Transcription
NATIONALNATIONAL CHILDREN’SCHILDREN’S ALLIANCEALLIANCEStandardsfor AccreditedMembers2017 EditionNational Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 1
2 National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition
Table of ContentsContributorsGuiding PrinciplesPurpose of the StandardsHow the Standards Were RevisedProcess of Accreditation by Evaluation Against the StandardsWhat’s New in the 2017 linary Team11Cultural Competency and Diversity16Forensic Interviews19Victim Support and Advocacy24Medical Evaluation29Mental Health35Case Review40Case Tracking44Organizational Capacity47Child-Focused Setting51Appendix55National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 3
Contributors2014 NCA AccreditationCommitteeBeth BrandesChairDave BetzJohn DeereJanet FineNational Vicarious TraumaToolkit Project, NortheasternUniversityJane BraunMidwest Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterAnne LynnNortheast Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterCym DoggettSouthern Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterWilene LampertWestern Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterMarla BehlerChild Advocacy Center ofPutnam County (N.Y.)Kasey BourbonCenter for Child ProtectionBeth BrandesMaureen FitzgeraldWestern Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterJane BraunMidwest Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterLori Frasier, MDPenn State Hershey Children’sHospitalCathy BrittisChild Advocacy Center of Graftonand Sullivan Counties (N.H.) atDHMC- Sullivan County ProgramMaria GallagherNortheast Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterBethany CaseOffice for Victims of CrimeKaren HangartnerSouthern Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterJulia ClassenAurora ConsultingIrina HeinNational Children’s AlliancePaula CondolCACs of North DakotaClairice HetzlerAdvocacy Network for ChildrenKatie ConnellFederal Bureau of InvestigationShannon HilferDakota Children’s AdvocacyCenterDr. Karen FarstCenter for Children at Risk,University of Arkansas forMedical SciencesLisa ConradiChadwick CenterStandards Task Force MembersJan DunnNational Children’s AllianceJoyce Adams, MDDepartment of Pediatrics,University of California, DavisCatherine BassCACs of TexasNaomi BaraschSafe HorizonJanet FineNational Vicarious TraumaToolkit Project, NortheasternUniversitySteve DemingCAC of the Black HillsRuss HuberPartnerSourceTeresa HuizarNational Children’s AllianceLois DunstonHeart to Heart CACMaggi HutchasonCAC of Kay County (Okla.),Dearing HouseMark Everson, Ph.D.University of North Carolina atChapel HillRich Kaplan, MDCenter for Safe and HealthyChildren, University of MinnesotaKaren Farst, MDCenter for Children at Risk,University of Arkansas forMedical SciencesPam KaralunasAlaska Children’s Alliance4 National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition
Contributors ( continued )Ada McCloudCACs of TexasNancy Kellogg, MDDepartment of Pediatrics,University of Texas HealthScience CenterMichelle MillerButte Child Evaluation CenterDarcy KomejanChildren’s Advocacy Center(Ottawa County, Mich.)Kerry KoontzCARES, St. Luke’s Magic ValleyRegional Medical CenterWilene LampertWestern Regional Children’sAdvocacy Center/Safe PassageCACBillie LarkinCACs of IllinoisCarolyn LevittMidwest Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterSusanne MitchellSouth Valley Children’s JusticeCenterChris NewlinNational Children’s AdvocacyCenterNydia MonagasNew Jersey Children’s AllianceVince Palusci, MDDepartment of Pediatrics,New York University School ofMedicineJulie PrudhomeGarth HouseBob Shapiro, MDCincinnati Children’s HospitalMedical CenterSuzanne Starling, MDChildren’s Hospital of the King’sDaughtersKori StephensMidwest Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterCarol SwiecickiChildren’s Hospitals of theKing’s Daughters – Child AbuseProgramTracey TabetUtah Children’s Justice CenterDana TooleChildren’s Justice Bureau,Montana Department of JusticeFiona TuttlePlacer Multi-DisciplinaryInterview CenterLinda LoganNative American Children’sAllianceLibby RalstonDee Norton Low CountryChildren’s CenterJan LutzIndiana Chapter of NationalChildren’s AllianceLynn RiothWestern Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterAnne LynnNortheast Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterYvette RoszellSouthern Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterMarcia MillikenMinnesota Children’s AllianceNancy SegerCornerhouseJoddie WalkerAdams County (Pa.) Children’sAdvocacy CenterMonica MauerChild’s VoicePaula SmithChildren’s Network of StarkCounty (Ohio)Jeff Wherry, Ph.D.Dallas CAC Research InstituteCerina MarlarMidwest Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterTeresa SmithNortheast Regional Children’sAdvocacy CenterKarla TyeChildren’s Advocacy Centers ofMississippiRoAnn VecchiaMassachusetts Department ofChildren and FamiliesNancy WilliamsMemphis CACNational Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 5
Guiding Principles of Revising the StandardsThe Standards value diversity in CACs, includingorganizational structure, staffing patterns, andsocio-economic factors in communities.The Standards are evidence-supported andevolve over time and require revision as researchprogresses.The Standards balance the goal to serve morechildren through a growing NCA membershipwith the goal to sustain the professional credibilityof CACs and the value of the NCA accreditationprocess through a fair and equitable review process.NCA strives to make all Standards measurable, andthe basis of measurement readily apparent.The Standards are minimum standards of operationand are not to be viewed as best practice standards.As the success of the Standards rests upon thefield’s willingness to support and adhere to them,NCA recognizes that support hinges upon acredible and inclusive process.Purpose of the Standards for Accredited MembersTo ensure that all children across the U.S. who areserved by Children’s Advocacy Centers receiveconsistent, evidence-based interventions that helpthem heal.In addition to serving as the set of standards bywhich Children’s Advocacy Centers (CACs) maybe accredited as capable of providing consistentand evidence-based healing interventions, theStandards for Accredited Members also performseveral secondary functions. The Standards 1) actas a compass for CACs during leadership transitionso that Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs), Boards,and other stakeholders know how to maintainthe course; 2) to serve as a valuable roadmap fornew CACs as they develop; and 3) to demonstratethe high-quality work of Accredited CACs topolicymakers, funders, and supporters.How the Standards Were RevisedThe National Children’s Alliance Standardsfor Accredited Members are reviewed by anAccreditation Committee every five years tocoincide with the five-year period for which anaccreditation status is valid before re-accreditationis required. NCA and its Accreditation Committeeconduct these regular reviews of the currentaccreditation standards to ensure that theStandards take into consideration the newestevidence-based practices in the field, and alsoconvey clear and concise uniform thresholds acrosseach standard.The first step of the process of reviewing andrevising the Standards was the commission andpublication of an Annotated Bibliography of theEmpirical and Scholarly Literature Supporting theTen Standards for Accreditation by the National6 National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition
How the Standards Were Revised ( continued )Children’s Alliance, first published in 2011, thenreviewed and republished in a 2013 second edition.(Relevant research published in the interimperiod was added to the draft Bibliography andalso reviewed.) Research support for all existingstandards was identified at that time, providinggood evidence that the existing standards atthat time and extant research were in alignment.Therefore, the intent of the revision process wasnot to increase the practice thresholds to bemet by CACs but rather to clarify the minimumrequirements and to alleviate any existingambiguity and/or redundancy in the language.Beginning in September 2012, NCA conducteda stakeholder survey of site reviewers (thoseresponsible for evaluating CACs against theStandards, regional CAC leaders, State Chapterdirectors, and NCA board members and staff.During this time, NCA’s Accreditation Committeealso reviewed accreditation outcome and evaluationdata from the period 2010-2012 to identify troublespots or areas requiring further inquiry orclarification.After the collection, review, and approval of thefinal Bibliography plus the outcome and evaluationdata, the Accreditation Committee formed fiveStandards Task Forces covering groupings ofrelated standards: 1) Organizational Capacity,Case Tracking, and Child-Focused Setting; 2)Multidisciplinary Team, Case Review, and ForensicInterview; 3) Cultural Competency & Diversityand Victim Services & Advocacy; 4) Medical; and5) Mental Health. Each Task Force was composedof subject matter experts and representativesfrom Regional CACs, the NCA AccreditationCommittee, and NCA senior staff. Special carewas taken to ensure that each Task Force includedrepresentatives experienced with CACs of diverseorganizational structure, caseload, geography, andservice population size. These Task Forces metmonthly to complete revisions to their grouping ofStandards, completing their work in the first half of2014.After the five Task Forces submitted their combinedrevisions to the Standards, a final review periodbegan in mid-2014 with a readers’ pool selectedfrom across all five Task Forces. Another draftrevision based upon feedback from the readers’ poolwas submitted to the Regional CACs, select StateChapters, and select Accredited CACs for furtherreview. The Accreditation Committee reviewedthe revised draft last before submitting, and madefurther revisions before forwarding the revisedStandards to NCA’s Executive Committee and fullBoard of Directors.NCA’s Executive Committee reviewed the draftrevisions at the end of 2014, and made any finalrevisions before submitting the standards for a voteby the full Board held January 2015, where the 2017Edition of the Standards for Accredited Memberswas approved. The Standards were unveiled atNCA’s 2015 Leadership Conference along withtraining materials for the field, allowing more than18 months for CACs to come into compliance beforethe revised Standards become effective for allCACs beginning January 1, 2017.National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 7
Process of Accreditation by Evaluation Against the StandardsNewly accredited CACs, whether applying asa brand-new center or as a center in anothermembership category, are accredited by site reviewand evaluation against the Standards in the year inwhich they apply. Accredited Centers must undergore-accreditation every five years on a rolling basisfrom their previous accreditation.CACs applying for new or re-accreditationbegin by filling out a comprehensive applicationdetailing how the center meets each standard. Thisapplication must include attached documentationestablishing the center’s claim to meet thestandards. NCA staff then screen the application forcompleteness. Then, a two-person site review teamwill review the application and send any questionsto the site before a required site visit.Within six months of the application submission,a two-person site review team will conduct anon-site review meeting with board members, staff,and multidisciplinary team members to reviewpractices and documentation for compliancewith the Standards. Based upon their findingsin a site review, the site review team scores thesite for adherence to the Standards and make arecommendation as to the center’s accreditationstatus.NCA’s Accreditation Committee reviews onlythose site review recommendations that do notpass and recommend a “pending” status for thosesites they deem fail to meet the Standards inagreement with the site review team. NCA’s Boardof Directors reviews and, if in agreement with thefindings, approves the Accreditation Committee’srecommendations and awards accreditation.Centers seeking new or re-accreditation arenotified of the outcome of the review processat this time. Sites determined as “Pending” forfailing to meet the Standards are given a oneyear period to implement a corrective actionplan, documenting corrective actions and currentcompliance. At the end of the one-year “pending”period, progress against the corrective action planand documentation are reviewed by the originalsite reviewers, the Accreditation Committee, andthe Board. The Board determines whether afterthe pending period the center is in complianceor not, and either awards or denies accreditationaccordingly. Centers denied accreditation mayat this point appeal the denial or begin a newaccreditation process.8 National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition
What’s New in the 2017 EditionIn order to ensure CACs provide services that are responsive to the latest evidence and trends within boththe child maltreatment intervention field and communities, NCA’s Accreditation Committee convenes torevise the Standards for Accredited Members every five years. In the 2017 Edition of the Standards, thefollowing points represent notable changes since the release of previous edition:› All standards have been updated based upon the latest research published over the last five years.› Clear benchmarks are now set across all essential components.› The site review process of measuring CAC practice against the Standards for accreditation hasmoved to a pass/fail basis.› Training standards are now part of the Victim Advocacy standard.› Continuing education requirements are now consistent across all standards related to practice.› Standards now recognize the importance of responding to vicarious trauma in staff and MDTmembers.AcknowledgementsThe National Children’s Alliance gratefully acknowledges the hard work and expertise of the members of itsAccreditation Committee and Standards Task Force members, without whose involvement publication of the2017 Edition of the Standards for Accredited Members would not have been possible.National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 9
10 National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition
MULTIDISCIPLINARYTEAMA multidisciplinary team for response to child abuseallegations includes representation from the following: Law EnforcementChild Protective ServicesProsecutionMedicalMental HealthVictim AdvocacyChildren’s Advocacy Center1National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 11
1. MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAMRationaleA functioning and effective multidisciplinaryteam (MDT) is the foundation of a Children’sAdvocacy Center (CAC). An MDT is agroup of professionals from specific, distinctdisciplines that collaborates from the pointof report and throughout a child and family’sinvolvement with the CAC. MDTs coordinateintervention so as to reduce potential traumato children and families and improve servicesoverall, while preserving and respecting therights, mandates and obligations of eachagency.1A CAC is not just a facility, but serves as aninteragency coordinated response center.All MDT representatives contribute theirknowledge, experience and expertise for acoordinated, comprehensive, compassionate,and professional response. Quality assuranceand a review of the effectiveness of thecollaborative efforts are also critical to theMDT response.The core MDT is comprised of representativesfrom law enforcement, child protectiveservices, prosecution, medical, mentalhealth, and victim advocacy, together withCAC staff. Some CACs, including those insmall, rural communities, may employ oneperson to fill multiple roles. For example, theCAC Director may also serve as the VictimAdvocate, or a CPS worker may function as aforensic interviewer and a caseworker. Whatis important is that clear boundaries aremaintained between each function, and thatall functions are performed by a member ofthe MDT.1MDTs may also be expanded to includeother professionals including guardiansad litem, adult and juvenile probationofficers, dependency (civil) attorneys, outof-home care licensing personnel, federalinvestigators, school personnel, domesticviolence providers, and others, as is neededand appropriate for an individual child, family,or community.Generally, a coordinated, MDTapproach facilitates efficient interagencycommunication and information sharing,ongoing involvement of key individuals, andsupport for children and families. Each agencygains the benefit of a broadened knowledgebase from which decisions are made, thoroughand shared information, and improved andtimely evidence gathering. Involvement of theprosecutor from the beginning stages of thecase may also contribute to a more successfulcriminal justice outcome. MDT interventionsin a neutral, child-focused CAC setting areassociated with less anxiety, fewer interviews,and more appropriate and timely referrals forneeded services. An MDT response fostersneeded education, support, and treatmentfor children and families that may enhancetheir willingness to participate in the criminaljustice system as effective witnesses. Inaddition, parents and other caregivers areempowered to protect and support their childthroughout the investigation and prosecutionand beyond.12 National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition
11. MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM ( continued )Benefits by MDT Function1Law Enforcement:Mental Health Providers: Suspects may be more likely to cooperate whenconfronted with evidence generated by acoordinated MDT approach. Mental health personnel provide the MDTwith valuable information regarding the child’semotional state, treatment needs, and ability toparticipate in the criminal justice process. Support and advocacy functions are attendedto by other MDT functions, leaving lawenforcement personnel more time to focus onother aspects of the investigation. Collaboration with CPS and other MDTmembers allows law enforcement toutilize MDT members’ training andexpertise in working on child protectionissues, communicating with children andunderstanding family dynamics. A mental health professional helps ensure thatassessment, treatment, and related servicesare routinely offered and made available tochildren and families.Victim Advocates:CPS Workers: Victim advocates are available to provideneeded crisis intervention, safety planning,referrals for additional services, ongoingsupport, information and case updates, andcourt advocacy in a timely fashion. Effective information sharing places CPSworkers in a better position to monitor childsafety and parental support, provide assistanceto non-offending parents, and providerecommendations regarding placement andvisitation. Victim advocates allow the MDT to anticipateand respond to the specific needs of childrenand their families more effectively, lessen thestress of the court process, and increase accessto resources needed by the child and family,including access to victims of crime funding.Medical Providers:Prosecutors: History obtained during the coordinatedinterview provides medical personnelimportant information in making medicaldecisions. Prosecutors hold offenders accountable andensure community safety. In turn, medical providers are availablefor consultation on specialized medicalevaluations and for interpretation of medicalfindings and reports.National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 13
11. MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM ( continued )CRITERIA - Essential ComponentsA. The CAC/MDT has a written interagencyagreement signed by authorizedrepresentatives of all MDT components thatclearly commits the signed parties to theCAC/MDT model for its multidisciplinarychild abuse intervention response. Theinteragency agreement includes:1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Law EnforcementChild Protective ServicesProsecutionMental HealthMedicalVictim AdvocacyChildren’s Advocacy CenterSTATEMENT OF INTENT:Written agreements formalize interagencycooperation and commitment to CAC/MDTpolicy ensuring continuity of practice. Writtenagreements may be in differing forms includingmemoranda of understanding (MOUs), and/orinteragency agreements (I/As), and are signedby the leadership of participating agencies(e.g. police chiefs, prosecuting attorney,agency department heads, supervisors, etc.) ortheir designees. These documents should bedeveloped with input from the MDT, reviewedannually, and re-executed upon change inpractice, policy or current agency leadership.B.Written protocols and/or guidelines addressthe functions of the MDT, the roles andresponsibilities of each discipline, andtheir interaction in the CAC. Protocolsare developed with input from the MDT,reviewed minimally every 3 years, andupdated as needed to reflect currentpractice.STATEMENT OF INTENT:The involvement of the agency leadersand MDT members is critical to ensuringthat the policies and procedures by whichinvestigations are conducted and servicesprovided are consistently followed.C.All members of the MDT—includingappropriate CAC staff, as defined by theneeds of the case—are routinely involved ininvestigations and/or MDT interventions.STATEMENT OF INTENT:The purpose of multidisciplinary involvementfor all interventions is to assure that the uniqueneeds of children are recognized and met. Thisallows for informed decision-making to occurat all stages of the case so that children andfamilies benefit optimally from a coordinatedresponse.Multidisciplinary intervention begins at initialoutcry or report and includes, but is not limitedto, first response, pre- and post- interviewdebriefings, forensic interviews, consultations,advocacy, evaluation, treatment, case reviews,and prosecution.D.CAC/MDT members participate in effectiveinformation sharing that is consistent withlegal, ethical and professional standards ofpractice and ensures the timely exchange ofcase information within the MDT.STATEMENT OF INTENT:Regular and effective communication andinformation sharing minimizes duplicativeefforts, enhances decision-making, andmaximizes the opportunity for children andcaretakers to receive the services they need.14 National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition
11. MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM ( continued )E.The CAC has written documentationdescribing how information sharing iscommunicated among MDT members andhow confidential information is protected.STATEMENT OF INTENT:Most professions represented on the MDThave legal, ethical, and professional standardsof practice with regard to confidentiality, butthey may differ across disciplines. States mayalso have laws such as the Health InformationPortability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)that govern this practice. The CAC/MDT mustcreate written confidentiality and informationsharing policies that align to these standardsand specifically apply to the MDT, staff, andvolunteers.F.The CAC provides routine opportunitiesfor MDT members to give feedback andsuggestions regarding procedures andoperations of the CAC/MDT. The CAC has aformal process for reviewing and assessingthe information provided.1Feedback and/or suggestions from MDTmembers may be obtained via the OutcomeMeasurement Survey tool (OMS), teamsatisfaction surveys, suggestion boxes, MDTmeetings specifically scheduled for thispurpose, and other methods.G. The CAC/MDT annually provides orfacilitates relevant training or othereducational opportunities focused on issuesrelevant to investigation, prosecution,and service provision for children andtheir non-offending caregivers. The CACdemonstrates documented MDT memberparticipation in annual professionaldevelopment.STATEMENT OF INTENT:Ongoing learning is critical to the successfuloperation of CAC/MDTs. The CAC identifiesand/or provides relevant educationalopportunities for MDT members. These shouldinclude topics that enhance the skills of MDTmembers, are cross-discipline in nature, andare MDT-focused.STATEMENT OF INTENT:CACs should have both formal and informalmechanisms allowing MDT membersto regularly provide feedback regardingthe operations of the CAC, operational/administrative matters (e.g., transportationfor clients, use of the facility, equipmentupgrades) and multidisciplinary team issues(e.g., communication, case decision making,documentation and record keeping, conflictresolution, etc.).CACs should foster opportunities foropen communication in order to create anatmosphere of trust and respect and to enableMDT members to share ideas and raiseconcerns.National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 15
CULTURALCOMPETENCY ANDDIVERSITYThe Children’s Advocacy Center provides culturallycompetent services for all CAC clients throughout theduration of the case.16 National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition2
22. CULTURAL COMPETENCY AND DIVERSITYRationaleCultural competency is defined as the capacityto function in more than one culture, requiringthe ability to appreciate, understand, and interactwith members of diverse populations withinthe local community. Cultural competency is afundamental component of the CAC philosophyand is as central to operations as developmentallyappropriate, child-friendly practice. Likedevelopmental considerations, cultural normsinfluence nearly every aspect of working withchildren and families, such as welcoming a childand family to the center, employing effectiveforensic interviewing techniques, assessing thelikelihood of abuse, selecting appropriate mentalhealth providers, and securing services that arerelevant and accessible to a child and family.To effectively meet clients’ needs, the CAC andMDT must be willing and able to understand theclients’ worldviews, adapt practices as needed,and offer assistance in a manner in which it can2be utilized. Striving towards cultural competenceis an important and ongoing endeavor and anintegral part of a CAC’s operations and servicedelivery.Proactive, culturally competent planning andoutreach should focus on culture and degree ofacculturation, ethnicity, religion, socioeconomicstatus, disability, gender, gender identity andexpression, and sexual orientation. Thesefactors contribute to a client’s experiencesand perspectives, and must be considered andaccommodated throughout the investigation,intervention, and case management processes.Addressing these factors in a culturally sensitiveenvironment helps children and families ofall backgrounds feel welcomed, valued, andrespected by staff, MDT members and volunteers.CRITERIA - Essential ComponentsA. The CAC conducts a communityassessment at a minimum of every 3 years,which includes:1. Community demographics2. CAC client demographics3. Analysis of disparities between thesepopulations4. Methods the CAC utilizes to identify andaddress gaps in services5. Strategies for outreach to un- orunderserved communities6. A method to monitor the effectiveness ofoutreach and intervention strategies.STATEMENT OF INTENT:In order to serve a community in a culturallycompetent manner, a CAC must completea comprehensive assessment of the entirecommunity and jurisdiction that they serve.The assessment should focus on a rangeof issues including, but not limited to,race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity andexpression, sexual orientation, disabilities,income, geography, religion and culture. Theassessment should inform the development ofgoals and strategies that ensure that the CACdelivers high quality, relevant, and accessibleservices to all children and families in need.National Children’s Alliance Standards for Accredited Members 2017 Edition 17
2. CULTURAL COMPETENCY AND DIVERSITY ( continued )B.The CAC must ensure that provisions aremade for non-English speaking and deaf orhard of hearing children and their familymembers throughout the investigation,intervention, and case managementprocesses.STATEMENT OF INTENT:The ability to effectively communicate is criticalin creating an environment in which childrenand families feel comfortable and safe, and arerespected and supported. Language barrierscan significantly impact the CAC and/or MDT’sabilities to communicate expectations andobtain accurate information from the child andfamily. Similarly, language barriers hamper theability for children and families to understandtheir roles and communicate their concernsand decisions regarding the investigation andintervention services. Language barriers maycompound children and families’ feelings offear, anxiety, and confusion. The CAC mustexplore a variety of resources or solutionsto ensure adequate provisions are made toovercome language and communicationbarriers. In order to protect the integrity ofthe investigation and services, care should betaken to ensure that appropriate translatorsare utilized. CACs should not utilize childrenor client family members to translate for MDTmembers.C.CAC services are accessible and tailored tomeet the individualized and unique needsof children and families regarding culture,development, and special needs throughoutthe investigation, intervention, and casemanagement processes.STATEMENT OF INTENT:It is the responsibility of the CAC and MDTmembers to understand and tailor services tothe diverse backgrounds and unique needs ofthe children and families being served. From2the moment of first contact with the child andfamily, the MDT should identify any issues thatmay affect service delivery.Ascertaining the a client ’s background allowsCAC/MDT members to better understandchild and family perceptions of the abuseand attributions of responsibility; understandthe family’s degree of acculturation andcomprehension of laws; address any religiousor cultural beliefs which may affect disclosureand follow-up with services, and recognizethe impact of prior experience with police andgovernment authorities both in this
a two-person site review team will conduct an on-site review meeting with board members, sta", and multidisciplinary team members to review practices and documentation for compliance with the . Standards. Based upon their findings in a site review, the site review team
