This article was republished with permission from 海角精品黑料’s news partners at .聽Sign up for today.
Maryland Child Protective Services evaluates thousands of potential cases of child neglect, abuse and mistreatment each year to determine what actions are needed to protect some of the state鈥檚 most vulnerable population: its youth.
But according to a Wednesday discussion during a Joint Committee on Children, Youth and Families meeting, there are holes in the state data reporting and it鈥檚 currently unclear how many families and children receive services to protect kids from mistreatment.
Dr. Wendy Lane, chair of the State Council on Child Abuse and Neglect (SCCAN), provided a briefing to the joint committee about the history of the council, which was established to evaluate state agencies鈥� effectiveness regarding child protective services, and gave lawmakers updates on child well-being in the state.
But according to Lane, SCCAN is facing issues in reporting data on families who are screened for alleged child mistreatment, possibly due to the state鈥檚 data system used to track and report those cases.
The Senate chair for the committee, Sen. Mary-Dulany James (D-Harford) seemed shocked by the data challenges on such an important topic.
鈥淭he thing that really got my attention 鈥� is the lack of accurate tracking and reporting in services and outcomes,鈥� she said during the meeting.
Lane reported to the committee that SCCAN collects data from the Maryland Department of Human Services each year, which breaks out the number of referrals that come into child protective services in the state and the results of the referrals.
The most recent data from DHS was from 2021, and there were over 74,000 total referrals for alleged child mistreatment in the state. About half of those cases evaluated in 2021 where 鈥渟creened out鈥� of needing further investigation, leaving about 35,298 needing additional investigations.
But this is where the holes in the data points begin, according to Lane.
For example, in 2021, there were about 14,746 families that were referred to receive 鈥渁lternative response鈥� due to low level risks of child abuse and neglect. This is when a plan is made between the family and the caseworker in order to improve family conditions and safety for the child before CPS officially gets involved with a more serious investigation.
The state data shows that only 711 of those families actually received 鈥渇amily preservation services鈥� while 136 children were removed from their families and went to out-of-home placement options like foster care. Lane says that there is not data for the remaining 13,899 families in this category.
鈥淪o our question is 鈥� what happened to all those other kids?鈥� Lane posed to the committee. She said that the minimal data makes it unclear as to whether thousands of children are receiving services or not.
That is also the case for families who are actively investigated for child abuse. According to the presentation, there were 6,573 instances where investigations indicated that a child was experiencing abuse within their family.
The data only shows that 1,118 of those families received family preservation services, while 678 children were removed and placed into out-of-home supervision. According to Lane, SCCAN did not receive state data for the remaining 4,777 cases.
鈥淏ut there鈥檚 a lot of kids that 鈥� maybe they鈥檙e getting services and maybe they鈥檙e not. They鈥檙e just not included in this documentation,鈥� she said.
Lane says that the lack in data may be due to the program that the state uses to collect information on child well-being called the Child, Juvenile and Adult Management System, which is shortened to CJAMS.
She said that there are issues in the data system itself that makes it challenging to input data and receive certain points of data, including the information about what happens to thousands of families who are screened for potential child mistreatment, neglect or abuse.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 know that鈥檚 because they鈥檙e not getting services or their services are not getting adequately tracked because of issues with CJAMS or other issues. And we don鈥檛 have specifics on what services they receive even if they do receive services.鈥�
Stephen Liggett-Creel, senior advisor to the secretary of the Department of Human Services, confirmed Lane鈥檚 concerns about the CJAMS data system and said that the Moore administration is aware of the issues.
鈥淚鈥檓 not surprising anyone to say that鈥here has been documented and reported challenges with data in the past,鈥� he said during the meeting. 鈥淭hings that have been very, very at the top of this current administration鈥檚 focus, around, particularly, CJAMS.鈥�
Liggett-Creel said that the data is there, and that the department is open to working with SCANN to address any data concerns they have.
James asked Liggett-Creel to follow-up after the meeting with the availability of those data points and the accessibility for others to look use it.
鈥淭he issue of this committee is to find out how others鈥CCAN, the legislative body鈥� they all want to have access, so they can make meaningful policy decisions,鈥� she said.
