Subsequent Maltreatment Reports: Risk and Safety Assessments As Predictors of Subsequent Reports

Background and Purpose:

The majority of families reported for maltreatment will not experience subsequent reports after that single event.  However, some families routinely reengage with child welfare systems due to re-occurring maltreatment reports. Services may not address the needs of these chronically maltreating families.  Studies have looked at the risk factors for multiple subsequent reports have found that the profile of families with two reports is significantly different than those who only have one.  Understanding the specific needs and risk factors of these chronically reported families may help child welfare services adjust their services to families. 

Methods:  The data were from a state administrative data set, and the sample was all families with an accepted report of maltreatment in 2015 without a prior reports in the system (n=9,969).  Two logistic regression were run. The outcome for the first regression was a second report within 12-months of the index event.  The sample for the second regression was those families who had a second report, with an outcome of at least a third report within 12-months. The primary predictors used were family demographics, such as caregiver age and race.  In the full sample as assessed by the risk and safety screening, in 19% of families the primary caregiver had a mental health problem, 14% had a past or current alcohol or drug problem, 16% of secondary caregivers had an alcohol or drug problem, and in 17% of families at least one child had a mental/behavioral health problem.  

Results:

Primary caregiver’s age, presence of a mental health problem, presence of an alcohol or drug problem and child mental health or behavioral problems were significant predictors of a second report, and the model correctly predicted 80% of second reports.  Of families who had a second report, the prevalence of the risk factors was higher as assessed by the second risk and safety assessment; 25% of families had a PC with a mental health problem, 30% of families the PC had a drug or alcohol problem; and 25% of families had at least one child with a mental health or behavioral problem. 

Conclusions and implications:

Common, but difficult to treat, risk factors were much more prevalent in families who had more than one report, particularly caregiver mental health and alcohol/drug problems.  In families who had a second report within the 12-month period, almost a third of primary caregivers had an alcohol/drug problem and a quarter had a mental health problem. Because these problems are more difficult to address, families may need additional time and services before the family situation is stable.  Additionally, these percentages are a conservative estimate of alcohol and drug problems.  In light of recent articles on the lack of specificity in identifying caregiver drug and alcohol problems, it is likely that more families have a PC with a drug or alcohol problem.  Additional screening and targeted treatment for mental health and drug/alcohol problems may reduce the number of families with subsequent reports.