Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 12:23 pm
Time: 12:23 pm
Results for judicial decision-making (u.s.)
1 results foundAuthor: National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Permanency Planning for Children Department Title: Right From the Start: The CCC Preliminary Protective Hearing Benchcard Study Report: Testing a Tool for Judicial Decision-Making Summary: This report presents findings from the Courts Catalyzing Change: Achieving Equity and Fairness in Foster Care (CCC) Preliminary Protective Hearing (PPH) Benchcard Study. The CCC initiative, supported by Casey Family Programs and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, was created and launched through the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) Model Courts project. In the fall of 2009, the Permanency Planning for Children Department (PPCD) of NCJFCJ began a study to examine the effects associated with judges’ use of the PPH Benchcard, which had been developed as part of the CCC agenda. Three sites agreed to participate in a pilot and assessment of the Benchcard. For the assessment study, data were collected on more than 500 children in Los Angeles, California; Omaha, Nebraska; and Portland, Oregon. Data were gathered from case file information (both court and agency files) and from courtroom observations. Researchers collected data at several junctures, from placement to establishment of jurisdiction and disposition. To explore Benchcard implementation effects, the study was designed to allow for several different comparisons. Researchers collected information on numerous data points, including demographic details, information about the families involved, hearing participants, dates of case events, and details on allegations, services, and placement. Data from a baseline sample were collected at each of the three sites, and judicial officers at each site were randomly assigned to either a Benchcard implementation group or a control group. Judicial officers in the Benchcard group were trained on its use, including receipt of a draft Technical Assistance Bulletin explaining the development of the Benchcard (Right from the Start: A Judicial Tool for Critical Analysis & Decision-Making at the PPH Hearing). They began implementation of the Benchcard in their preliminary protective hearings. Each randomly assigned judicial officer heard 10 preliminary protective hearings using the Benchcard, while the control group of judicial officers in each of the sites heard 10 preliminary protective hearings without Benchcard implementation. The Benchcard was not shared with stakeholders during the research project in order to isolate the judicial intervention. Based upon systematic courtroom observation and a standardized count methodology, the data indicate that those judicial officers who used the Benchcard discussed more key topics during the preliminary protective hearings than did the control group. Benchcard implementation appears to be associated with substantially higher quantities and quality of discussion of key dependency topics identified in both the RESOURCE GUIDELINES and the CCC initiative when compared to the control group. Benchcard implementation also corresponds to an increased thoroughness of discussion and judicial inquiry, as demonstrated by the number of topics and how thoroughly they were discussed. Tests indicate that these differences are statistically significant. These process findings indicate that Benchcard implementation is associated with substantial increases in the quantity and quality of discussion in PPH hearings. Benchcard use also was associated with more family placements—placement with a charged parent, with a non-charged parent, or with a relative—at the initial hearing and even more again at adjudication when comparing the same judges before and after Benchcard implementation. (Reciprocally, Benchcard use was also associated with fewer children placed in non-relative foster care at the initial hearing and even fewer again at adjudication.) Statistical tests show these findings to be significant. Similarly, the percentage of children who were reunified with the charged parent at the initial hearing and at the adjudication hearing increased after Benchcard implementation. Differences did exist across the three sites, but the findings remained significant when the three sites were accounted for in the statistical analysis. The study found race differences in filing trends. White mothers (in comparison to African American and Hispanic mothers) tended to enter court with a higher number of allegations. White mothers also had more allegations of substance abuse, homelessness, and mental health issues (each of these represent statistically significant differences). ReportOverall, African American mothers came into court with fewer allegations and were more likely to have their case dismissed by the time of the adjudication hearing. Allegations of substance abuse show a different pattern. White families in the sample were much more likely than other families to face allegations of failure to supervise or parent adequately due to substance abuse (drugs or alcohol) than were families of other racial groups (statistical tests show these differences to be statistically significant). Differences among racial groups are also apparent in allegations involving poor parenting due, in major part, to poor mental health functioning. As with substance abuse allegations, White families were much more likely to be brought to court with allegations relating to mental health. White families were almost three times as likely to face a mental health allegation as families from other racial groups (again statistically significant). Looking at placement differences by race in the baseline sample, children with White mothers were the most likely to be placed in foster care at the initial hearing, and children with African American mothers were the least likely to be placed in foster care. However, when allegations are taken into account, race does not appear to be related to placements at all. Statistical tests show that there may be differences in placement by racial group, but children with similar case allegations tend to be equally likely to be placed in foster care regardless of race. While allegation differences could explain apparent differences by race in placement trends, by the permanency hearing these differences were more substantial. At the permanency hearing, African American children were more likely to be currently placed in foster care than children from White or Hispanic families. Also, African American children were less likely to be currently placed with a parent or with relatives at the permanency hearing than children from Hispanic or White families. Details: Reno, NV: National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Permanency Planning for Children Department, 2011. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 24, 2012 at: http://www.ncjfcj.org/sites/default/files/CCC%20Benchcard%20Study%20Report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncjfcj.org/sites/default/files/CCC%20Benchcard%20Study%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 126785 Keywords: Child ProtectionDiscriminationFoster CareJudgesJudicial Decision-Making (U.S.)Racial Disparities |