mental health staff at the local level. In Quarter 2, CACTX expanded participant capacity in the Family Advocate 201 training, the forensic interviewer trainings and the TF‐CBT training and brought in additional trainers when necessary.

A third Family Advocacy 201 training has been added in July 2016 because registration for the March session has already exceeded capacity. In addition, CACTX is in the process of scheduling a third TF‐CBT Learning Collaborative for CAC mental health clinicians that will begin in August 2016.

The inaugural Executive Director Leadership Summit was kicked off in February and was very successful. The goal of the Summit was to bring together CAC leaders in a common forum to facilitate discussion and the exchange of ideas, as well as to develop a unified vision for the future and establish common goals.

In February, CACTX hosted staff from the Mississippi and West Virginia state chapters who wanted to learn more about expanding services to their membership, including increasing their capacity to provide training and technical assistance.

Organization: CACTX (CJA‐16‐02)

Project: Evaluating the MDT Approach to Investigating Child Abuse Cases and the Impact of the MDT Enhancement Program


The University of Texas at Austin’s Moody College of Communications research team is in the process of collecting a significant amount of data through on‐site observations, focus groups, and other mechanisms for analysis. Preliminary qualitative data from the occupational focus

43

CJAFY16SecondQuarterProgramUpdates

groups is revealing the unique challenges of CAC multidisciplinary partner agencies in manner that will not only assist CACs in better understanding and interacting with those partners, but will also assist partner agencies in evaluating challenges within their particular sectors.

Organization: Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) (CJA‐16‐03)

Project: Child Fatality Review Team (CFRT) Local Coordinator Pilot Project


Bexar County and Burnet County will be the CFRT coordinator locations. Burnet County will encompass Burnet, San Saba, Blanco and Lampasas Counties. The Burnet County District Attorney’s office will house the CFRT coordinator. DSHS is still awaiting some administrative information from Bexar County regarding who specifically should be the agency to house the position (juvenile justice dept or juvenile board).

Both contracts are currently in process. Budget documents have been submitted by San Antonio and sub recipient approval has been given to both sites by DSHS. Burnet County has been given the budget forms and is working with their auditor to return them as soon as possible.

The position description for CFRT Coordinator has been created. Both the scope of work and the statement of work has been created and provided to the sites.

Organization: University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio (CJA‐16‐04)

Project: Child Protector: A Smart Phone Decision Tool for Medical and Investigative Personnel


“Texas version” contents have been identified and provided to Engage Mobile.

Twenty child abuse pediatrics experts have participated in Beta‐testing the app, specifically the decision trees. Users have provided globally positive feedback. No significant critical errors in app function or in the decision trees have been identified by Beta testers.

Google Analytics is embedded in the App. This allows for global monitoring of app usage. As of March 9, 2016, there have been 296 users in the world using the app a total of 507 times. Users are in 29 different states in the US and over 30 foreign countries, encompassing Europe, Africa, Asia and South America. As no “advertising” or presenting of the app has occurred, UTHSCSA feels this is a result of word of mouth spread from their 20 “Beta‐testers”. It is anticipated that use of the app will grow exponentially once the app is officially presented.

Preliminary versions of 34 of the estimated 60 new animations are complete.

“Child Protector: A smartphone app for the MDT investigation of child physical abuse” will be presented at the Helfer Society national meeting (national Child Abuse Pediatrics meeting) in Tucson in mid‐April 2016.

Organization: Texas Municipal Police Association (CJA‐16‐05)

Project: Law Enforcement & CPS Joint Training


Held two 3‐day Joint Investigations trainings in Beaumont and McAllen. The Beaumont training had 19 law enforcement students, 9 CPS investigators, 1 CAC Family Advocate, and 2 other child

44


welfare professionals. The McAllen Training had 13 law enforcement students and 5 CPS investigators.

Six trainings are already scheduled for the third quarter.

Program staff began to review the existing Interactive Exercises to be used during joint training events. The Program collaborated with instructors to develop new Interactive Exercises and other activities to encourage class participation and engagement. The newly developed exercises will be completed and distributed to all instructors during the third quarter.

The Program launched an online survey to be completed by various MDT members working in the field of child protection. The survey was intended to capture information regarding current crime trends, issues related to joint investigations, and personal experiences working joint investigations across the state. There were a total of 185 respondents with 71 respondents from Law Enforcement, 77 from CPS, 32 from DFPS, and 5 other.

o In answer to questions as to whether cross‐disciplinary collaboration occurs efficiently and consistently, both law enforcement and CPS investigators in Region 3 (Dallas) were overwhelmingly negative. CPS investigators in Regions 7 (Austin), 11 (Edinburg) and 8 (San Antonio) also held negative views of the degree of collaboration.

Examples of comments:

o Law Enforcement “If we have a case involving CPS, we work closely with them and assist for request their assistance as much as possible”

o Law Enforcement “Our organization works well with CPS Units in our county. We have a great relationship and enjoy working together”

o DFPS: “[County] has established a good working relationship with law enforcement and other agencies involved with investigating crimes against children. There are very few times the cooperation between multiple agencies breaks down.”

o DFPS: “Most agencies are easy to work with. There are minor exceptions.” o Law Enforcement: “CPS operates as a completely separate entity from us. As a patrol

officer, whenever there is a family violence involving a child or any other offense we feel could endanger a child, we call and report that incident. CPS investigates on their own and almost always sends back a letter that states they will not be offering services to the family.”

o Law Enforcement: “I have made numerous calls for attempts for investigations with cps and le and with no luck. Even an abandoned child, it took over 5 hours for a response.”

o Law Enforcement: “My experiences have been mostly negative. There seems to be little cooperation between the field officer and CPS. Most times they act like they do not care when we contact them and we have a hard time getting results or even a reply to our questions.

o DFPS: “As a worker outside [County], when needing assistance from [law enforcement agency], it was difficult to navigate and reach someone to assist due to the LE agency being overwhelmed. It was more difficult and sometimes not possible to do joint investigations because [law enforcement agency] did not have the manpower or their time frames for making contact was different than the timeframes from CPS”

o DFPS: “Despite the relationships with our local law enforcement, they have a significant back log and often times there is a delay in follow ups and even arrests in some instances with very serious situations of abuse. At times it does feel like they depend on CPS to gather all the information and are not as diligent in following up with additional information shared or pertinent information gathered.”

45


o DFPS: “Assigned detectives are very difficult to recontact. LE doesn’t always take the CPS investigations seriously or understand the importance of the role of CPS. Workers are sometimes treated disrespectfully as of workers concerns with the case are not important.”

o DFPS: “Most rural areas do not share information, don’t understand family code.” o DFPS: “Some law enforcement agencies are receptive to joint investigations, but not all

of them. Some agencies do not investigate the case and depend on CPS personnel to find a criminal offense and relay to their agency at a later date instead of them investigating from the beginning.”

o Law Enforcement: “The agency tends to be too bureaucratic. They also don’t always understand the process of criminal investigation and prosecution in terms of standards. It is very frustrating when the contact people ahead of the police interview and cause them not to talk. There needs to be more coordination.”

Organization: SafePlace (CJA‐16‐06)

Project: Seeking Justice for Child Victims with Disabilities


SafePlace has conducted extensive research and identified 127 resources to include on the website for criminal justice staff, child advocates, child protection workers, teachers, disability services staff, and parents/guardians. They are currently working to gain consent to link with as many of these resources as possible from the project’s website (when consent is needed).

Resource topic range from recognizing, responding to, and reporting abuse; preventing abuse; interviewing/forensic interviews of children with a variety of disabilities; cultural sensitivity; trauma informed responses; and community resources.

The website is in the early stages of the build‐out. The basic materials for most of the navigation bar are shared on the site’s URL. SafePlace included in its reporting materials a schematic outlining the content materials and how it will be built‐out with a note of the status for each set of materials listed (complete, in editing process, in writing process, seeking submissions). The URL for the website is http://childabuseanddisabilities.safeaustin.org

During this reporting period, SafePlace staff worked with CPS and other organizations recommended by the CJA Task Force. They are currently in contact with a recommended CPS staff member who works specifically on disability issues and she has agreed to review all materials related to CPS. SafePlace also recently attended a training by CPS (held at SafePlace) where they were able to gather information on how CPS currently functions within the new laws and regulations.

Organization: Harris County (CJA‐16‐07)

Project: Using Quantitative Ultrasound to Evaluate Infant Bone Health and Fracture Risk in the Medical Examiner and Clinical Setting


Data collection commenced on 12/1/15. During this quarter, data were collected from 23 infants. In total, data has been collected from 33 infants, 12 females and 21 males. These infants range in age from 0 to 10 months. Anterior‐posterior and medial‐lateral radiographs of the

46


lower leg were collected from all infants. All specimens, save one, have been delivered for micro‐CT, Raman spectroscopy, and biomechanical testing.

Data associated with medical history and autopsy findings are being entered as they become available. Analyses related to micro‐CT, Raman spectroscopy, and biomechanical testing will be added to the Infant Injury Database once reports have been received. After analyses of all specimens are complete, they will be sent to Dr. Ambrose, Director of Research in the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at the University of Texas Health Science Center, and Dr. Bi, Assistant Professor in the Department of Nanomedicine and Biomedical Engineering.

Organization: Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) (CJA‐16‐08)

Project: Alternative Response: Better Outcomes Through Family and Community Partnering


AR was rolled out in Regions 3 and 7 during the first quarter of the grant. An additional caseworker training was conducted in Region 3 on March 1‐3 in order to train 9 new staff. Six caseworker trainings with 109 staff and two supervisor trainings with 44 staff were conducted in Region 7 during the second quarter. Region 7 also had a two‐day coaching session with Kempe Center and a State Office coach for technical assistance, review of the model, embedding the practice and maintaining model fidelity.

Coaching is ongoing for the regions that have already implemented Alternative Response. A coaching tracking system has been developed to more efficiently assign coaching sessions where needed. During the second quarter, one 2‐day coaching session was held in Region 7 and two 2‐day sessions were held in Region 11.

An initial implementation meeting was held in Region 9 on January 4/5 with CPS State Office staff and Casey Family Programs project manager to develop a task timeline and schedule trainings for the region in preparation for a May 2 implementation date. Five AR 101 sessions were conducted in Region 9 from February 2‐4 with 145 staff attending. Additionally, 2 caseworker trainings were held with 31 staff attending.

State Office and Casey Family Programs staff met with Region 8 management staff in San Antonio for the initial pre‐implementation planning meeting on Feb 2‐3, to identify staff to be trained, number of training sessions needed, and the development of an implementation timeline with task deadlines. 6 AR 101 sessions were conducted in Region 8 with 184 people in attendance.

Kempe Center and CPS State Office Staff are currently working to align the Alternative Response curriculum with Signs of Safety.

Kempe Center conducted a 2‐day “Advanced AR Caseworker” Train‐the‐Trainer refresher training on February 16‐17 with all of the AR trainers in attendance at the Casey Family Programs offices.

A presentation about AR was given to agency attorneys and Public Information Officers on January 21.

Due to changes and initiatives occurring simultaneously in CPS, Regional staff are becoming overwhelmed with change. Therefore, a 3 month “pause” in the implementation of AR has been approved by DFPS and CJA to allow trainers and coaches to focus on embedding the AR practice in the regions that have already implemented. The purpose is to assist them with coaching and technical assistance to ensure fidelity to the model, develop and enhance sound practice techniques, and to work with supervisors in developing expertise in the parallel process.

47


The total number of AR cases opened since the program began is 12,672 and the total number of cases closed is 9,880. 683 cases (6.9% have progressed to Investigations, 144 have progressed to FBSS (1.5%) and 62 cases (.6%) have progressed to Investigations for Removal Purposes.

Organization: Texas Council on Family Violence

Project: Statewide Intake Pilot Project


TCFV and CPS’ Division of Practice Excellence coordinated and facilitated collaborative meetings between regional leadership at CPS and Family Violence Programs in DFPS Regions 1,2,3,6 and 9 where Disposition Guidelines training occurred thus far this quarter. At these meetings, CPS and DV program leadership had an opportunity to jointly review the disposition guidelines, discuss shifts in CPS policy and procedure, and create space for CPS and Programs to partner in the roll out of the disposition guidelines in the region.

TCFV and CPS met with SWI staff to review the intake questions used by their specialists when screening calls for child abuse and neglect. Currently there is not guidance for Intake Specialists for screening when domestic violence is present in the home. Options for incorporating new questions were specifically discussed. A smaller workgroup met to discuss and begin development of a training for SWI.

TCFV and CPS co‐presented at the 2016 TCFV/TAASA Executive Director Conference on the shifts in policy and practice in CPS investigations.

TCFV provided a second level training for New Braunfels area domestic violence program leadership and CPS investigative staff. TCFV brought in Elizanet Cervantes from CPS Region 8 DV Pilot Unit to discuss their shifts in practice and outcomes for families.

TCFV provided regional training to program leadership on the shifts in policy and practice in investigations with CPS covering SB 434 guiding principles, partnering with CPS, partnering with the victim, engaging the batterer, the new disposition guidelines and the MOU between FVPs and DFPS.

TCFV presented on a state panel at PEI’s Texas Fatherhood Summit.

48

CJA BudgetFiscal Year: October 1, 2015 - September 30, 2016

4/20/2016

GY 16 Unexpended Funds: 1,282,713.99$

IncomeGY 15 Remaining Funds: 288,233.00$ Estimate

GY 16 Grant Income: 1,391,873.00$ Program Income: -$

Total Grant Income 1,680,106.00$ Total Budgeted 1,666,859.00$

Funds Remaining for New Projects 13,247.00$

Expenses Budget Expenses to Date Balance

Grantees

CACTX - Training and Technical Assistance for CACs 200,000.00$ $ 56,854.17 143,145.83$

CACTX MDT Evaluation 101,696.00$ 9,603.00$ 92,093.00$

DSHS 128,635.00$ -$ 128,635.00$

University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio 174,280.00$ 5,253.34$ 169,026.66$

Texas Municipal Police Association 200,000.00$ 67,187.23$ 132,812.77$

SafePlace 62,049.00$ 19,703.69$ 42,345.31$

Harris County 113,506.00$ 51,700.71$ 61,805.29$

DFPS 200,000.00$ 17,844.40$ 182,155.60$

Texas Council on Family Violence 50,000.00$ 25,225.64$ 24,774.36$

Small Training Grants 20,000.00$ 1,336.71$ 18,663.29$

Scholarships 85,000.00$ 12,277.85$ 72,722.15$

CJA Task Force 24,000.00$ 8,532.53$ 15,467.47$

Overhead

Salaries 170,234.00$ 63,355.83$ 106,878.17$

Fringe 46,966.00$ 19,457.10$ 27,508.90$

Travel 10,000.00$ 291.12$ 9,708.88$

Rent 36,383.00$ 19,642.21$ 16,740.79$

Equipment -$ -$ -$

Contractual (Audit) 8,000.00$ 3,500.00$ 4,500.00$

Supplies (Office Supplies, Shipping, Printing, etc) 8,500.00$ 2,447.17$ 6,052.83$ Other Admin (IT, Professional fees and services, Insurance, Phone, etc) 27,610.00$ 13,179.31$ 14,430.69$

1,666,859.00$ 397,392.01$ 1,269,466.99$

Summary49

1

OMB Control No: 0970-0425

Expiration Date: 07/31/2017

ACF

Administration

for Children

and Families

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN

SERVICES

Administration on Children, Youth and Families

1. Log No. ACYF-CB-PI-01 2. Issuance Date: February 22, 2016

3. Originating Office: Children's Bureau

Office on Child Abuse and Neglect

4. Key Words: Children's Justice Act

5. 42 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.

PROGRAM INSTRUCTION

TO: The State Office, Agency, or Organization Designated by the

Governor to Apply for a Children's Justice Act Grant (CJA)

SUBJECT: Availability of Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Children's Justice Act

Grants to States Under the Child Abuse Prevention and

Treatment Act (CAPTA)

LEGAL

REFERENCES: Section 107(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) of the Child Abuse

Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) (42 U.S.C. 5106c et

seq.) as amended by Public Law (P.L.) 111-320 enacted

December 20, 2010; and the Victims of Crime Act of 1984, as

amended (42 U.S.C. 10603 et seq.).

50

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................................ 3

SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ 3

PURPOSE ........................................................................................................................................... 3

INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................. 3

Annual Reporting Requirements.................................................................................................... 3

Three-year Assessment Requirement ............................................................................................ 4

Grant Administration Regulations ................................................................................................. 5

EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS ............................................................................................................. 5

AVAILABILITY AND ALLOCATION OF FUNDS ........................................................................ 6

Excess Funds .................................................................................................................................. 7

FUNDING PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................... 7

Required Categories/Areas for Use of CJA Funds ........................................................................ 7

PART II: APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS .............................................................................. 11

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS .................................................................................................... 11

Format ........................................................................................................................................ 11

Signature .................................................................................................................................... 12

Delivery...................................................................................................................................... 12

ELIGIBILITY INSTRUCTIONS ..................................................................................................... 12

Eligibility Requirements ............................................................................................................ 12

Documentation of Eligibility ..................................................................................................... 13

REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL STATES ........................................................................................... 13

Establishment/Maintenance of a CJA State Task Force ............................................................. 13

Governor's Letter ......................................................................................................................... 14

Certifications ............................................................................................................................... 15

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS (for States which have not previously established

eligibility and for States which are required to submit a three-year assessment) ............................. 15

State Task Force Recommendations ........................................................................................... 16

State Implementation of the State Task Force Recommendations ............................................. 16

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION INSTRUCTIONS ............................................................................... 17

Program Performance Reporting Requirements and Program Content ...................................... 17

Application for Proposed Activities ........................................................................................... 18

PART III: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ............................................................................... 18

CLOSING DATE ............................................................................................................................... 18

INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW .............................................................................................. 18

INQUIRIES ........................................................................................................................................ 19

EFFECTIVE DATE ........................................................................................................................... 19

WEBSITE RESOURCES…………… .............................................................................................. 20

ATTACHMENT 1 (Tentative Allocations) .................................................................................. 21-22

51

3

PART I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION

SUMMARY: Section 107(a) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (P.L. 111-320)

(the Act) authorizes grants to States for the purpose of assisting States in

developing, establishing and operating programs designed to improve: (1) the

assessment and investigation of suspected child abuse and neglect cases, including

cases of suspected child sexual abuse and exploitation, in a manner that limits

additional trauma to the child and the child’s family; (2) the assessment and

investigation of cases of suspected child abuse-related fatalities and suspected child

neglect-related fatalities; (3) the investigation and prosecution of cases of child

abuse and neglect, including child sexual abuse and exploitation; and (4) the

assessment and investigation of cases involving children with disabilities or serious

health-related problems who are suspected victims of child abuse or neglect.

The term “State” as used in Section 3 (7) of the Act includes each of the States, the

District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam,

American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. In FY

2015, 50 States, including the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto

Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the

Northern Mariana Islands were deemed eligible for grants from funds deposited in

the Crime Victims Fund, for a total of $17,000,000.

Since the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana

Islands may submit consolidated grant applications in accordance with 45 CFR Part

97, these jurisdictions need not submit an application under this Program

Instruction (PI) if they choose to have their allotments included in a consolidated

grant and to expend these funds under the authority of another program that is

available for consolidation.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this PI is to set forth the eligibility requirements and the grant

application procedures for FY 2016 Children’s Justice Act (CJA) grants and to

provide the tentative State allocation table.

INFORMATION:

Annual Reporting Requirements

Financial Reporting

Federal funds awarded through these grants must be expended for the purposes for which

they were awarded and within the time period allotted, in accordance with the deadlines

discussed below.

52

4

1. Funding (Project) Period/Obligation Deadline (10/01/2015 – 09/30/2018). The grantee

must submit an annual Financial Status Report, using Standard Form 425 (Form SF-

425), within 90 days of the end of each 12 months of the three-year

obligation/liquidation period.

2. Liquidation Deadline (12/30/2018). All obligated Federal funds awarded under this

grant must be liquidated no later than 90 days after the end of the funding/obligation

period (i.e., December 30 following the end of Federal Fiscal Year 3). Any Federal

funds from this award not liquidated by this date will be recouped by this Department.

3. Federal Financial Reporting System. Form SF-425, “Federal Financial Report.”

Effective October 1, 2013 – It is mandatory that grantees enter their expenditures

into the Online Data Collection (OLDC) system. ACF will no longer accept paper

submissions of any expenditure reports either by mail, email or fax. The OLDC

web address is https://extranet.acf.hhs.gov/oldcdocs/materials.html. To sign up for

access to OLDC, send an email request to Matthew McMahon at

[email protected].

4. Submission Schedule: Annual. Each annual report must be submitted within 90 days

following the end of each Federal Fiscal Year.

(a) An Interim report (covering Year 1 thru Year 2 of the project period) is due 90

days following the end of the Federal Fiscal Year: 12/30/2016 and 12/30/2017.

(b) A Final report (cumulative, covering the entire 3-year project period

10/01/2015 – 09/30/2018) is due 90 days following the end of Federal Fiscal

Year (12/30/2018).

Program Performance Reports

Program Performance Reports are required once a year as part of the grant application.

(See instructions under Part C, PROGRAM DESCRIPTION INSTRUCTIONS on pages

17-18.)

Three-year Assessment Requirement

Section 107(d) of the Act requires the State Task Force (see State Task Force

requirements on page 13) to undertake a comprehensive review and evaluation of

the investigative, administrative and judicial handling of cases of child abuse and

neglect and to make training and policy recommendations in each of the three

categories in Section 107(e)(1) (A), (B) and (C). The State Task Force assessment

(review, evaluation and recommendations) is required for an initial application and

at three-year intervals thereafter.

53

5

The assessment must include a report clearly outlining the review, evaluation,

and recommendations in all the areas required in Section 107(e)(1)(A), (B) and

(C). See required areas on pages 7-8.

The report must detail the process used by the State to conduct and complete the

Three-year Assessment. The review and evaluation should build on prior

assessments and note system improvements related to prior work. The review must

outline proposed policy and training recommendations.

Additional information: The report may also include any other relevant

comments and recommendations. States may identify numerous training

and policy recommendations and choose to prioritize certain

recommendations to be supported by CJA funding.

States which established their eligibility and first received funding in FY 2013, and

States which completed the three-year assessment requirement and received

funding in FY 2013, must include in their FY 2016 application documentation

that the State Task Force complied with the requirement for a State Task Force

study at three-year intervals. Those States are:

District of Columbia

Indiana

Maine

Michigan

Missouri

Nebraska

North Dakota

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Grant Administration Regulations

The regulations which apply to the administration of these grants are contained in

45 CFR Part 92, "Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and

Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments," (see website link on

page 17 for a copy of 45 CFR Part 92 revised regulations).

EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS:

States are encouraged to obligate (establish binding contracts and sign them) CJA Federal

funds in one year but are required to obligate and liquidate (spend) CJA funds no later than

two years after the end of the fiscal year in which the funds are awarded. Grantees have

until December 30, 2018 to liquidate FY 2016 CJA funds. This December 30, 2018

deadline is to assist grantees in paying invoices for services completed, but invoiced by

end of the year (September 30, 2018). A negative grant award will be issued for any

54

6

unobligated or unliquidated balances reported as of December 30, 2018, and returned to

the Treasury.

States must obligate all FY 2016 CJA funds by September 30, 2018. States must liquidate

all FY 2016 CJA funds by December 30, 2018.





No-cost extension requests will not be approved except in the event of a

natural occurrence of destruction or distress. These circumstances are defined

in 45 CFR § 95.22. (See Appendix).

Those States requesting an extension due to a natural occurrence of destruction or

distress are to provide a written request, explaining the amount of money that

remains to be liquidated and the circumstances for such an extension to: Rafael

López, Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF),

Attn: Children’s Bureau, Administration on Children, Youth and Families,

Mary E. Switzer Building, 330 C Street, SW, 3rd

Floor, Washington, D.C.

20201, no later than November 1, 2016.

Note: The Office of Grants Management is pleased to work with grantees needing

guidance in the obligation and liquidation of funds according to the terms and

conditions of their grant award.

AVAILABILITY AND ALLOCATION OF FUNDS:

Funding for the CJA program is available from the Crime Victims Fund.

Legislation requires in any fiscal year that funds be made available to the

Department of Health and Human Services for CJA grants to the States, except that

15 percent will be reserved by the Attorney General for CJA grants to Native

American Tribes. With the enactment of the Child Abuse Prevention and

Enforcement Act (CAPE) in March 2000, the amount transferred to ACF is capped

at $17,000,000. The total funding available for the CJA grants is $17,000,000.

Funds will be allocated to States based on a formula similar to that used in

distributing the CAPTA State grants, i.e., a base amount of $50,000 will be

awarded to each State; an additional amount will be awarded bearing the same ratio

to the total funds remaining as the number of children under the age of 18 in each

State bears to the total number of children under 18 in all the States.

55

7

The tentative FY 2016 allocation for each State is shown in Attachment 1 on pages

21-22.

Excess Funds

Any excess funds resulting from States not meeting the eligibility requirements will

be awarded to eligible States on a pro rata share basis. When a State receives more

than their tentative allocation, supplemental information to explain the State's

use of these additional funds should be submitted in the form of a letter to

Rafael López, Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families

(ACYF), Mary E. Switzer Building, 330 C Street, SW, 3rd

Floor, Washington,

D.C. 20201 no later than November 29, 2016.

The use of excess funds must conform to the guidelines contained in this PI.

FUNDING PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES:

In accordance with Section 107(a) of CAPTA, grants awarded are to be used to

develop, establish and operate programs designed to improve:

1. the assessment and investigation of suspected child abuse and neglect cases,

including cases of suspected child sexual abuse and exploitation, in a manner

that limits additional trauma to the child and the child’s family;

2. the assessment and investigation of cases of suspected child abuse-related

fatalities and suspected child neglect-related fatalities;

3. the investigation and prosecution of cases of child abuse and neglect, including

child sexual abuse and exploitation; and

4. the assessment and investigation of cases involving children with disabilities or

serious health-related problems who are suspected victims of child abuse or

neglect.

Required Categories/Areas for Use of CJA Funds

In particular grant funds should be used to implement State Task Force

recommendations in the following three categories (the three categories from

Section 107(e)(1)(A) (B) and (C)) of the Act:

A. investigative, administrative, and judicial handling of cases of child

abuse and neglect, including child sexual abuse and exploitation, as

well as cases involving suspected child maltreatment related

fatalities and cases involving a potential combination of

jurisdictions, such as interstate, Federal-State, and State-Tribal, in a

manner which reduces the additional trauma to the child victim and

56

8

the victim's family and which also ensures procedural fairness to the

accused;

B. experimental, model, and demonstration programs for testing

innovative approaches and techniques which may improve the

prompt and successful resolution of civil and criminal court

proceedings or enhance the effectiveness of judicial and

administrative action in child abuse and neglect cases, particularly

child sexual abuse and exploitation cases, including the

enhancement of performance of court-appointed attorneys and

guardians ad litem for children, and which also ensure procedural

fairness to the accused; and

C. reform of State laws, ordinances, regulations, protocols and

procedures to provide comprehensive protection for children from

abuse, including sexual abuse and exploitation, while ensuring

fairness to all affected persons.

CJA funds should be used for programs to reform State systems and improve the

processes by which States respond to cases of child abuse and neglect, including

child sexual abuse and exploitation and cases of suspected child abuse or neglect

related fatalities. This will enable States to deal more effectively with both the

child victim and the offender and to limit additional trauma to the child victim.

The on-going activities of a State Task Force in monitoring implementation of its

recommendations and continuing interagency collaboration in carrying out the

intent of the Act may be supported with these funds. Supporting child abuse

prevention programs or treatment services is not an appropriate use of CJA

funds.

CJA funds are to be primarily focused on the front-end, intake and investigative

piece of child welfare. Projects selected by State Task Forces should be mindful

that funds must be spent to support efforts at this point in a child welfare case.

Examples of CJA-supported Activities Include:

Developing curricula and conducting training for personnel in law

enforcement and child protective services, as well as health and mental

health professionals, prosecutors and judges. This may include attention

to issues of trafficking and exploitation within child welfare.

Establishing or enhancing child advocacy centers and other

multidisciplinary programs to serve child victims and their families in

order to minimize trauma.

57

9

Establishing and supporting local and/or State child fatality review

teams, including multidisciplinary training, team development, and

annual reporting.

Supporting the enactment of laws to improve system response,

including allowing the admission of indirect testimony of children into

evidence, making the courtroom setting less intimidating to children,

increasing the penalties for sexual offenses against children, requiring

mandatory sentencing, shortening the trial process and permitting

victims to make statements prior to sentencing.

The on-going activities of a State Task Force in monitoring

implementation of its recommendations and continuing interagency

collaboration in carrying out the intent of the Act may be supported with

these funds.

Trafficking

This Administration has increased its attention on the issue of Human Trafficking.

The Children’s Bureau, along with the Administration on Children, Youth and

Families (ACYF), continues to focus efforts at the intersection of trafficking and

child welfare. In 2014, 9 discretionary awards were made to grantees focused at

addressing trafficking within the child welfare population (information available at

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/resource/discretionary-grant-awards-2014).

In the funding announcement for these grants was mention of collaboration and

coordination with CJA work and State Task Forces. The Children’s Bureau is

committed to supporting the work of States to address trafficking and exploitation.

The Children’s Justice Act specifically mentions the issue of exploitation in Section

107 of CAPTA. CJA State Task Forces have directed CJA funds to projects to

address exploitation and trafficking. Projects responding to trafficking must be

focused on systems improvement in response to cases of child maltreatment.

Examples of appropriate use of CJA funds in this area include: trainings on

recognizing trafficked or exploited children for first responders,

training/collaborative efforts between child protective services and law

enforcement, and/or development of procedures or a resource (tool kit) for

professionals to address trafficking or exploitation. Other areas might focus on

policies and procedures to promote successful prosecution of the

traffickers/exploiters and ways to reduce child victim trauma.

Funds should be used for programs to reform State systems and improve the

processes by which States respond to cases of child abuse and neglect, including

child sexual abuse and exploitation and cases of suspected child abuse or neglect

related fatalities. This will enable States to deal more effectively with both the child

victim and the offender and to limit additional trauma to the child victim.

58

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/resource/discretionary-grant-awards-2014

10

Linkage to the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) and Continuous Quality

Improvement Work

The Children’s Bureau is focusing efforts on the Child and Family Services Review

and the connection of formula grants to this work. The CFSR is the process the

Children's Bureau uses to conduct periodic reviews of state child welfare systems.

CJA programs should be aware of State work as it engages in this process.

Reporting related to the CFSR

Child and Family Services Plan (CFSP)

States are required to develop a Child and Family Services Plan, a five-year

strategic plan that sets forth the vision and the goals to be accomplished to

strengthen the States' overall child welfare system.

The CFSP was due on June 30, 2014 for fiscal years 2015 - 2019. A

primary purpose of the CFSP is to facilitate States’ integration of the

programs that serve children and families, including title IV-B, subparts 1

and 2 of the Social Security Act (SSA), and the Chafee Foster Care

Independence Program (CFCIP) and Education and Training Vouchers

(ETV) programs (section 477 of the SSA) for older and/or young adults

formerly in foster care, into a continuum of services for children and their

families. The CFSP consolidates plans for these programs to help States

comprehensively integrate the full array of child welfare services, from

prevention and protection through permanency (45 CFR 1357.15(a)). States

are required to make these plans available to the public and many of them

are located online. In addition, while states are no longer required to submit

a new plan for the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA)

state grant program every five years, they are required to submit an annual

update on their use of CAPTA State grant funds each year and to submit

other updates to the CAPTA plan, as needed. These CAPTA plan reports

and updates are submitted with the CFSP and Annual Progress and Services

Reports each year.

Annual Progress and Services Report (APSR)

Each year on June 30, States are required to submit an APSR, which

provides an annual update on the progress made toward accomplishing the

goals and objectives in the CFSP. In preparing the APSR, each State must

conduct an interim review of the progress made since the last APSR toward

accomplishing the goals and objectives in the CFSP based on updated

information and current data. The next APSR is due June 30, 2016.

59

11

Both of these reports are available online as part of State’s reporting

requirements and additional information is available at:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/cfsp_apsr_reporting_requireme

nts.pdf.

Alignment of CFSP/APSRs with the Child and Family Services Reviews

(CFSRs)

The 2015-2019 CFSP was used to align the work conducted under the

CFSP with the Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSRs). After a CFSR

is completed, States develop a Program Improvement Plan (PIP) to address

areas in their child welfare services that need improvement. The Children’s

Bureau continues to work with States to align the CFSP/APSR, CFSR and

the PIP process, and other program and services to achieve measurable

progress to improve outcomes for children and families.

A core component of the CFSP/APSR and CFSR process is the

collaboration and coordination by the child welfare agency with partners,

tribes, courts and other stakeholders.

In an effort to purposefully and consistently align CJA programs to relevant work

in the States, the 2015 CJA Program Instruction asked States to demonstrate their

awareness of the CFSP/APSR and CFSR processes. To move this effort forward,

CB encourages CJA programs and/or its State Task Force members to become

more active participants in various stakeholder meetings and planning committees

related to the Child and Family Services Plan (CFSP)/Annual Progress and

Services Report (APSR) and review the goals and objectives of the CFSP/APSR

and identify which of them are related to the final recommendations identified

through the State’s Three-year Assessment process. The ACF Regional Office is

also available to help facilitate this process.

Linkage to Court and Legal Representation Improvement Work

The Children’s Bureau’s Court Improvement Program (CIP) is a mandatory formula grant

authorized under the Social Security Act. All 50 States, Puerto Rico and the District of

Columbia receive CIP funding. The purpose of the program is to promote the continuous

quality improvement of court processes and legal representation in child welfare

proceedings through ongoing assessment, data collection and analysis, and training. The

CIP is also designed to enhance collaboration between the judicial branch of state

government, state child welfare agencies, other executive branch agencies, and tribes. The

grant requires the creation of a statewide multi-disciplinary task force, a strategic plan and

an annual self-assessment of how the grantee is progressing on its identified priorities.

CJA grantees are encouraged to connect with the CIP Director in their state and become

familiar with efforts planned or underway to improve the handling of child welfare

60

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/cfsp_apsr_reporting_requirements.pdf

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/cfsp_apsr_reporting_requirements.pdf

12

proceedings under the program and explore opportunities for collaboration and joint work

toward shared outcomes. A CIP Director directory is included as an attachment to this

program instruction.

The Children’s Bureau Regional Office and Central Office plan to provide technical

assistance to assist CJA programs in making connections to improve collaboration and

coordination to improve services for children and families.

PART II: APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS

A. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Format: States are no longer required to submit a SF-424, “Application for Financial

Assistance,” although a State may use this form if it so chooses. States may apply in a

format best suited to their needs. However, we recommend that States complete and

submit the SF-424, because all of its content is required information for the applicant. In

addition to the items specified in the SF-424, the application should include the Dun and

Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number for the agency.

To receive a grant, States must meet the eligibility requirements identified in this PI.

Signature: The application and report may be signed by the Governor or an individual

authorized to act on behalf of the State office, agency, or organization designated by the

Governor to apply for a CJA grant, and to assume for that agency the obligations imposed

by the terms and conditions of the grant award.

The Governor must sign the Governor’s letter listing the assurances related to the CJA

award. The Governor’s letter requirement is detailed below.

Delivery: The Federal government is continually striving to promote efficiency in the

management of its programs. As such, States should submit the application and

subsequent annual program reports electronically. Consistent with Action Transmittal No.

OGM-AT-13-01, issued September 25, 2013 by the ACF Office of Grants Management, as

of October 1, 2013, all applications, plans and financial reports for mandatory grants must

now be submitted electronically. States should submit their application and report, and the

three-year assessment (if applicable), to the CJA Resource Inbox at:

[email protected].

For additional questions, please contact the Federal Project Officer for CJA, Lauren

Fischman at (202) 205-4539 or [email protected].

B. ELIGIBILITY INSTRUCTIONS

1. Eligibility Requirements

61

mailto:[email protected]


13

Eligibility for a CJA grant is based on two sets of requirements:

(a) States must be in compliance with the child abuse and neglect State Grant

requirements set forth in Section 106(b) of CAPTA at the time of the CJA

award. States not eligible for a State Grant will not be eligible for a FY 2016

CJA grant.

(b) States must fulfill the CJA requirements specified in Section 107 of the Act.

These requirements differ for: (A) States which have never established

eligibility to receive CJA funding; (B) States which met the three-year

assessment requirement and received CJA funding in FY 2013; and (C) all

other States. These requirements are specified in the “Documentation of

Eligibility” section which follows.

2. Documentation of Eligibility

N.B. All States must complete Part A below and applicable sections of Part C on

pages 17-18. States which have not previously established eligibility, and

States required to submit a three-year assessment with this application, must

complete the additional requirements stated in Part B, Additional

Requirements for States, on pages 15-17.

A. REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL STATES

All States must provide as part of the application information regarding:

1. Establishment and Maintenance of a CJA State Task Force (Sections 107(b)(2)

and 107(c)(1)) of the Act

Documentation that the State has established or designated and maintained a

multidisciplinary Task Force on children's justice, composed of professionals with

knowledge of and experience with the criminal justice system and the system handling

child physical abuse, child neglect, child sexual abuse and exploitation, and child

maltreatment related fatalities.

Applicants must clearly list the member for each discipline. The documentation must

include the names, titles and brief descriptions of the relevant professional experience

of each Task Force member, and designation of which professional category the task

force member represents. States have found presenting this information in table format

useful.

Documentation that the State Task Force includes members representing the following

disciplines as specified in Section 107(c)(1) of the Act:

62

14

• Law Enforcement Community

• Criminal Court Judge(s)

• Civil Court Judge(s)

• Prosecuting Attorney(s)

• Defense Attorney(s)

• Child Advocate(s) (Attorney(s) for Children)

• Court Appointed Special Advocate Representative(s), where such programs are in

operation

• Health Professional(s)

• Mental Health Professional(s)

• Child Protective Service Agencies

• Individual(s) experienced in working with children with disabilities

• Parents and Representative of Parent Groups

• Adult former victims of child abuse and or neglect; and

• Individuals experienced in working with homeless children and youths (as

defined in section 725 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42

U.S.C. 11434a)).

2. Governor's Letter (Signed)

A letter addressed to Rafael López, Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and

Families (ACYF), Mary E. Switzer Building, 330 C Street, SW, Washington, D.C.

20201, signed by the Governor certifying:

(a) the State received the FY 2015 child abuse and neglect Basic State

Grant and continues to comply with the requirements stipulated in

Section 106(b) of the Act; or the State has received a recently rendered

Federal decision attesting to the State's current compliance with the

requirements for the Basic State Grant under Section 106(b); and

(b) the State will maintain a State multidisciplinary task force on

children's justice (only for those States not currently receiving CJA funds);

or

(c) the State has maintained a State multidisciplinary task force on

children's justice (only for those States currently receiving CJA funds);

and

(d) the State has adopted or continues to progress in adopting

recommendations of the State Task Force or a comparable alternative to

such recommendations; and

(e) the State will make such reports to the Secretary as may reasonably be

required, including an annual report on how assistance received under

63

15

this program was expended throughout the State, with particular attention to

the areas described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of Section 107(a); and

(f) the State will maintain and provide access to records relating to

activities under CJA; and

(g) the State will participate in at least one Federally initiated CJA meeting

each year that the grant is in effect and are authorized to use grant

funds to cover travel and per diem expenses for two CJA

representatives (CJA Coordinator and Task Force Chairperson) to

attend the meeting.

Please note that a new and updated Governor’s letter with the aforementioned assurances

must be included every year as part of the CJA application.

3. Certifications

The following certifications are required at the time of application for Federal funds:

(a) Certification Regarding Lobbying (See Website on Page 20)

Pursuant to 45 CFR Part 93, the certification must be signed and submitted with

the application. If applicable, a SF LLL, which discloses lobbying payments, must

be submitted.

A retyped certification or a State's own certification form will not be accepted.

(b) Certification Regarding Drug-Free Work Place (See Website on Page

20)

Signature on the application by an authorized individual attests to the applicant's

intent to comply with Drug-Free Work Place requirements. A signed form does not

have to be returned with the application.

(c) Debarment Certification (See Website on Page 20)


compliance with the Debarment requirements. A signed form does not have to be

returned with the application.

(d) Certification Regarding Environmental Tobacco Smoke

(See Website on Page 20)

64

16


compliance with the Environmental Tobacco Smoke requirements. A signed form

does not have to be returned with the application.

B. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR STATES

States which have not previously established eligibility and States which are required

to submit a Three-year Assessment with this application must provide:

1. a statement of the Task Force's function/purpose; and

2. the date the Task Force was established.

Note: A Commission or Task Force established after January 1, 1983 and presently

maintained with substantially comparable membership and functions meets the Task Force

requirements. However, clear designation of which professional category the task

force member represents must be included as part of the documentation. (See Section

107(c)(2))

States not previously eligible and States required to submit a Three-year Assessment

with this application must also provide:

1. State Task Force Recommendations (Section 107(d))

Documentation that the State Task Force has comprehensively:

(a) reviewed and evaluated State investigative, administrative and both

civil and criminal judicial handling of cases of child abuse and

neglect, including child sexual abuse and exploitation, as well as

cases involving suspected child maltreatment related fatalities and

cases involving a potential combination of jurisdictions, such as

intrastate, interstate, Federal-State, and State-Tribal; and

(b) made policy and training recommendations in each of the categories

described in Section 107(e) of the Act. The task force may make

such other comments and recommendations as are considered

relevant and useful.

Documentation must include a report of the State Task Force

study including its recommendations in all areas required in

Section 107(e) of the Act.

2. State Implementation of the State Task Force Recommendations

(Section 107(e)) of the Act

65

17

Documentation that the State adopted the Task Force recommendations as

stipulated in 1(b) above.

Note: As provided in Section 107(e)(2) of the Act, a State shall be

considered to be in fulfillment of Section 107(e)(1) requirements if it:

(a) adopts comparable alternatives to the recommendations of the Task

Force in each of the categories for which the Task Force's

recommendations are not adopted; or

(b) is making substantial progress toward adopting the Task Force

recommendations or comparable alternatives to such

recommendations.

The documentation must identify all Task Force recommendations adopted

and/or comparable alternatives designed to carry out the purposes of the

Act; describe the actions yet to be taken and timetables for implementing

each recommendation or comparable alternative; or be sufficient to support

a showing that the State is making substantial progress in adopting Task

Force recommendations or comparable alternatives.

C. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION INSTRUCTIONS

Program Performance Reporting Requirements and Program Content

The program performance report is required annually. The performance report is to be

included as part of the application.

The reporting period for a program performance report should include activities for the 12

month period preceding the date of submission of the application (for example May to

May).

A program performance report should focus on the programming, outputs and outcomes

of CJA activities and projects for the prior year. Reports should include:

clear statement of the needs of the State as identified by the Task Force;

activities, outputs and outcomes as they relate to the needs identified,

including implementation of evidence based trainings and programming;

and

results of evaluation work of the CJA projects (both process and program

evaluations including program efforts).

Applications from States currently receiving CJA funds must contain a

performance report which describes project impact and/or progress related

to categories listed in the legislation:

66

18

A. activities to improve the investigative, administrative, and

judicial handling of cases of child abuse and neglect, including

child sexual abuse and exploitation, as well as cases involving

suspected child maltreatment related fatalities and cases

involving a potential combination of jurisdictions, such as

intrastate, interstate, Federal-State, and State-Tribal, in a

manner which reduces the additional trauma to the child victim

and the victim’s family and which also ensures procedural

fairness to the accused;

B. support of experimental, model, and demonstration programs

for testing innovative approaches and techniques which may

improve the prompt and successful resolution of civil and

criminal court proceedings or enhance the effectiveness of

judicial and administrative action in child abuse and neglect

cases, particularly child sexual abuse and exploitation cases,

including the enhancement of performance of court appointed

attorneys and guardians ad litem for children, and which also

ensure procedural fairness to the accused; and

C. reform of State laws, ordinances, regulations, protocols, and

procedures to provide comprehensive protection for children,

which may include those children involved in reports of child

abuse or neglect with a potential combination of jurisdictions,

such as intrastate, interstate, Federal-State, and State-Tribal,

from child abuse and neglect, including child sexual abuse and

exploitation, while ensuring fairness to all affected persons.

Application for Proposed Activities

All applications are to contain a performance report as well as an application for proposed

activities.

The application is to include a description of the categories/areas/activities (as described on

page 7 (A), (B) and (C)) to be supported with Children's Justice Act grant funds.

The Application should include:

1. project goals and objectives;

2. approaches to be used;

3. a clear budget for each activity;

4. evaluation efforts related to the project;

5. an explanation of the extent to which the activity contributes to the reform

of State systems handling cases of child abuse and neglect/and furthers

implementation of State Task Force recommendations; and

67

19

6. a clearly articulated demonstration of the CJA program’s awareness of the

CFSP and APSR strategies and goals.

PART III: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS:

The signed original, including all attachments, must be submitted to the Federal Project

Officer at the Office on Child Abuse and Neglect by May 31, 2016.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

(EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372):

This program is covered under Executive Order (EO)12372, "Intergovernmental Review of

Federal Programs," for State plan consolidation and simplification only (See 45 CFR

100.12). The review and comment provisions of the EO and Part 100 do not apply.

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a

collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) Control Number.

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 60 hours

per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the

data needed, and reviewing the collection of information.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-13), the Department is

required to submit to OMB for review and approval any reporting and record-keeping

requirements or program announcements. This program announcement meets all

information collection requirements approved for ACF grant applications under OMB

Control Number 0970-0425 which expires July 31, 2017.

CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE (CFDA) # 93.643

INQUIRIES TO:

Lauren Fischman

Children's Bureau

Office on Child Abuse and Neglect

Telephone: (202) 205-4539

Email address: [email protected]

EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon Issuance.

68


20

/s/

Rafael López, Commissioner

Administration on Children, Youth and Families

69

21

WEBSITES TO CJA RESOURCE MATERIALS

Please visit the following websites listed below to download the relevant CJA resource materials

for this PI:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_01/45cfr92_01.html

45 CFR Part 92, revised as of October 1, 1996

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-

cfr.cgi?TITLE=45&PART=95&SECTION=22&YEAR=1999&TYPE=TEXT

45 CFR Part 95.22, revised as of October 1, 1999

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/laws_policies/cblaws/capta/capta2010.pdf

Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act as amended by P.L. 111-320, the CAPTA

Reauthorization Act of 2010

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/certification-regarding-lobbying

Certification Regarding Lobbying

Drug-Free Work Place Certification

Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other

Responsibility Matters

Certification Regarding Environmental Tobacco Smoke

http://www.dpm.psc.gov/

Payment Management System

70

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_01/45cfr92_01.html

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=45&PART=95&SECTION=22&YEAR=1999&TYPE=TEXT

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=45&PART=95&SECTION=22&YEAR=1999&TYPE=TEXT

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/laws_policies/cblaws/capta/capta2010.pdf

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/certification-regarding-lobbying

http://www.dpm.psc.gov/

22

ATTACHMENT 1

TENTATIVE FISCAL YEAR 2016 STATE ALLOCATION TABLE

ALABAMA 260,922

ALASKA 85,780

ARIZONA 359,041

ARKANSAS 184,824

CALIFORNIA 1,797,597

Colorado 287,602

CONNECTICUT 196,994

Delaware 88,978

District of Columbia 72,524

FLORIDA 822,587

GEORGIA 524,607

HAWAII 109,235

IDAHO 132,145

ILLINOIS 619,120

Indiana 351,322

IOWA 188,402

KANSAS 188,015

Kentucky 243,233

LOUISIANA 262,672

MAINE 99,170

MARYLAND 307,688

MASSACHUSETTS 314,899

MICHIGAN 472,819

MINNESOTA 294,548

MISSISSIPPI 189,201

MISSOURI 315,467

MONTANA 92,946

NEBRASKA 139,136

NEVADA 176,342

NEW HAMPSHIRE 100,621

NEW JERSEY 433,000

NEW MEXICO 145,707

New York (Start 2011) 858,760

NORTH CAROLINA 485,708

NORTH DAKOTA 82,453

OHIO 552,328

71

23

OKLAHOMA 231,947

OREGON 213,501

PENNSYLVANIA 564,496

RHODE ISLAND 90,510

SOUTH CAROLINA 256,716

SOUTH DAKOTA 90,308

TENNESSEE 334,873

TEXAS 1,407,958

UTAH 222,792

Vermont 73,095

VIRGINIA 406,941

WASHINGTON 356,111

WEST VIRGINIA 122,483

WISCONSIN 297,416

WYOMING 76,412

AMERICAN SAMOA 54,247

GUAM 59,468

NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS 53,104

PUERTO RICO 196,338

VIRGIN ISLANDS 54,891

Total 17,000,000

72

CJA 2015‐2016 COMMITTTEES SCOPE OF WORK

CJA 2015‐2016 MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE Membership Recruitment The Membership Committee shall assess the composition of the Task Force to ensure compliance with mandated positions; diversity among its membership to include a variety of categories, including but not limited to, professional expertise/contacts, gender, ethnicity, race, and culture; as well as alignment with the current three‐year plan priorities.

I. The Committee will meet to thoroughly review the current composition of the Task Force. The committee will assess strengths and weaknesses of Task Force membership and develop a specific, targeted plan to strengthen the Task Force. This plan may include recommendations to increase geographic diversity, ethnic/racial/culturally diversity, professional expertise, etc. The plan can also include recommendations to improve Task Force engagement. (October – April; Report back at April Task Force meeting)

II. The Committee will develop key criteria for 2016‐2017 Task Force candidates and will enlist the other members of the Task Force in helping to identify potential candidates that meet one or more of the key criteria. (October – April; Report back at April Task Force meeting)

III. The Committee will work with staff to develop recruitment and orientation materials and publications for CJA (October – July)

IV. Once potential candidates have been identified, the Committee, with staff support, will schedule meetings (in person if possible) with these individuals to further determine their eligibility and level of interest in being presented as official nominees. (April – May)

V. The Committee will present a slate of candidates for member and officer positions to the Task Force prior to the July Task Force meeting at which elections will be conducted for Task Force members and officers for the following grant year beginning October 1, 2015. (April – July; Report back at July meeting)

Training and Education The Membership Committee is also responsible for building the capacity of Task Force members:

73

I. The Committee will recommend and implement, with staff support, training for the Task Force throughout the year. Training presentations should be designed to further Task Force knowledge pertaining to the three‐year assessment priority areas and should focus on work being done in different geographic regions of the state. Membership Committee will assist staff with planning quarterly meeting agenda. (Ongoing).

II. The Committee will assist staff with planning a Task Force retreat.

CJA 2015‐2016 GRANTS COMMITTEE The Grants Committee shall provide guidance and oversight of CJA’s grants processes and programs. Application Process

I. The Committee shall meet with CJA staff to review and revise the annual grants process. (October – January; Report back at January Task Force meeting)

II. The Committee will review the Request for Applications (RFAs) drafted by staff to ensure the solicitations reflect the Task Force’s current priorities. (October‐January; Report back at January Task Force meeting)

III. The Committee will assist with publicizing the availability of the CJA grant

through appropriate venues.

IV. The Committee shall review all full grant submissions as well as staff recommendations related to grant submissions and make final recommendations to the full Task Force regarding grant approvals. (March‐August)

Monitoring Process I. The Committee members will attend CJA‐funded trainings and programs and

report back to staff and Task Force members. (Ongoing) II. Committee members will attend grantee meetings with CJA staff, as

appropriate. (Ongoing)

74

III. The Committee will assist staff in identifying grantee programs for possible presentations to the full Task Force throughout the year. (Ongoing)

IV. The Committee shall assist staff in identifying organizations/programs in the

state doing work relevant to the CJA priorities. (Ongoing)

V. The Committee will assist staff in developing publications and materials to describe the work of CJA. (October – April)

75

2015‐2016 Children’s Justice Act Task Force Committees Grants Committee

Laura Wolf, Ex Officio Isidro Alaniz Executive Director CASA of Travis County Austin, TX (512) 539‐2665 [email protected]

District Attorney Webb County District Attorney’s Office Laredo, TX (956) 523‐4912 [email protected]

Tymothy Belseth Irene Clements

ETV/Youth Specialist Texas Department of Family and Protective Services Austin, TX (512) 438‐3769 [email protected]

Executive Director National Foster Parent Association Pflugerville, TX (512) 775‐1024 [email protected]

Jamye Coffman Cathy Crabtree

Medical Director Cook Children’s Center for Prevention of Child Maltreatment and CARE Team Fort Worth, TX [email protected]

Special Projects Consultant/Trainer Austin, TX (512) 258‐9920 [email protected]

Denise Hyde Julie Prudhome

Attorney at Law 812 San Antonio Street, Ste 304 Austin, TX (512) 474‐9911 denise@hyde‐law.com

Clinical Director Garth House, Mickey Mahaffy CAC Beaumont, TX (409) 838‐9084 [email protected]

Monica Reyes Craig Spinn

Parent Liaison The Children’s Partnership/Travis County Health and Human Services Austin, TX (512) 854‐7872 [email protected]

Deputy Executive Director of Administrative Services Region 13 Education Service Center Austin, TX [email protected]

Stephanie Stephens Nhung Tran

Assistant County Attorney Nacogdoches County Attorney’s Office Nacogdoches, TX (936) 560‐7788 [email protected]

Developmental‐Behavioral Pediatrician Scott and White Healthcare Department of Pediatrics Temple, TX (254) 724‐6060 [email protected]

76

Membership Committee

Dan Powers, Ex Officio Tony Bradley Senior Vice President/Clinical Director Collin County CAC Plano, TX (972) 633‐6615 [email protected]

Law Enforcement ‐ Retired Collin County Sheriff’s Office Plano, TX (972) 633‐6626 [email protected]

Jon Evans Jesse Gonzales, Jr.

Attorney at Law Lusk & Evans Austin, TX (512) 476‐4075 [email protected]

Attorney at Law Fort Stockton, TX (432) 940‐5646 [email protected]

Angela Goodwin Aurora Martinez Jones Director of Investigations CPS Austin, TX (512) 438‐4746 [email protected]

Associate Judge Travis County Austin, TX (512) 854‐2484 [email protected]

Diana Martinez Gabriel E. Martinez, Jr.

Vice President of Public Policy Texas Assisted Living Association Austin, TX (512) 914‐3908 [email protected]

Captain, Special Projects City of Laredo Police Department Laredo, TX (956) 795‐2899 [email protected]

Lindsay Mullins Joy Rauls

Executive Director, State Government Affairs BNSF Railway Austin, TX (512) 473‐2823 [email protected]

Executive Director Children Advocacy Centers of Texas Austin, TX (512) 258‐9920 [email protected]

Vicki Spriggs Angela Tucker

CEO Texas CASA, Inc. Austin, TX (512) 473‐2627 [email protected]

Judge 199th Judicial District Court – Collin County McKinney, TX 972‐548‐4415 [email protected]

76

cja task force meeting - yourhonor.com · v isidro alaniz x tym belseth x tony bradley x irene...

Documents