Q&A
Concerns about coercive practices in CARES implementation
0:47:01
·
6 min
Council Member Stevens raises concerns about potentially coercive practices in the CARES program, particularly regarding threats of child removal. Commissioner Dannhauser responds by emphasizing ACS's commitment to informing families of their rights and the voluntary nature of CARES after the initial 7-day period.
- ACS is now notifying families at the front door about their right to call an attorney
- Threatening families with child removal is counter to ACS practice
- CARES is voluntary after the initial 7-day safety assessment period
Althea V. Stevens
0:47:01
Families have reported that sometimes ACS, resort to cooperative practices to gain cooperation from, parents referred to Cares track, including threatening to removal, removal of children.
0:47:12
How do you ensure that the program remains voluntary or optional?
0:47:16
I don't know which one we're using.
Jess Dannhauser
0:47:17
Yeah.
0:47:18
We have, you know, I think this is part of the reason it's so important that we're informing families about calling an attorney early on that that that they have that right.
0:47:28
As you know, we are now notifying families at the front door that we need their permission to come into their home and that they have the right to call an attorney, and we're providing legal defense.
0:47:38
Our staff are are not it is not our practice to threaten, to threaten families, to tell them to take care or remove the children.
0:47:47
That is absolutely counter to to our practice.
0:47:50
But we always need reinforcements.
0:47:52
We always need, sort of, to make sure that families have access to someone who they can talk to about their rights.
Althea V. Stevens
0:48:00
I mean, the feedback from specialty advocates, they are still saying that that is not happening.
0:48:05
So we definitely need to continue to to have that conversation of what that truly looks like around letting families know their rights, because I'm hearing that that is not happening on a regular basis.
0:48:16
And so, you know, sometimes I think it can be a disconnect, especially if we have staff who's been there for a long time and it hasn't been something that has been done before, and and what does the training look like?
0:48:24
But, I'm gonna keep going with some of the other questions.
0:48:28
Could any of, could any of the funding received by ACS for the CARES program be used for direct oil?
0:48:34
You've kind of already said no.
0:48:36
According to ACS, cases are deferred to cases tracked if they are low risk.
0:48:40
What criteria does ACS use to determine what which cases are considered low risk?
0:48:46
Are those specific safeguards to prevent cases from being miscategorized?
Jess Dannhauser
0:48:51
Yes.
0:48:51
So the, the the criteria that we described earlier from the state level and then the additional criteria that ACS has, including our instant response team.
0:49:02
And, again, there's a retracking if if there's something that's noted that's unsafe for a child.
0:49:09
And so that's we have managers, supervisors, managers, deputy directors.
0:49:15
They get involved in these conversations with teams, to really do that do that assessment.
0:49:21
There are times when, we wanna use CARES, and a family doesn't wish to do it, we will immediately retract that and go down the investigative track.
Althea V. Stevens
0:49:35
So, I mean, I guess that's why you kinda changed it from voluntary to optional because if they refuse, they are automatically going to get an investigation.
Jess Dannhauser
0:49:42
By state law, we, ACS is mandated to respond within 24 to 48 hours to every report that comes into the state central registry.
0:49:51
We can do CARES if there's not an exclusionary criteria, or we can do an investigation, but we have to do one or the other.
Althea V. Stevens
0:49:57
So my my question is, and just thinking about this, and if we are coming in and leading with, you know, coming in saying we're trying to help the kids and we're only coming in for resources, then why do we have 2 different models?
0:50:08
Right?
0:50:08
Because if I'm coming in to do an investigation, it you know, I believe you guys start with like a safety evaluation and that's one of the first things, and so why is that not like the base opposed to saying like we're gonna go through a Cares track or investigate, like, I think that's a little bit confusing because if we're coming in and saying like, hey.
0:50:24
We're just coming in to do an assessment to make sure the kids are okay, why is that not the first step, and why are there 2 different tracks?
Jess Dannhauser
0:50:31
The first step is always a a safety assessment and to make sure that the children are okay.
0:50:35
The the big difference, in addition to some of the practices that we've been able to to build into CARES, is that the focus is not making a determination of indication or not.
0:50:47
And so there's a lot that we have to do in investigation to determine whether we have the preponderance of evidence that there's been maltreatment or not.
0:50:56
So take a child who's, chronically absent from school.
0:51:01
A lot of the folks in the investigation has to be, did the parent meet the minimum degree of care?
0:51:07
Do we indicate or do we not?
0:51:09
And in cares, we can get to much quicker, how do we help get the child to school?
0:51:15
In investigations, we're doing that too, but there is a, requirement to determine whether we have the provenance evidence or not in an investigation.
0:51:25
And for CARES, even if, you know, having an indication over something that you're struggling with that infect that affects employment and other things, we think if we can solve the problem, keep children safe without saddling families with an indicated record, that that's the right thing to do.
0:51:43
But safety is always the first, assessment.
0:51:47
It's always what we're focused on.
Althea V. Stevens
0:51:49
Because, listen, I I I just wanna say I I a 100% understand that, you know, we wanna always focus on safety and making sure that kids are safe and but it's a delicate balance, and I understand that, you know, especially with the disproportionate of black children specifically being having removals from homes.
0:52:06
I think that, you know, we also have to it just seems strange that we would be like, okay, we have these 2 different tracks.
0:52:13
And what I'm hearing from advocates that they're feeling like care sometimes actually is more intrusive than the actual investigatory because I think if the care is if the case is open longer when a lot of times if they go down a regular track, the cases actually close a lot quicker and have less involvement, and so that's why I'm also confused where it's like, if I'm hearing from advocates that they only really like CARES, well, like, who who is this benefiting if they're saying that cases are longer, parents don't really feel like it's voluntary, it kind of feels like they have the feels like they have the same type of scrutiny.
0:52:43
What's really the the difference?
0:52:45
And so that's why I'm, you know
Jess Dannhauser
0:52:47
Yeah.
0:52:47
What we what some of the, we look at, time to closure on both CARES and investigations.
0:52:56
They're they're fairly equivalent.
0:52:59
CARES, if we developed a plan with a family, to make sure that whatever underlying issues are addressed, our team is gonna stick around to make sure that we can support them in that.
0:53:13
CARES is voluntary after the 7 days.
0:53:17
And so if we have made an assessment that the child is safe, families do not have to continue with CARES.
0:53:22
What we're hearing is they are continuing because we're advocating for services for them or their supports that they need that we're putting into place.
