CODES/REFERENCES 

O.C.G.A. § 19-7-5 Reporting of Child Abuse

O.C.G.A. § 49-5-40 Definitions; Confidentiality of Records; Restricted Access to Records

O.C.G.A. § 49-5-41 Persons and Agencies Permitted to Access Records

 REQUIREMENTS

The Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) shall:

1. Make the following determinations upon the conclusion of a special investigation:
   1. Maltreatment determination (substantiated or unsubstantiated);
   2. Safety determination (safe or unsafe); and
   3. Whether any policy violation(s) occurred (when applicable).
2. Complete a thorough review and analysis of the information gathered, including DFCS history, during the special investigation to support decision-making.
3. Conduct a supervisor staffing to make a special investigation determination.
4. Conduct a multi-disciplinary staffing at least 48 hours prior to submitting the special investigation for closure to discuss the case disposition, the assessment of child safety, well-being, and permanency, policy violations supported or concerns, and/or any recommendations regarding the child’s placement and the status of the placement resource.
5. Substantiate neglect when evidence confirms that unsafe sleep practices were the cause or a contributing factor to the death of an infant (under the age of one) and case documentation supports that DFCS staff previously educated the caregiver(s) of the dangers of an unsafe sleep environment.
6. Document the special investigation determination and the evidence to support the safety and maltreatment determination on the Allegation Detail page and Investigation Conclusion page in Georgia SHINES.

 PROCEDURES

The Social Services Case Manager (SSCM) will:

1. Document all investigative activities in Georgia SHINES including:
   1. Interviews, observations, and collaterals;
   2. Joint investigative activities with law enforcement and/or the oversight authorities; and
   3. Upload into External Documentation reports, forms, medical reports, professional assessments, pictures, notifications, letters, etc.

2. Analyze information gathered relative to each area of family functioning:

   a. Interviews and observations of all household members, alleged maltreater(s), facility personnel and/or facility residents;

   b. Observations of the home environment and/or the location in which the abuse occurred, including observation of objects that may have been named in the allegations of maltreatment;

   c. Collateral contacts;

   d. Videos, assessments, forensic reports, police reports, medical reports, educational reports, pictures, etc.;

   e. Records obtained from the oversight authority concerning the alleged victim child(ren) and/or alleged maltreater(s);

   f. DFCS history and how it relates to the current allegations (see policy 19.10 Case Management: Analyzing DFCS History);

   g. Safety Screenings; and

   h. Any other information relevant to the allegations of maltreatment and child safety.

3. Consider the challenges the family is facing related to their developmental stage and tasks and any correlation to alleged child abuse.
4. When substance abuse is suspected or alleged see policy 19.26 Case Management: Case Management Involving Abuse or Use for additional steps that need to be completed and considered when making a determination.
5. Make additional contacts or obtain additional information to resolve and/or provide clarification of inconsistencies (see Practice Guidance: Resolving Discrepancies and Conflicting Information).
6. Participate in a supervisor staffing to make the following determinations:
   1. Safety (safe or unsafe) for each alleged victim child in accordance with policy 19.11 Case Management: Safety Assessment.
   2. Maltreatment (unsubstantiated or substantiated) for each alleged victim child; NOTE: Substantiate neglect when evidence confirms that an unsafe sleep practice was the cause or contributing factor to the infant’s death and documentation supports that DFCS staff previously educated the caregiver(s) of the dangers of an unsafe sleep environment to child safety.
   3. Whether a policy violation(s) by a DFCS approved caregiver of children in DFCS custody is supported or there is a concern a policy violation has occurred;
   4. Whether further DFCS intervention is required to ensure child safety; and
   5. Service provision needed to assist the family, caregiver, or resource with managing the challenging situation(s).
7. Notify the following participants, as applicable, of the multi-disciplinary staffing at least two business days prior to the staffing:
   1. The primary case SSCM and Social Services Supervisor (SSS) when the child or family has an active child welfare case.
   2. Resource Development SSS and SSCM when the case involves a DFCS foster or adoptive home;
   3. Child Placing Agency (CPA) Director/Designee when the case involves a CPA foster or adoptive home.
   4. Regional Adoption Coordinator, when the case involves a child in DFCS custody with a permanency plan of adoption or guardianship;
   5. CCI Director/Designee when the case involves a CCI;
   6. Independent Living Coordinator, when the case involves a youth in DFCS custody 14 years of age or older;
   7. Oversight authority (for a list of oversight authorities see policy 6.9 Special Investigations: Notifications in Special Investigations); and
   8. Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) Administrator, when the case involves a child placed in Georgia in accordance with ICPC.

8. Conduct a multi-disciplinary staffing at least 48-hours prior to submitting a special investigation for closure and discuss at minimum:

   1. Maltreatment determinations (substantiated and unsubstantiated);
   2. Safety determination, including any safety strategies needed and/or implemented for children in DFCS custody and/or in the legal custody of the caregiver;
   3. Policy violations, for special investigations involving DFCS approved caregivers of children in DFCS custody, including:
      1. Policy violations supported and recommendations for a corrective action plan (CAP); and/or
      2. Concerns that a policy violation has occurred.

   NOTE: Policy violations concerns not assessed during the special investigation requires the initiation of a policy violation assessment by the resource maintainer in accordance with policy 14.22 Resource Development: Policy Violations.

   d. The reason for a change in the DFCS placement resource status (suspended, on hold, or closure, reopen) when applicable;

   e. Assessment findings of well-being or permanency and any service needs identified.

   f. Medical diagnosis as a result of abuse, including the autopsy findings, if available and applicable;

   g. The transition plan for a child in DFCS custody if a placement change is necessary, including providing the required placement move notifications (see policy 10.3 Foster Care: Changes in Placement).

9. Document the 48-hour staffing including who was present and any recommendations in Georgia SHINES.

10. Complete the Safety Assessment in Georgia SHINES to document the safety determination.

    NOTE: For special investigations where the Family Functional Assessment (FFA) is required, the safety assessment is completed as part of the FFA.

11. Document the maltreatment determination on the Allegation Detail page in Georgia SHINES:

    1. Verify the address of the alleged maltreater is correct on the Person Detail Page and make corrections as necessary;
    2. Verify the category/type of child abuse and maltreatment code is matched to the appropriate victim child;

    3. Designate the appropriate individual(s) as the alleged maltreater for each applicable category/type of child abuse and corresponding maltreatment code;

       NOTE: When the alleged maltreater is unknown and the evidence gathered during the investigation supports that child abuse occurred, the maltreatment determination must be substantiated.

       d. Select “Substantiated” or “Unsubstantiated” for each child abuse allegation;

       NOTE: If the category/type of child abuse and/or maltreatment code(s) is incorrect, unsubstantiate the allegation and add the correct of maltreatment category/type and corresponding maltreatment code(s). The addition of the category/type of maltreatment and corresponding code(s) must be related to the information reported at intake. If not related to the incident, a new intake report is required.

    e. Complete the Evidence Summary section by documenting a detailed summary of evidence that supports each maltreatment determination (photos, videos observations, diagnoses, disclosures during interviews); and

    f. Write a concise statement in the Justification of Findings section that supports the maltreatment determination to include the type of child abuse being substantiated or unsubstantiated. See Practice Guidance: Allegation Detail Page and the Justification of Findings.

    g. When a special investigation involving a child death, near fatality, serious injury (CD/NF/SI) is substantiated and the alleged abuse occurred during the period the child was in the legal custody of DFCS, classify the special investigation as:

    1. Child Death-In Care;
    2. Near Fatality-In Care; or
    3. Serious Injury-In Care.

    h. When a special investigation involving a CD/NF/SI is substantiated and the alleged abuse occurred during the period the child was not in the legal custody of DFCS, classify the special investigation as:

    i. Child Death-Not in Care;

    ii. Near Fatality-Not in Care; or

    iii. Serious Injury-Not in Care.

12. Complete the Investigative Conclusion page in Georgia SHINES, including writing an Investigation Conclusion Summary that includes:
    1. A detailed summary of evidence that supports the maltreatment and safety determination for each child abuse allegation investigated (photos, videos, observations, diagnoses, disclosures during interviews),
    2. An analysis of DFCS history and how it affected the maltreatment and safety determination;
    3. Whether consensus was achieved with the family;
    4. Safety interventions in place (as applicable); and

    5. Recommendations for services.

       See Practice Guidance: Investigation Conclusion Page for examples of investigation conclusion summaries.

The SSS will:

1. Conduct a supervisor staffing as outlined in policy 19.6 Case Management: Supervisor Staffing to make the following determinations:
   1. Safety (safe or unsafe) for each alleged victim child in accordance with policy 19.11 Case Management: Safety Assessment.
   2. Maltreatment (unsubstantiated or substantiated) for each alleged victim child; NOTE: Substantiate neglect when evidence confirms that an unsafe sleep practice was the cause or contributing factor to the infant’s death and documentation supports that DFCS staff previously educated the caregiver(s) of the dangers of an unsafe sleep environment to child safety.
   3. Whether a policy violation(s) by a DFCS approved caregiver of children in DFCS custody is supported or there is a concern a policy violation has occurred;
   4. Whether further DFCS intervention is required to ensure child safety; and
   5. Services provision needed to assist the family, caregiver, or resource with managing the challenging situation(s).
2. Participate in the 48-hour staffing, ensure all required participants are notified, and recommendations are provided.
3. Review the case record in Georgia SHINES within 45 calendar days of receipt of the intake report to ensure the case determination is accurately reflected:
   1. Log of Contacts;
   2. Allegation Detail Page:
      1. The child abuse category and maltreatment code(s) correspond to the appropriate child victim and that the maltreatment determination of substantiated or unsubstantiated is correct;
      2. The alleged maltreater identified is correct for each alleged victim child and maltreatment determination.
      3. Justification of Findings statement supports the decision to substantiate or unsubstantiate the category/type of child abuse selected.
   3. Investigation Conclusion, including the Investigation Conclusion Summary to ensure it supports the decisions made during the dispositional staffing:
      1. A detailed summary of evidence that supports the maltreatment findings and safety determination for each allegation investigated (photos, videos, observations, diagnoses, disclosures during interviews, etc.);
      2. An analysis of DFCS history and how it affected the maltreatment and safety determination;
      3. Safety interventions in place (as applicable); and
      4. Recommendations for services.

PRACTICE GUIDANCE 

The Role of Intent in Maltreatment

A caregiver often states that he/she did not mean or intend to harm their child. For example, a caregiver may choose to punish his/her child by spanking the child using an instrument such as a belt. Once this choice is made the caregiver’s “intent” is not relevant as to whether the child was maltreated. The natural consequences of the actions or inactions of the caregiver determine whether maltreatment occurred. The caregiver may not have “meant” to leave the marks, but because he/she made the decision to use the belt when hitting the child, marks occurred. The marks were left as a natural consequence of using the belt to spank the child. When maltreatment meets the statutory language in the definition, intent is not relevant; maltreatment occurred, and the allegation of abuse must be substantiated. However, the intent of the caregiver may be considered when making a safety determination.

Resolving Discrepancies or Conflicting Information

During an Investigation, often there are discrepancies in information collected or there are conflicting accounts regarding the allegations of abuse. It is important to attempt to resolve discrepancies or conflicts to ensure that the information gathered accurately supports the investigation determination. Some ways to address these situations include but are not limited to:

1. Reviewing the information gathered again to determine what information is needed to resolve the issue(s).
2. Seeking supervisory assistance to review the information or develop a plan to resolve the issue(s).
3. Conducting additional interviews with the family members, reporter, collaterals, etc.
4. Engaging subject matter experts to assist in the review of evidence or to discuss the information.
5. Requesting additional professional assessments or evaluations for the child(ren) or caregiver(s).

Maltreatment Determination

The maltreatment determination considers whether the alleged child abuse is substantiated or unsubstantiated.

1. Substantiated means the allegations of child abuse, as defined by Georgia statute, is supported by a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of evidence means that the greater the weight of the evidence makes it more probable than not that child abuse occurred. A substantiation determination also means harm to the child is severe enough to constitute maltreatment and there is sufficient evidence to support child maltreatment. When evidence supports maltreatment occurred, regardless of whether the identity of the maltreater is known or unknown the case determination must be substantiated.
2. Unsubstantiated means the allegations of child abuse, as defined by Georgia statute, is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. An unsubstantiated determination means harm to the child is not severe enough to constitute maltreatment and/or there is not sufficient evidence to support child maltreatment. Even though a maltreatment determination may be unsubstantiated, documentation may show a pattern of behavior that may be useful in decision-making.

Safety Determination

The safety determination identifies the child as either safe or unsafe based on the safety assessment as outlined in policy 19.11 Case Management: Safety Assessment. The existence of maltreatment (substantiated or unsubstantiated) and a safety determination (safe or unsafe) are two separate determinations. A child may have been maltreated but could still be considered safe based on individual family circumstances and caregiver protective capacities.

When a case involves a child death, a case determination must take into consideration whether they are other children in the home, and whether the other children in the home are safe. If there is a determination that any child in the home is unsafe then DFCS must transfer the case to Family Preservation Services or Permanency for further intervention.

Making an Investigative Decision - Maltreater Unidentified or Unknown

Questions about the identity of a maltreater occur primarily when a child is injured, he/she is unable to identify the maltreater and there is more than one caregiver that could have caused the injury. In these circumstances, case managers and supervisors will need to reach a judgement as to whether there is a preponderance of the evidence that one of the possible caregivers, as compared to other caregivers, injured the child. A preponderance of evidence means that the greater the weight of the evidence makes it more probable than not that the caregiver caused the injury to the child. Reaching such a conclusion may require an investigation which is more time consuming and detailed than an investigation in which this issue is not present. There may be instances where the decision is made to substantiate child abuse against more than one caregiver, especially when the injuries have occurred over time. When the alleged maltreater is unknown and the evidence gathered during the investigation supports that child abuse occurred, the maltreatment determination must be substantiated.

Investigation Conclusion Page

The Investigation Conclusion Page in Georgia SHINES is where the overall finding case disposition is recorded. Included on the Investigation Conclusion page is the Investigation Conclusion Summary. The purpose of this summarized what occurred during the investigation from beginning to end. This does not mean that the Log of Contacts should be copied and pasted into this section. An Investigation Conclusion Summary should include:

1. What was alleged.
2. Evidence to support or refute the allegations. Evidence may include pictures, direct witness statements, observations, formal diagnosis, evaluations from licensed clinicians, disclosures by the alleged victim child or other children subject to the care of the alleged maltreater, interviews with the alleged maltreater, history that shows a pattern of behavior, or information obtained by collateral resources.
3. Family Functioning information relevant to the case determination.
4. Safety related information and interventions put in place during the Investigation.
5. The overall case determination including whether the case will be closed, or stage progressed to Family Preservation Services or Foster Care.

Example of Substantiated-Open Investigation Conclusion

On 3/1/2017 a report was received indicating that the Lannister family moved from Florida to Georgia in December 2016. At the time of the move the family had an open CPS case in FL and failed to notify their case manager of the move to Georgia. The case was open due to medical neglect resulting from prescription substance abuse by the mother, Ms. Jane Lannister and her live-in paramour, John Baratheon.

Ms. Lannister and Mr. Baratheon have one child, Joffery, age 2. Joffery was born premature and has not been seen in the doctor’s office since he was 9 months old. Joffery’s pediatrician in FL indicated that Ms. Lannister missed several follow up appointments to treat a severe asthma condition. Ms. Lannister stated that she took Joffery to the doctor before leaving FL and was up to date on all well-checks and immunizations, however medical records verified this was untrue. Ms. Lannister also stated that she applied for Medicaid upon arriving in GA, however the application could not be located by Office of Family Independence (OFI). The sole income in the home is Mr. Baratheon’s SSI, received for a chronic seizure condition that is currently untreated. Both caregivers admitted to spending the SSI money on purchasing illegal prescription medications.

The home was observed to be in disarray. Dirty dishes were piled up in the sink and all over the counter and food that appeared to be several days old was left on the table in dishes. Joffery was wandering around the home in a dirty diaper that had not been recently changed based on the amount of urine that saturated the diaper. He was also observed to be coughing and wheezing by the SSCM during the visit.

The drug screen results on both caregivers were positive for opiates and benzodiazepines. SSCM also noted that Ms. Lannister and Mr. Baratheon appeared to be under the influence of substances as evidenced by sleeping during the day, slurred words when talking, and dilated pupils. Prior medical conditions were cited as the basis for the prescription drug use, however neither caregiver could produce valid prescriptions from a medical provider. Results of a substance abuse assessment included several recommendations for follow up treatment for both caregivers.

Impending dangers were identified based on the caregivers’ inability to control their behavior and complete daily life activities (cleaning, taking child to the doctor, etc.) due to the illegal use of prescription drugs and the inability of both caregivers to give a valid explanation as to why Joffery had not been taken to the doctor to deal with his severe asthma in both FL and GA.

A safety plan was completed to address the condition of the home, follow up on Joffery’s medical care for observed respiratory issues, and to develop a plan for supervision of Joffery if Ms. Lannister or Mr. Baratheon are using prescription medications (legally or illegally) that affect their judgement and/or rendered them unable to care for the children. The home was cleaned on a follow up visit and Joffery was enrolled in daycare. An appointment was also made with a local pediatrician. Both caregivers indicate a willingness to attend substance abuse treatment based on the recommendations of the substance abuse assessments.

Neglect (Medical Neglect) is substantiated due to Ms. Lannister failing to provide adequate medical care for Joffery’s continued respiratory issues and the case opened for FPS. Recommended initial services are:

• Ms. Lannister and Mr. Baratheon need to follow up on recommendations from the substance abuse assessment.
• Follow up medical care for Joffery

Example of Unsubstantiated-Closed Investigation Conclusion

On 3/2/17 DFCS received a report concerning Arya Stark stating that Arya was being abused by her father, Ned Stark. Arya was interviewed and stated that her father, Mr. Stark slammed her head into the head rest in the car. She also stated that Mr. Stark emotionally abuses her by calling her names.

Collateral contacts and interviews with Arya’s siblings did not support Arya’s statement of abuse. Arya did not have any marks/bruises and Arya’s siblings (Sansa, Robb, and Bran) stated that Arya is not physically disciplined. Arya also could not remember important details of her account such as when the alleged incident happened or why Mr. Stark allegedly did it.

Arya has been seeing a therapist for approximately one year. The therapist reported that Arya never disclosed any abuse/neglect during the sessions. Arya did sustain an injury when Mr. Stark restrained her from running way, which was a minor bruise to the lip approximately a year and a half ago. Mr. Stark obtained therapy for Arya soon after the incident. Mr. Stark is a single parent, after losing his wife to cancer. The therapist indicated that there have been incidents of the family using name calling when they are angry, but she is doing both individual and family counseling with them to help work through these issues and feels that most of the problems are related to the family’s grief. Mr. Stark has extended family support who assist him with the children. Other personal collateral contacts did not reveal any information that would indicate Mr. Stark was being abusive to his children. No impending dangers were noted. Allegations of physical abuse (bruises, welts, abrasions) are unsubstantiated. There is no CPS history, and no further services are recommended.

Allegation Detail Page and the Justification of Findings

The Allegation Detail page in Georgia SHINES is where the SSCM documents a disposition (substantiated or unsubstantiated) for each allegation of child abuse investigated. The

  justification of findings supports the decision to substantiate or unsubstantiate the allegations. It is a clear and concise description of facts and evidence gathered during the investigation and details a preponderance of credible evidence to support the findings concerning one of the forms of child abuse investigated (prenatal abuse, risk of imminent harm, labor servitude emotional abuse, neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and sexual exploitation). Below is an example of a justification of findings for neglect.

• Ms. Jones is substantiated for neglect due to abandonment. For six months from approximately August 8, 2021, through February 14, 2022, Ms. Smith abandoned her two children, S.D. and M.D., age 13, by leaving them with their grandmother Ms. Scott, without provision for their support and without regularly visiting them.
• Ms. Jackson is substantiated for neglect due to inadequate supervision. On January 11, 2022, Ms. Jackson neglected I.J., age 8 by failing to provide him with adequate supervision by leaving him alone at home while she was away from home at work for nine hours.

Policy Violations

Policy Violations are actions performed by a DFCS agent that may breach any DFCS policy and/or RBWO Minimum Standards, but do not constitute child abuse. For additional information on policy violations see policy 14.22 Resource Development: Policy Violations.

When a policy violation is supported or identified it should be discussed during the 48-hour staffing. The resource maintainer (Permanency SSCM, RD SSCM or OPM) has the responsibility to address the policy violation with the caregiver including implementing a CAP (if applicable) or initiating a policy violation assessment as outlined in policy 14.22 Resource Development: Policy Violations.

 FORMS AND TOOLS

Maltreatment Codes