Partnering with Families after a Child Abuse Investigation: Examining Recidivism Among Families Referred to Home-Based, Differential Response Services and a Comparison Group

Background and Purpose

Millions of children are investigated by child protective services (CPS) agencies annually due to concerns of abuse and neglect and many of them receive services to prevent future maltreatment. Although some studies have examined recidivism following participation in a home-based, differential response program (HBDR) following a child abuse investigation, they often do not include adequate comparison groups or are limited to one outcome. In response, this study compared families who received HBDR to randomly selected families that were investigated but did not receive HBDR using two indicators of CPS recidivism in order provide insight on the broader impact of HBDR for families who come in contact with CPS.

Methods

Using administrative data including 4,079 children whose families received HBDR services after an allegation of maltreatment between January 2014 and June 2018, this study compared families who received HBDR services following a closed investigation and families that were investigated but did not receive HBDR services (n=4600) using two indicators of CPS recidivism (i.e., re-reports and substantiations). Bivariate analyses were used to compare the re-report and substantiation rates among both groups, and a multivariable logistic regression was conducted to analyze the effect of HBDR as well as successful completion of HBDR on a CPS re-report and a substantiated re-report while adjusting for various demographic and case characteristics associated with recidivism including age, ethnicity, estimated median-family income per zip code, and allegation type. Recidivism data were obtained until August 2021 allowing for comparisons ranging from 4 ½ to 7 years.

Results

Bivariate analyses indicated that families who received HBDR services had lower re-report rates at one year and during the overall study period relative to the comparison group, 28% to 45% at one year and 56% to 68% overall, respectively. In contrast, the substantiation was higher for HBDR families. They had an average substantiation rate of 7.9% using a revised federal methodology compared to the comparison group at 6.1% and a substantiation rate of 14.5% over the entire study period compared to 10.4% for the non-HBDR group. When examining successful completion models, both the re-report and substantiation rate for HBDR families who successfully completed services was lower than the comparison group and HBDR participants at 1.8% and 8.2% overall. Multivariable analyses indicated that successful completion of HBDR was associated with reduced odds of re-referral and substantiation after adjusting for demographic and case characteristics.

Conclusions and Implications

These findings suggest that prevention programs offering HBDR could make a short-term and long-term impact on the re-referral and substantiation rates among high-risk families after a child abuse investigation. Furthermore, findings highlight the importance of ensuring that participants successfully complete the entirety of the HBDR as this was associated with reductions in both re-referral rates and substantiation rates. Furthermore, these findings emphasize the importance of examining multiple outcomes capturing recidivism and using randomly selected comparison groups to improve the evaluation of HBDR.