iii. Structured Decision Making™
Purpose
This procedure outlines an overview of Structured Decision Making (SDM™).
Goals
SDM™ is an assessment and decision making model to assist in making critical decisions about the safety of children. SDM™ was developed by the Children's Research Centre, and has two primary goals and five key objectives.
The two goals are to:
1. Reduce subsequent harm to children and families:
- reduce subsequent referrals;
- reduce subsequent substantiations;
- reduce subsequent injuries; and
- reduce subsequent foster placements.
Research by the Children's Research Centre indicates that when the model is used accurately the quality of case decisions and departmental accountability improve.
2. Expedite permanency for children (or reduce the time to permanency arrangements for children in out-of-home care).
Children should not 'drift in care'. Children will return safely to the family or when this is not possible, be placed in long-term stable out-of-home care in a timely way.
Objectives
The five key objectives of SDM™ are to:
- identify critical decision points;
- increase reliability of decisions;
- increase validity of decisions;
- target resources to families at highest risk; and
- use case level data to inform decisions throughout the department.
Exception in relation to matters of concern
The screening criteria, response priority, safety assessment and family risk evaluation tools that apply to interventions within the general community have not been adapted for use in relation to matters of concern, and will not be used as part of a response to matters of concern.
|
|---|
Critical Characteristics
There are four critical characteristics of SDM.
- Reliability: Structured assessment tools and protocols systematically focus on the critical decision points in the life of a case, increasing consistency in assessment and case planning. Families are assessed more objectively and decision-making is guided by facts of the case, rather than individual judgment.
- Validity: Research repeatedly demonstrates the model's effectiveness at reducing subsequent abuse/neglect, as evidenced by reduced rates of subsequent notifications, substantiations, injuries to children and placements in foster care. The cornerstone of the model is the actuarial research-based risk evaluation that accurately classifies families according to the likelihood of subsequent abuse/neglect, enabling agencies to target services to families at highest risk.
- Equity: SDM™ assessment tools ensure that critical case characteristics, immediate harm indicators and domains of family functioning are assessed for every family, every time, regardless of social differences. Detailed definitions for assessment items increase the likelihood that the CSO will assess all families using a similar framework. Research demonstrates racial equity of the risk evaluation in classifying families across risk levels. The reunification assessment has demonstrated expedited permanency for children, regardless of race.
- Utility: The SDM™ model and tools are easy to use and understand. Assessment tools are designed to focus on critical characteristics that are necessary and relevant to a specific decision point in the life of a case. Use of the tools provides the CSO with a means to focus the information gathering and assessment process. By focusing on critical characteristics, the CSO is able to organise case narrative in a meaningful way. Additionally, the tools facilitate communication between the CSO and the team leader, and between teams, about each family and the status of the case. Aggregate data facilitates communication among community partners and stakeholders.
General definitions
Household: A household includes all persons who have significant in-home contact with the child, including those who have a familial or intimate relationship with any person in the home.
Parent: The parent is defined as the child's mother or father; a person in whose favour a residence order or contact order for the child is in operation under the Family Law Act 1975; or a person, other than the chief executive, having custody or guardianship of the child under a law of the State or another State. For Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander families, the definition would include family members who may have been given the cultural responsibility to care for the child.
Primary Parent: The primary parent is the adult living in the household where the allegation occurs who assumes the most responsibility for child care. When two adult parents are present and the CSO is in doubt which one assumes the most child care responsibility, the legal guardian of the child involved in the incident should be selected as the primary parent. For example, when a mother and her partner reside in the same household and appear to equally share the child care responsibility, the mother is selected. If this does not resolve the question, the legal guardian who is the person responsible or the alleged responsible for the harm should be selected. For example, when a mother and a father reside in the same household and appear to equally share the child care responsibility, and the mother is the person responsible or the alleged person responsible for the harm, the mother is selected. In circumstances where both parents are in the household, equally sharing the child care responsibility, and both have been identified as the person responsible or alleged person responsible for the harm, the parent demonstrating the more severe behaviour is selected. Only one primary parent can be identified.
Secondary Parent: The secondary parent is defined as an adult living in the household who has routine responsibility for child care, but less responsibility than the primary parent. A partner may be a secondary parent even though they has minimal responsibility for care of the child.
Use of term AND/OR: Consistency in decision making is reliant on staff thoroughly reading and considering the information gathered and matching this against all appropriate definitions. In some instances an 'OR' a semicolon, and additional dot points indicate that the definition is broken down into different components - only one part of the definition needs to be satisfied. In other matters, an 'AND' indicates that the definition has conjoined parts, and in these instances, the whole statement needs to be satisfied. Sometimes examples are provided to indicate the types of circumstances that could arise in the particular definition. These are not an exhaustive list, nor do they need to accord with the child protection concerns.
On all tools, items are brief representations of the entire definition for each item. Selecting an item is the same as selecting the definition. CSOs should refer to the definitions prior to selecting items.
General practice considerations
Considerations regarding Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children and families
Throughout the document there are references to Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child rearing practices. These practices are derived from a body of cultural knowledge specific to Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander persons and are defined as incorporating:
- independence;
- responsibility of children at an earlier age;
- cultural authority (within kinship/clan groups); and
- cultural responsibility (passing on of knowledge or skills).
The impact of past government policy and procedures may have influenced Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander parental behaviours towards their children and may be observed in language which is a prevalent community standard. The impact of past government policy and procedures on the child must be considered in the community context.
The cultural commentary used throughout these tools and accompanying definitions is learned communal knowledge obtained from the experience and personal history of the Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander departmental officers.
For Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children and families, the recognised Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander entity must be given the opportunity to participate in the decision-making where the completion of the SDM™ tools is part of making a significant decision for the child.
Other
The SDM™ forms are not designed as interview guides or written in family-centred language, however, the process of the assessment is intended to be conducted in conjunction with the family to the greatest extent possible. This includes children when it is developmentally appropriate to do so.
Decision tools
There are eight decision tools used from the time child protection concerns are received at intake to when a case is closed following ongoing intervention.
Most of the tools have been developed using a consensus approach with the exception being the family risk evaluation tool, which has been developed from actuarial research.
Case plan reviews completed regularly will assist the CSO to evaluate the change that is occurring with the child and family. The reassessment process will assist the CSO to decide whether the level of contact and type of services provided are meeting the needs of the child and family.
The CSO will use professional judgement in making decisions, however the SDM tools will improve the consistency of practice and provide a systematic way of evaluating practice and the outcomes for children.
Completion of SDM tools at critical decision making points
| SDM tool | When to use | Timeframes | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Screening criteria | For all concerns received about children, including unborn children and excluding all MOC |
Within 24 hours of receiving information |
Is this matter a notification or child concern report? |
| Response priority | For all notifications received about children and unborn children, excluding MOC |
Within 24 hours of receiving information |
What is the appropriate timeframe response for the notification? |
| Safety assessment | At the commencement of every I&A, excluding MOC and unborn children When circumstances change during an open case At case closure |
To commence at the first face-to-face contact for an I&A and the form to be completed within 72 hours |
Can the child remain safely in the home? What does the child need to be safe in the home? |
| Family risk evaluation | For all I&As, excluding MOC and unborn children |
Incorporated into I&A process |
Should there be ongoing departmental involvement to address the risk in the family? What are the required contact standards between the CSO and the child/family? |
| Child strengths and needs assessment | Prior to a family group meeting to develop a case plan (IPA, CPO) Prior to each review of a case plan |
Within 30 days of case opening Prior to each review of a case plan |
What are the child's needs that will be addressed in the case plan? |
| Parental strengths and needs assessment | Prior to a family group meeting to develop a case plan (IPA, CPO) Prior to each review of a case plan where the goal is reunification |
Within 30 days of case opening Prior to each review of a case plan |
What are the three priority parental needs to include in the case plan? |
| Family risk re-evaluation | Prior to each review of a case plan where the children are in the home (support service, IPA, CPO) |
Prior to each review of a case plan |
Will the case remain open, or can it be closed? |
| Family reunification assessment | Prior to each review of a case plan where at least one child is out of the home and the goal is reunification (CPO) |
Prior to each review of a case plan |
Should the child be returned to the family, or should there be alternative long-term care arrangements? |
Minimum departmental contact requirements
The minimum departmental contact requirements are determined by:
- the outcome or risk level, identified in the family risk evaluation tool, completed as part of an investigation and assessment; or
- the outcome or risk level, identified in the family risk re-evaluation or the family reunification assessment tools, completed as part of the review of a case plan.
The minimum departmental contact requirements specify the minimum number of contacts that a CSO is to have with the child, their parents and other people who can contribute to case work with a child, each month during ongoing intervention with a family. The contact requirements ensure that intervention resources are targeted primarily to the highest risk families.
- Last updated
- 28 April 2008
Other languages