Issues in Differential Response

Abstract

Differential response (DR), also referred to as alternative response (AR), family assessment response (FAR), or multiple track response, was developed to incorporate family-centered, strengths-based practices into child protective services (CPS), primarily by diverting lower risk families into an assessment track rather than requiring the traditional CPS investigation. Since the program's inception, researchers have conducted several large evaluation studies of DR programs, and a large body of research and program literature has been published touting the success and benefits of DR. In response to significant concerns about the clarity and consistency of DR program models and the validity and generalizability of its associated research, the authors undertook a comprehensive, three-pronged evaluation to provide guidance in shaping the ongoing development of DR programs. This report summarizes the methodology, findings, conclusions, and recommendations from the review.

Responding to “Issues in Differential Response”

“…particularly related to children's safety'' (Hughes, Rycus, Saunders-Adams, Hughes, & Hughes, 2013, p. 495). Hughes et al (2013) highlight a number of trends and issues denoted by other authors (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2008;Connolly, 2005;Lohrbach, 2011; National Quality Improvement Center on Differential Response in Child Protective Services, [NQIC-DR] 2011;Schene, 2005;Waldfogel, 2009;Yuan, 2005) . Within their review, the authors have identified one of the prevailing contradictions and conflicts constraining any child welfare system: ''The confluence in both law and policy of these compelling practice principles reflected one of the most prevalent and difficult inherent tensions in CPS practice: that is, how to promote engagement, empowerment, and support of families without compromising the essential need and capacity to use more authoritative interventions to protect children at high risk of serious harm when less authoritative methods could not'' (Hughes et al, 2013, p. 494).…”

Empirical evidence on legal levers aimed at addressing child maltreatment

“…Yet, in any scenarios under a traditional framework, service provision is not part of the role of social services, though service recommendations may accompany investigations and escalation of intervention may occur if voluntary compliance does not occur. Differential response systems were developed to incorporate family centered practices into child protective services (Hughes, Rycus, Saunders-Adams, Hughes, & Hughes, 2013). Lower risk families are diverted into an assessment track in an attempt to enhance a parent's ability to safely care for their children (Hughes et al, 2013).…”

“…Differential response systems were developed to incorporate family centered practices into child protective services (Hughes, Rycus, Saunders-Adams, Hughes, & Hughes, 2013). Lower risk families are diverted into an assessment track in an attempt to enhance a parent's ability to safely care for their children (Hughes et al, 2013). Alternative response systems-also known as differential response, dual track, multiple track, or family assessment-allow state child protective services to provide different responses to reports of child maltreatment (Merkel-Holguin, 2005).…”

“…The additional pathways created include an investigative track, family assessment track, and screened-out, and are designed to provide services to high-risk families. In alternative response, the investigative track is primarily used for severe cases while the family assessment track is used to engage families in services on a voluntary basis who are at low to moderate risk of child maltreatment (Hughes et al, 2013). To date, almost all states have implemented some type of alternative response system (Jones, 2015).…”

“…To date, almost all states have implemented some type of alternative response system (Jones, 2015). However, recent research demonstrates that widespread adoption does not equal consistent design; there is wide variation in definition, design, and implementation across states (Hughes et al, 2013).…”