The Influence of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) As a Caregiver Risk Factor on Child Maltreatment and CPS Substantiation Decisions: A Secondary Data Analysis Using Ncands

Background/Purpose: Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is widely recognized as a critical caregiver risk factor in child maltreatment. Children in IPV-exposed households face elevated risks of emotional abuse, neglect, and physical harm. In response, many child protection agencies treat witnessing IPV as an adverse childhood experience (ACE), and in some jurisdictions, exposure alone may trigger CPS investigations or substantiation decisions. However, how child welfare systems operationalize IPV—and whether such responses effectively protect children or inadvertently cause additional trauma—remains a matter of debate. Prior research has largely focused on the co-occurrence of IPV and maltreatment using survey or clinical samples, with limited empirical evidence on how CPS substantiates different forms of maltreatment in the context of IPV. Even fewer studies have assessed how caregiver and child-level factors—such as substance use, financial hardship, and prior victimization—influence substantiation outcomes among IPV-exposed households. This study addresses these gaps using national administrative data to answer two questions: (1) how IPV affects the likelihood of substantiation across maltreatment types, and (2) how caregiver and child-level risk factors influence substantiation decisions within IPV-exposed households.

Methods: Data were drawn from the 2023 National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) Child File, a federally maintained dataset containing records of child protective services (CPS) investigations nationwide. The analytic sample included approximately 2 million cases involving caregiver intimate partner violence (IPV), identified using the domestic violence risk factor indicator. The primary outcome was substantiated maltreatment, constructed from maltreatment disposition outcomes (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect). Logistic regression models examined associations between IPV exposure and substantiation outcomes across maltreatment types. Additional logistic regressions analyzed how caregiver and child-level risk factors—including parental substance abuse, financial hardship, prior victimization, and demographic characteristics—influenced substantiation among IPV-exposed households.

Results: Analyses showed that emotional abuse (30.24% vs. 10.55%) and neglect (12.74% vs. 10.81%) were significantly more prevalent in IPV-exposed households compared to non-IPV households, whereas physical abuse (11.05% vs. 12.29%) and sexual abuse (4.86% vs. 12.61%) were slightly less prevalent. Logistic regression confirmed these patterns: IPV exposure strongly increased substantiation odds for emotional abuse (OR = 3.91) and modestly for neglect (OR = 1.18), but reduced substantiation odds for sexual abuse (OR = 0.37) and physical abuse (OR = 0.95). Among IPV-exposed families, caregiver drug abuse nearly doubled the odds of maltreatment substantiation (OR = 1.95), and alcohol abuse increased odds by 55% (OR = 1.55). Unexpectedly, financial difficulties were associated with slightly lower substantiation odds (OR = 0.92).

Conclusions and Implications: IPV exposure was strongly associated with substantiations for emotional abuse and neglect, while physical and sexual abuse were less likely to be substantiated—possibly reflecting reporting bias or protective interventions. Within IPV-affected households, caregiver substance use increased substantiation risk, while financial hardship slightly reduced it. These findings support CPS policies that prioritize trauma-informed, integrated responses over automatic substantiation, and call for clearer guidelines that distinguish structural hardship from caregiver-caused harm to ensure more equitable and supportive interventions.