Community Partnerships:
 

Improving the Response
 

to Child Maltreatment
 

2010
 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
 

Administration for Children and Families
 

Administration on Children, Youth and Families
 

ChildrenÊs Bureau
 

Office on Child Abuse and Neglect
 

 

Table of Contents
 

PREFACE ......................................................................................................................................................1
 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................................... 3
 

1. PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW....................................................................................................... 5
 

2. 	 COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS: WHAT AND WHY ................................................................ 7
 

What Are Community Partnerships? ...............................................................................................7
 

Why Community Partnerships? ......................................................................................................8
 

3.	 BUILDING AND SUSTAINING THE FOUNDATION FOR A
 

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP................................................................................................. 11
 

Assessing Readiness for Collaboration ...........................................................................................11
 

Identifying Potential Partners ........................................................................................................12
 

Establishing Leadership ................................................................................................................18
 

Developing the Strategic Plan .......................................................................................................18
 

Developing Other Framework Documents ...................................................................................20
 

Anticipating Challenges for a Community Partnership .................................................................21
 

Incorporating Cultural Competence .............................................................................................25
 

Securing Funding and Other Resources ........................................................................................27
 

Sustaining a Community Partnership ............................................................................................30
 

4. PARTNERING WITH CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ....................................................... 33
 

Changing the CPS Response to Maltreatment ..............................................................................33
 

Enhancing the Relationship Between CPS and Service Providers ..................................................38
 

Involving Families and Communities ............................................................................................40
 

5. 	 MEASURING THE RESULTS OF A COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP ..................................... 43
 

Understanding the Importance of an Evaluation ...........................................................................43
 

Conducting an Evaluation ............................................................................................................44
 

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................47
 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

i 
 

 

 

 

ENDNOTES ......................................................................................................................................... 49
 

APPENDICES:
 

APPENDIX A—GLOSSARY OF TERMS................................................................................... 55
 

APPENDIX B—RESOURCE LISTINGS FOR SELECTED NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
 

APPENDIX C—STATE TELEPHONE NUMBERS FOR REPORTING SUSPECTED CHILD
 

APPENDIX D—REFERENCE GUIDE FOR IDENTIFYING POSSIBLE CHILD
 

APPENDIX N—FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND
 

CONCERNED WITH CHILD MALTREATMENT................................................................... 61
 

MALTREATMENT...................................................................................................................... 69
 

MALTREATMENT...................................................................................................................... 71
 

APPENDIX E—EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS ......................................... 75
 

APPENDIX F—PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE COURTS ......................................................... 85
 

APPENDIX G—THE COLLABORATION CHECKLIST......................................................... 89
 

APPENDIX H—POTENTIAL COMMUNITY COLLABORATION PARTNERS .................. 93
 

APPENDIX I—MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING .................................................... 97
 

APPENDIX J—MANAGING CONFLICT................................................................................. 99
 

APPENDIX K—CULTURAL SENSITIVITY WHEN WORKING WITH FAMILIES ........... 101
 

APPENDIX L—FUNDING RESOURCES FOR COMMUNITY PARTNERSHPS ................ 103
 

APPENDIX M—COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP SELF-ASSESSMENT................................ 105
 

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT ............................................................................................. 117
 

APPENDIX O—CHILD WELFARE PRACTICE COMPARISON: CONVENTIONAL,
 

FAMILY-CENTERED, AND COMMUNITY-CENTERED .................................................... 123
 

APPENDIX P—SAMPLE CONSENT FORM.......................................................................... 125
 

APPENDIX Q—SYSTEMS OF CARE VALUES AND PRINCIPLES...................................... 129
 

APPENDIX R—SAMPLE EVALUATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN................................. 131
 

APPENDIX S—COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP RESOURCES............................................. 133
 

ii Table of Contents
 

Preface
 

Each day, the safety and well-being of some 

children across the Nation are threatened by child 

abuse and neglect. Working to have a positive impact 

on the lives of these children and their families is not 

the responsibility of any single agency or professional 

group, but rather is a shared community concern. 

Th e Child Abuse and Neglect User Manual Series has 

provided guidance on child protection to hundreds 

of thousands of multidisciplinary professionals 

and concerned community members since the late 

1970s. Th e User Manual Series offers a foundation 

for understanding child maltreatment and the 

roles and responsibilities of various practitioners 

in its prevention, identification, investigation, and 

treatment. Through the years, the manuals have 

served as valuable resources for building knowledge, 

promoting effective practices, and enhancing 

community partnerships. 

Since the last update of the User Manual Series in 

the early 1990s, a number of changes have occurred 

that dramatically affect each community’s response to 

child maltreatment. The changing landscape refl ects 

increased recognition of the complexity of issues 

facing children and families, new legislation, practice 

innovations, and systems reform efforts. Signifi cant 

advances in research have helped shape new directions 

for interventions, while ongoing evaluations help us 

know “what works.” 

Th e Office on Child Abuse and Neglect within the 

Children’s Bureau of the Administration for Children 

and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, has developed this third edition of the User 

Manual Series to reflect the increased knowledge and 

the evolving state of practice on child protection. 

The updated and new manuals are comprehensive 

in scope while succinct in presentation and easy to 

follow, and they address trends and concerns relevant 

to today’s professional. 

Th is manual, Community Partnerships: Improving the 

Response to Child Maltreatment, reflects the widespread 

recognition that coordinated multidisciplinary 

responses are needed to address the complex needs 

of today’s children and families. It off ers guidance 

on how diverse community agencies, organizations, 

and individuals can join together to provide a web 

of support for families and create safe, healthy 

environments for children to thrive. Th e manual 

describes the benefits of community partnerships, 

outlines the steps to establishing and sustaining 

partnerships, and provides information on how 

to measure results. It also describes ways in which 

child protective services can adapt their practices 

to engage families’ natural support systems and 

increase community involvement in child protection. 

The importance of responsive, family-centered 

approaches is underscored throughout the manual. 

The appendices provide valuable resources, including 

checklists, sample forms, and success stories. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

1 
 

This manual builds on the keystone publication of the 

User Manual Series, A Coordinated Response to Child 

Abuse and Neglect: The Foundation for Practice. Readers 

may want to consult that manual for background 

information on the definition, scope, causes, and 

consequences of child abuse and neglect, as well as an 

overview of prevention efforts, the child protection 

process, and the roles of different professional groups 

in working together to protect the safety, permanency, 

and well-being of children. 

User Manual Series 

This manual—along with the entire Child Abuse and Neglect User Manual Series—is available from Child 

Welfare Information Gateway. Contact Child Welfare Information Gateway for a full list of available 

manuals and ordering information: 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

1250 Maryland Avenue, SW 

Eighth Floor 

Washington, DC 20024 

Phone: (800) 394-3366 

Fax: (703) 225-2357 

E-mail: info@childwelfare.gov 

The manuals also are available online at http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanual.cfm. 

2 Preface 
 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 

CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS 

Patricia Schene, Ph.D., a child and family services 

consultant, has been working in the child protection 

field for more than 25 years as a State administrator, 

private agency director, researcher, writer, and educator. 

Since 1995, she has been working as an independent 

consultant in children and family services with her 

company, Patricia Schene and Associates, as well as 

writing articles and presenting at national forums. 

Dr. Schene has had a leadership role in designing 

and implementing policy changes at the State level, 

identifying and measuring outcomes in child welfare, 

performing risk assessments, establishing national 

data systems, developing curricula, and building 

community partnerships to protect children. 

H. Lien Bragg, M.S.W., formerly a consultant 

with ICF International, has more than a decade of 

social services experience. Ms. Bragg has served in a 

variety of victim and community service capacities, 

including providing technical assistance to State and 

local public child welfare and human services agencies 

regarding the co-occurrence of domestic violence and 

child abuse and neglect. 

Jeannie Newman, M.S.W., M.I.B.S., formerly a 

consultant with ICF International, has held policy 

and direct practice positions in child welfare and 

family programs. She also has cultivated an extensive 

network in various related professional fi elds, 

including domestic violence, fatherhood, and poverty. 

She was the Project Manager for the Child Abuse and 

Neglect User Manual Series. 

Matthew Shuman, M.S.W., a consultant with ICF 

International, has more than 11 years experience 

in the human services field. He previously worked 

as an analyst in the Office of the Secretary of the 

Department of Health and Human Services for a 

variety of child welfare issues, including foster care, 

adoption, and child care. He also has written and 

edited various child welfare publications, including 

other manuals in the User Manual Series. 

Carl R. Tacy, M.S.W., formerly a consultant with 

ICF International, has more than 12 years experience 

working in clinical, policy, and management positions 

primarily addressing substance abuse, domestic 

violence, health, and child welfare issues.  Mr. Tacy 

has authored or co-authored several publications, 

including the Underage Drinking Prevention Action 

Guide and Planner, the Tips for Teens series, and Th e 

Role of Educators in Preventing and Responding to Child 

Abuse and Neglect of the User Manual Series. 

Lindsay Ritter Taylor, formerly a consultant with 

ICF International, worked on projects relating to 

various child welfare and juvenile justice issues. She 

helped write issue briefs highlighting fi ndings from 

the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Wellbeing I, a national sample of children who had been 

abused or neglected. Additionally, she worked with 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

3 
 

 

the technical assistance and evaluation teams on the 

Improving Child Welfare Through Systems of Care grant 

project. 

REVIEWERS 

William R. (Reyn) Archer III, M.D., Hill and 

Knowlton, Inc. 

Charles Bruner, Ph.D., Child & Family Policy Center 

Gail Bethea Jackson, Pathfinder Project, Inc. 

Jenny Keyser, Ph.D., Children, Youth & Family 

Consortium, University of Minnesota 

Kathy Maddox Pinto, Howard County, Maryland, 

Department of Social Services 

Sarah Webster, Texas Department of Protective and 

Regulatory Services (retired) 

Michael Winer, 4Results: Together 

TECHNICAL ADVISORY PANEL 

The following were members of the January 2001 

Technical Advisory Panel for the User Manual Series 

contract. The organizations identifi ed refl ect each 

member’s affiliation at that time. 

Carolyn Abdullah 

FRIENDS National Resource Center 

Washington, DC 

H. Lien Bragg 

American Public Human Services Association 

Washington, DC 

Sgt. Richard Cage 


Montgomery County Police Department 


Wheaton, MD 


Diane DePanfi lis, Ph.D. 


University of Maryland at Baltimore School of Social 


Work 

Baltimore, MD 

Pauline Grant 

Florida Department of Children and Families 

Jacksonville, FL 

Jodi Hill 

Connecticut Department of Children and Families 

Hartford, CT 

Robert Ortega, Ph.D. 

University of Michigan School of Social Work 

Ann Arbor, MI 

Nancy Rawlings 

Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children 

Frankfort, KY 

Barry Salovitz 

Child Welfare Institute/National Resource Center 

on Child Maltreatment 

Glenmont, NY 

Sarah Webster 

Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory 

Services 

Austin, TX 

Ron Zuskin 

University of Maryland at Baltimore School of 

Social Work 

Baltimore, MD 

OTHER ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

Th e third edition of the User Manual Series was 

developed under the guidance and direction of Irene 

Bocella, Federal Task Order Offi cer, and Catherine 

Nolan, Director, Office on Child Abuse and Neglect. 

This manual was developed and produced by ICF 

International, Fairfax, VA, under Contract Number 

HHS-282-98-0025. 

4 Acknowledgments 
 

 

CHAPTER 1 

Purpose and Overview 

While child protective services (CPS) is at the 

center of every community’s child protection 

process, it cannot ensure the safety, permanency, and 

well-being of all children–nor address all the complex 

family issues associated with child maltreatment–by 

working alone. Each year, CPS workers respond to 

large volumes of child abuse and neglect reports. In 

2008, for example, an estimated 3.3 million reports 

alleging the maltreatment of approximately 6 million 

children were made to CPS agencies nationwide, and 

772,000 children were found to be victims of abuse 

or neglect.1

 The families of these children often face 

additional challenges, such as substance abuse, mental 

illness, domestic violence, unemployment, and 

poverty. Additionally, only a portion of the families 

needing services actually receives them.2 To improve 

access to services and more adequately address the 

diverse needs of vulnerable families, communities 

across the Nation have turned to a comprehensive, 

coordinated partnership approach.3 

Community partnerships bring child welfare 

agencies together with community organizations, 

service providers, concerned neighbors, and family 

members to help prevent children from entering 

the child welfare system and to provide families at 

risk or in crisis with access to services and supports. 

Successful partnerships can benefi t communities 

by strengthening families, extending the reach of 

limited resources, improving service access and 

delivery, enhancing relationships among public and 

private service providers, and creating community 

responsibility for child safety and family stability.4 

Building a community partnership can be complex 

and time consuming. Frequently, partnerships 

will require CPS and community organizations 

and individuals to work in new ways. Th is manual 

supports both CPS staff and interested community 

members in developing a coordinated effort to prevent 

For additional information about the definition, scope, causes, and consequences of maltreatment, 

as well as an overview of the child protection process, refer to the keystone publication of the User 

Manual Series, A Coordinated Response to Child Abuse and Neglect: The Foundation for Practice at 

www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/foundation/index.cfm. Other publications in the 

User Manual Series, which addresses topics such as domestic violence, working with the courts, 

and the role of educators and child care providers, can be found at www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/ 

usermanual.cfm. 

For a quick reference guide to the signs of and risk factors for child maltreatment, refer to Appendix 

D, Reference Guide for Identifying Possible Child Maltreatment This manual was developed and produced 

by ICF International, Fairfax, VA, under Contract Number HHS-282-98-0025. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

5 
6

and respond to child maltreatment. Specifi cally, this 

manual addresses: 

• 	 Reasons for and benefits of developing community 

partnerships to respond more eff ectively to child 

maltreatment 

• 	 Basic steps for developing and sustaining a 

community partnership, including conducting 

assessments, recruiting partners, establishing 

leadership, planning strategically, and securing 

funding and other resources 

• 	 Changes CPS agencies can make that foster a 

community partnership approach 

• 	 Tips for measuring the results of community 

partnerships. 

The appendices include additional resources, such 

as checklists and sample forms that partnerships 

can use to guide their efforts, examples of successful 

partnerships, and links to other valuable information. 

Notes About the Manual 

This manual does not endorse any single community partnership model or specific criteria for partnerships. 

Rather, it addresses the general concept of building productive relationships among a community’s 

child welfare agency, local organizations, family members, and other individuals or groups on behalf of 

children and families. The manual describes general approaches to developing, sustaining, and evaluating 

community partnerships and highlights effective practices that have been found useful in the field. It has 

information that will be helpful to participants at various stages of a community partnership’s lifespan. 

Additionally, although some resources differentiate between the terms partnership and collaboration, this 

manual uses them interchangeably. 

6 Purpose and Overview 
 

CHAPTER 2 

Community Partnerships: 

What and Why 

In This Chapter 

• 

• 

• 

What are community partnerships? 

Why community partnerships? 

– Background 

– Benefi ts 

Federal legislation 

Recognizing the many issues children and 

families across the country face, child welfare 

agencies are shifting from a single-agency response 

to child maltreatment toward an integrated system 

of collaboration with the community. Both child 

protective services (CPS) and other community 

stakeholders have determined that community 

partnerships can be extremely useful, if not vital, 

to achieving permanency, safety, and well-being for 

children. 

WHAT ARE COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS? 

Collaboration is “a mutually beneficial and welldefined relationship entered into by two or more 

organizations to achieve results they are more likely to 

achieve together than alone.” 5 

Community partnerships are collaborative 


relationships between public child welfare agencies 


and other stakeholders to address child protection.6 

Community partnerships may work to: 

• 	 Prevent child maltreatment and reduce its 

recurrence 

• 	 Offer a network of support and a range of services 

for families in which maltreatment has occurred 

or is at risk of occurring 

• 	 Provide individualized responses tailored to a 

family’s strengths and needs 

• 	 Encourage shared responsibility for ensuring 

safety, permanency, and well-being. 

Partnerships can take many forms depending on the 

needs, resources, and priorities of the communities 

they serve. They may involve large networks with 

many members who provide formal and informal 

supports to families in a specified geographic area. 

Or, they may consist of more focused eff orts that 

address the needs of a very specific target population, 

such as those families who have experienced both 

child maltreatment and domestic violence. Some 

community partnerships conform to specifi c models 

promoted by Federal or private funding sources (e.g., 

the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Edna McConnell 

Clark Foundation), while others are formed on an ad 

hoc basis fully defined by the partners. 

Considering partnerships along a continuum, some 

communities are just beginning to change practices 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

7 
 

 

 

 

and create links through joint activities, such as case 

planning, training, or program development.7

 Other 

partnerships are further along and have begun to 

change organizational infrastructures, such as by 

co-locating staff or developing formal informationsharing mechanisms. Still others are even further 

along the continuum and have created State-level 

collaborations or undertaken major reforms of their 

CPS systems, such as developing diff erential response 

systems (described in more detail in Chapter 4, 

Partnering with Child Protective Services). 

WHY COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS? 

Community partnerships help communities shape 

their child protection strategies and build a network 

of services based on their own cultures, needs, and 

resources. Communities and the Federal, State, 

and local governments have been using community 

partnerships as an effective and more effi cient way of 

serving children and families. This section outlines 

the background for reform and the numerous benefi ts 

of community partnerships. 

Background of the Reform 

Concerned citizens and community groups— 

including faith-based organizations, schools, civic 

groups, and neighborhood associations—have long 

provided both formal and informal services and 

supports to local families and children in need. 

Concerns about child maltreatment and its impact on 

the community have caused individuals and groups to 

look to new ways to mobilize and coordinate eff orts 

that meet the pressing needs of vulnerable families and 

their children. Reform also is a product of growing 

concerns over the abilities of the traditional child 

welfare system to protect children and help families, 

particularly given: 

• 	 The limited capacity of CPS to address heavy 

caseloads reflecting complex issues 

• 	 A bureaucratized, “one-size-fi ts-all” approach 

that features adversarial investigations 

• 	 Inadequate and fragmented service delivery that 

frequently does not address underlying family 

problems and stresses.8 

Reform also reflects increased recognition of the 

importance of family engagement and the involvement 

of extended family networks in the assessment and 

service planning processes to encourage greater 

cooperation with services and motivate behavior 

changes. Additionally, it underscores a growing 

awareness of the links between healthy communities 

and healthy families. 

In addition, reform has coincided with an 

increased government-wide focus on outcomes and 

accountability.9 As part of reform efforts, States have 

made significant changes in the way they respond to 

Features of a Successful Community Partnership 

The following are some of the key features that lay the groundwork for a successful community partnership: 

• Community-based. Decision making and services are rooted in the community or neighborhood. 

• Family-centered. Services are coordinated to respond to each family’s situation and build on the family’s strengths. 

• Participatory. Stakeholders representing a broad range of fields are encouraged to play a role in safeguarding 

children and supporting families. 

• Responsive. Partnerships make services accessible to families, mobilize resources, and adapt to community needs. 

• Results-oriented. The partnership is held accountable for achieving results that are reflected in measurable 

improvement in child, family, and community outcomes.10 

8 Community Partnerships: What And Why 
 

 

child abuse and neglect—with a particular emphasis 

on integrated systems of collaboration. To better 

protect children and support families, the child 

welfare field is moving in a number of key directions, 

including: 

• 	 Responding more fl exibly to the variety of cases 

that enter the child welfare system 

• 	 Using existing networks of family, kin, faith 

communities, and neighborhoods to protect 

children and to strengthen families 

• 	 Engaging families more effectively in order 

to enhance their commitment to making the 

necessary changes 

• 	 Conducting comprehensive assessments in 

partnership with the family to determine what 

must change in order to reduce or eliminate the 

risk of maltreatment, to ensure safety, and to 

identify the resources needed to facilitate change 

• 	 Ensuring comprehensive, integrated, and 

coordinated resources to protect children 

• 	 Focusing on outcomes—defi ning what 

they are and building accountability for their 

achievement.11 

Benefits of Community Partnerships 

Community partnerships can provide signifi cant 

benefits for children, families, service providers, and 

the community as a whole, including: 

• 	 Creation of an integrated array of services 

that meets the multifaceted needs of individual 

children and families 

• 	 Less duplication of services and a greater 

efficiency in the use of resources 

• 	 Greater awareness of available services for 

children and families, as well as an understanding 

of how to obtain those services 

• 	 Improvements in the ability to share information 

and track families across agencies 

• 	 Leveraging of interagency resources and the 

subsequent reduction in the financial and staff 

burden on individual agencies 

• 	 Improved access to community leaders, 

target audiences, and additional resources for 

community agencies and organizations 

• 	 Increased accountability of all parties.

12 

In addition, building relationships with the 

community can generate important benefits for child 

welfare agencies, such as: 

• 	 Learning about and accessing new resources 

• 	 Closing cases more confidently knowing that 

community services and supports are available to 

families 

• 	 Gaining a critical understanding and perspective 

of the neighborhoods in which they serve 

• 	 Making more informed decisions regarding outof-home care and placement in the community 

• 	 Reducing stress caused by working in isolation 

from the community 

• 	 Increasing local awareness of child maltreatment 

and related issues 

• 	 Forming and strengthening relationships with 

community members, which can build trust 

between families and child welfare agencies and 

other service providers.13 

For descriptions of several successful community partnerships, see Appendix E, Examples of Community 

Partnerships, and Appendix F, Partnerships with the Courts. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 9

to Child Maltreatment 
 

 

Federal Legislation and Community Partnerships 

Federal legislation often serves as a catalyst for bringing communities together to provide services for 

children and families. Federal programs increasingly require collaboration among community programs to 

eliminate duplication of services and to identify and fill gaps as needed. Selected child welfare legislation 

and initiatives that have supported the development of community partnerships include: 

• The Family Preservation and Support Services Program. Established in 1993 under P.L. 103-66, the Family 

Preservation and Support Services program, now titled the Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) program, 

laid the foundation for the use of Federal funds to support community-level partnerships in order to preserve 

and support families. Public and private agency partnerships emerged to provide services and support to 

families, prevent initial or further child maltreatment, and preserve families experiencing crises. When PSSF was 

reauthorized in 2006 through the Child and Families Services Improvement Act, the Regional Partnership Grant 

program was established. This program funds regional partnerships to improve permanency outcomes for children 

affected by methamphetamine or other substance abuse. 

• The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA). Introduced in 1997, ASFA (P.L. 105-89) requires States to gain 

community input on how to achieve three national goals for children and families: safety, permanency, and 

well-being. ASFA focuses on moving children more rapidly from foster care into permanent homes, while also 

requiring “reasonable efforts” to rehabilitate and reunify families after children are removed from their homes. 

One signifi cant effect of ASFA has been increased efforts to bring community resources together in order to help 

families with multiple needs meet the tightened timeframes for permanency planning. 

• Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA). Most recently amended in 2003 through the Keeping 

Children and Families Safe Act (P.L. 108-36), CAPTA requires each State to establish a citizen review panel that 

offers community members the opportunity to ensure that States are adequately protecting children from abuse 

and neglect. Panel members examine a number of factors, including existing State policies and procedures and the 

extent to which the State agency is in compliance with its CAPTA State plan. These citizen review panels then are 

able to formulate creative solutions to challenges States face regarding child maltreatment issues.14 CAPTA also 

established: 

– The Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention Program (CBCAP), which provides funding to States to 

develop, operate, expand, and enhance community-based, prevention-focused programs and activities to 

strengthen and support families in order to prevent child abuse and neglect. 

– The Children’s Justice Act, which provides grants to States to improve the investigation, prosecution, 

and judicial handling of cases of child abuse and neglect in a manner that limits additional trauma to the 

child victims, including establishing multidisciplinary programs and training. 

• Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act. Signed in 2008, this law (P.L. 110-351) 

provides Federal funding for relatives caring for foster children (e.g., kinship care), expands the number of children 

eligible for adoption assistance payments, extends foster care payments to youth up to 21 years old, and increases 

Tribes’ access to foster care and adoption funding. The law also requires child welfare agencies to work with other 

State agencies to create a plan to better coordinate physical and mental health and education services for children in 

the child welfare system and to ensure critical information sharing among appropriate care providers. 

• The Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSRs). These Federal reviews of State child welfare services, which 

were designed to strengthen Federal-State partnerships, incorporate the goals of safety, permanency, and wellbeing and require the involvement of various stakeholders in the review and reform processes. Partnerships are 

considered vital in order to make the most of the resources available and to create systemic change. 

For additional information about child abuse and neglect laws, the CFSRs, and the CPS process, refer to: 

• A Coordinated Response to Child Abuse and Neglect: The Foundation for Practice at www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/ 

usermanuals/foundation/index.cfm 

• The Laws and Policies section of the Child Welfare Information Gateway at www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/ 

laws_policies 

• The Child Welfare Monitoring section of the Children’s Bureau website at www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/ 

cwmonitoring/index.htm. 

10 Community Partnerships: What And Why 
CHAPTER 3 

Building and Sustaining 

the Foundation for a 

Community Partnership 

In This Chapter 

• 	 Assessing readiness for collaboration 

• 	 Identifying potential partners 

• 	 Involving and working with families and 

youth involved with the child welfare system 

• 	 Establishing leadership 

• 	 Developing a strategic plan and other 

framework documents 

• 	 Coordinating meetings 

• 	 Anticipating challenges 

• 	 Confl ict resolution 

• 	 Eff ective communication 

• 	 Incorporating cultural competence 

• 	 Establishing partnerships with Tribes 

• 	 Working with gay, lesbian, bisexual, and 

transgender youth 

• 	 Securing funding and other resources 

• 	 Sustaining partnerships 

• 	 Characteristics of successful partnerships 

The planning process is one of the most critical 

steps to establishing a community partnership. 

The amount of planning that goes into creating a 

partnership greatly affects both its success and its longterm sustainability. This chapter discusses the steps 

individuals and organizations should take in order to 

establish—and sustain—a community partnership. 

Depending on each partnership’s situation, the steps 

in this process may occur in an order diff erent from 

the order presented in this chapter. For example, a 

core leadership group may already be designated for a 

partnership before its readiness for collaboration has 

been assessed fully. Also, if a partnership is developed 

due to the receipt of a grant or participation in a 

particular initiative, some of the strategic planning 

or other steps may have already been determined by 

the funder or organizer. This is essentially a “chicken 

or the egg” situation, and community partnerships 

should move through these steps in a manner that 

best matches their needs and goals. 

ASSESSING READINESS FOR COLLABORATION 

Before forming a community partnership, it often is 

necessary to conduct a formal or informal assessment 

to determine a community or group’s readiness and 

capacity for developing a partnership, how much a 

partnership could help foster change within that 

community, and which community challenges are 

best addressed by a partnership. Assessing readiness 

also can help identify potential barriers so that they 

can be discussed early. 

Community factors to consider in such an assessment 

include: 

• The history of partnerships in the community 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

11 
 

• 	 If the timing is right to start a partnership 

• 	 Who or what can help or hinder the collaborative 

eff orts 

• 	 If there are enough people willing and able to 

contribute to the partnership 

• 	 If there are leaders who can lend credibility to 

and help sustain the partnership 

• 	 If there is trust among the key stakeholders.15 

IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL PARTNERS 

The next step in establishing a community 

partnership is identifying potential partnership 

members. Child Protective Services (CPS) generally 

plays a central role in this process by discussing how 

it can work with others better to protect children 

and to support families. CPS should ensure that 

the community does not see the partnership as a 

Collaboration Readiness Checklist 

The following conditions will help ensure the successful start-up of a community partnership: 

• The home, or leading, organization is ready 

• The right partners are involved 

• A shared vision unifies the partners, and they believe collaboration can make a change 

• Partners are aware of what is expected of them 

• Partners know the partnership’s goals and objectives 

• People to do the work have been identifi ed, staffed, and made accountable 

• “Best practices” have been researched and shared in the partnership 

• Assets (i.e., strengths and supports) residing within the partnership have been mapped 

• The partnership encourages participation in the sustainability of its work (i.e., how to keep the work 

going after changes in funding or membership) 

• The partnership actively recruits new members to bring fresh perspectives 

• There is a defined model to govern the partnership 

• The leadership is eff ective 

• The partnership has a communications and outreach plan 

• Financial needs for the partnership are known and addressed 

• The partnership’s work is monitored, evaluated, and revised regularly 

• The partnership knows what challenges it faces.16 

For more a more detailed checklist, see Appendix G, The Collaboration Checklist. 

12 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
way of “transferring” CPS’s legal responsibilities, 

but rather as a way of working together to achieve 

common goals. 

Committed, hard-working members are the 

foundation of a thriving community partnership. 

They should represent a diverse group of people from 

various agencies, organizations, and community 

groups, as well as individuals who are involved with 

populations similar to those being served or are 

concerned about related issues. Possible community 

partners include: 

• 	 Families, youth, and children from the population 

served or who have been—or currently are— 

involved with the child welfare system 

• 	 Community professionals, such as physical and 

mental health workers, child care providers, and 

school personnel, who work closely with children 

and families and also have legal responsibilities to 

report suspected child abuse and neglect 

• 	 Law enforcement personnel who become involved 

when abuse or neglect is severe or is considered a 

criminal off ense 

• 	 Court personnel, such as judges, attorneys, 

and legal aid, who have a significant role in 

determining whether the harm the child has 

or could experience warrants removal from the 

home and placement into out-of-home care 

• 	 Public and private service providers, such as 

those offering services related to child welfare, 

health care, mental health care, substance abuse 

treatment, domestic violence, housing, and 

economic support 

• 	 Other community groups and individuals, such as 

neighborhood groups, faith-based organizations, 

advocates, and survivors of domestic abuse and 

child maltreatment.17 

While the tendency may be to choose personal contacts, 

well-known people, or individuals who have extensive 

resources, partners also should possess attributes that 

allow them to make meaningful contributions to the 

effort. It is important to consider diverse elements 

when identifying partners, as outlined in Exhibit 3-1. 

Once potential partners have been identifi ed, 

they will need to be contacted. During the initial 

conversations with the candidates, communicate: 

• 	 The purpose and goals of the partnership 

• 	 The partnership’s benefits to the community and 

to the members 

• 	 The level of commitment required 

• 	 The date and time of the fi rst meeting. 

A list of alternate candidates also should be developed 

in case some people are not able to participate. 

For additional resources related to stakeholder involvement and interagency collaboration, visit the National 

Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement website at http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/ 

helpkids/agency_collaboration.htm and the National Resource Center for Community-Based Child Abuse 

Prevention website at www.friendsnrc.org/cbcap/priority/collaboration.htm. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

13 
 

Exhibit 3-1

 Factors to Consider When Identifying Partners 

Number
 

Relationships 

Leadership and 

Resources 

 Level of 

Infl uence 

Readiness for 

Collaboration 

Diversity 

Too few members may overburden the partnership, while too many may make it difficult 

to accomplish specific tasks or manage the group. Depending on the situation, a group 

of 10–15 individuals usually is considered ideal. If the partnership needs to involve 

more members in order to have all of the necessary agencies represented, the partnership 

can establish subcommittees or workgroups for better manageability. Additionally, to 

keep the group from being too large, each participating organization should only have 

one representative who can report back to the organization about the partnership’s 

proceedings. 

Personal or business relationships among members outside the partnership may aff ect 

the group; therefore, it is important to be familiar with and to understand those 

relationships, including prior history of partnerships. If mostly friends, business 

colleagues, or relatives are selected as members, decisions may be based on discussions, 

events, or factors that occur outside the group and may cause divisions or a sense of 

exclusion within the group. 

The ability of a member to contribute time, skills, and resources to the partnership is 

very important. Carefully consider the leadership ability and assets that candidates will 

provide, based on their connections, job position, access to resources, reputation, and 

skills, as well as the time they can contribute.

Some members may be included because they will attract other key individuals to the 

effort. Celebrities, city or other government officials, and directors of large organizations 

may be magnets for committed, industrious talent. Even if they do not stay with the 

project to the end, these individuals may be important to helping the group form. It is 

equally critical, however, to recognize the importance of grassroots and local community 

leaders to the success of the partnership. 

The organizations and individuals should believe that a collaborative process can make a 

change in the community. The political and social climate within potential partnering 

organizations should be favorable to participation (e.g., effective leadership, good history 

of cooperation with others in the community). 

When creating partnerships, the sponsoring agency often tends to seek out members 

within its own field. For example, a CPS agency may seek out other child welfare 

agencies and exclude potential partners from education, mental health, or justice. 

Businesses, community organizations, families, and representatives from a variety of 

related fields and with shared interests should be recruited to ensure diversity within the 

partnership.18 

14 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
Formal and Informal Partners 

When discussing community partnerships, the words “formal” and “informal” partners often are used, 

but these terms may have different meanings to different people. For the purposes of this manual, formal 

partners are public or private agencies that provide or fund time-limited, direct services to children, 

youth, and families to address a particular problem (e.g., CPS workers, drug and alcohol abuse treatment 

providers). Informal partners are organizations or individuals that provide ongoing support to children, 

youth, and families, but whose primary relationship with them is not necessarily providing direct services 

(e.g., faith organizations, family members, neighbors, community leaders). Depending on how involved 

the community is with the CPS system, formal and informal partners and their roles will vary from 

community to community. However, both formal and informal members should be treated as equal 

contributors toward accomplishing the mission, goals, and objectives of the partnership 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

15 
Outreach to Families Involved with the Child Welfare System 

Active outreach to families involved with the child welfare system, as well as to other community members, 

is a vital part of a partnership’s success. Families should be invited to help develop all aspects of the 

partnership so that they feel ownership of the process. They also can assist in identifying neighborhood 

resources and in recruiting local volunteers. 

Collaboration between families and professionals, however, may require additional effort on both sides. 

The assumptions, viewpoints, and experiences of each group may vary drastically from those of the other. 

Key steps families and professionals can take to promote collaboration include: 

• 	 Acknowledging the need to do things differently 

• 	 Being honest with each other and admitting their limitations and strengths 

• 	 Facing their fears and discussing them mutually 

• 	 Discussing their expectations and assumptions 

• 	 Admitting to any anger, frustration, pain, or disappointments in the past and redirecting those feelings in a positive 

way 

• 	 Maintaining a healthy sense of humor 

• 	 Remembering to focus on strengths 

• 	 Agreeing to disagree and to resolve diff erences mutually 

• 	 Acknowledging the experiences that have brought them to where they are today 

• 	 Celebrating cultural diff erences.19 

Once established, the partners can engage families and other residents in a number of ways, including: 

• 	 Introducing themselves to families and seeking their input on the partnership 

• 	 Participating in neighborhood activities and events 

• 	 Providing resources for families to implement creative ideas in the community 

• 	 Distributing items that feature partnership logos (e.g., hats, magnets) as acknowledgments of involvement and to 

promote the partnership 

• 	 Inviting families to meetings or to other partnership events 

• 	 Holding public forums to obtain input from families.20 

16 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
Involving Youth in Community Partnerships 

When possible, community partnerships should involve youth in their work, both in terms of gaining their 

perspective and providing them with opportunities to take action. Youth may benefit from this experience 

by: 

• Gaining skills they will need to become successful adults 

• Creating new relationships with adults and peers, further connecting them to their community and enlarging their 

support network 

• Gaining a better understanding of their community and its diversity 

• Acquiring a more positive stature in the community 

• Beginning to view the world, and their ability to affect it, in a more positive way 

• Feeling needed and useful 

• Feeling enhanced power, autonomy, and self-esteem. 

Adults may benefi t by: 

• Feeling a stronger connection with the youth in their community 

• Gaining a better understanding of the needs of youth 

• Feeling a renewed energy for their work 

• Gaining an expanded resource base. 

Communities and partnerships may benefi t by: 

• Becoming more focused on the needs of the youth they serve 

• Absorbing the unconventional thinking of some youth, which can lead to new solutions 

• Developing potential leaders and workers who come from the community 

• Using involved youth as positive role models for other youth 

• Gaining new resources and support as youth reach out to their parents and other adults.21 

For more information on potential partners, see Appendix H, Potential Community 

Collaboration Partners. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

17 
 

ESTABLISHING LEADERSHIP 

A partnership’s leaders influence its success or failure. 

Leadership should not be confused with central 

control (i.e., being the “boss”), but rather defi ned as 

a person or group of people who are able to cultivate 

a sense of responsibility among all the participants, to 

guide the collaborative process, and to help facilitate 

the partnership’s sustainability. Th e following 

leadership attributes are important to community 

partnerships: 

• 	 Commitment to forming a partnership 

• 	 Ability to explore multiple viewpoints 

• 	 Respect and being regarded as trustworthy in the 

community 

• 	 Sensitivity to members’ personal and professional 

boundaries 

• 	 Knowledge about the problems being addressed 

by the group 

• 	 Knowledge about the community and the 

participating organizations 

• 	 Passion for the issue being addressed 

• 	 Full support and commitment of the organizations 

represented in the partnership 

• 	 Strong written and oral communication skills 

• 	 Time to invest in the partnership.22 

DEVELOPING THE STRATEGIC PLAN 

After it has been determined which individuals and 

organizations will make up the partnership, the group 

should develop a strategic plan. This helps guide the 

partnership toward achieving its goals and improving 

its performance plan. 

A strategic plan typically includes: 

• 	 A mission statement 

• 	 A results statement 

• 	 A definition of roles 

• 	 An action plan. 

Some of the ideas included in these components may 

have arisen during the assessment process. Using 

their various skills and experiences, partners can 

develop these ideas more fully during the strategic 

planning process. Members should read and agree to 

the strategic plan after it is developed and periodically 

review it in order to maintain priorities and focus, as 

well as to make any necessary changes. Additionally, 

new members should review the strategic plan—and 

any other partnership framework documents—when 

they join the partnership. 

The Mission Statement 

The mission statement provides the direction of the 

partnership. It should be easy to understand and 

to communicate to the community, stakeholders, 

and general public.23 The mission statement should 

identify and include (1) the population or the issue 

in the community that the partnership is targeting 

or addressing and (2) the partnership’s vision for 

what goals might ideally be accomplished.24 While a 

mission statement does not address the details of how 

the problem in the community will be solved, it does 

emphasize the partnership’s vision of the broader goal 

to be achieved. 

The Results Statement 

The results statement complements the mission 

statement by indicating what is needed to achieve 

the partnership’s vision, specifying expected results, 

and stating who is accountable for their achievement. 

The anticipated results should include both shortand long-term goals. For example, in a community 

18 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
partnership seeking to reduce homelessness among 

families, a short-term goal may be assessing how 

many families are homeless in the community or 

what services these families need. A long-term goal 

for that partnership may be reducing the number of 

homeless families in the community by 50 percent. 

The results statement may be developed along with 

an evaluation plan for the partnership. An evaluation 

of the efforts and the results, or outcomes, of the 

partnership is a wise investment of both time and 

resources. It will assist the partnership in determining 

whether its programs have been successful in meeting 

its goals, in understanding how it can improve 

upon its work, and in communicating the results to 

others. More information on evaluations is provided 

in Chapter 5, Measuring the Results of a Community 

Partnership. 

Th e Definition of Roles 

Members can have many roles in the partnership. 

When collaborating with CPS, individuals and 

agencies can: 

• 	 Support families before there is a need to make a 

report to CPS 

• 	 Provide services and support to families after 

CPS involvement in order to prevent a recurrence 

of abuse 

• 	 Attend child and family team meetings organized 

by CPS in order to help make decisions, 

coordinate care, and monitor progress 

• 	 Create “resource maps” to determine what 

services and supports are available to families in 

specific neighborhoods and communities and to 

identify gaps in services and supports 

• 	 Become part of a decision-making group or 

governing body that works continuously to 

improve service coordination and delivery, 

community outreach, resource development, or 

policy 

• 	 Assist in evaluation activities and development 

processes for utilizing data for decision-making 

and cross-agency planning.25 

Within the partnership, members may fulfi ll diff erent 

roles or work differently than the way they do in their 

daily professional lives. For example, CPS workers 

and their supervisors generally make the decisions 

about their cases. But in a partnership, CPS workers 

may discuss and make joint decisions with their 

community partners, possibly including families 

involved with the child welfare system. Members 

of a community partnership should be aware that 

individuals often need time to adjust to new or 

changing roles. 

The Action Plan 

The action plan describes the steps needed to achieve 

the mission, goals, and objectives of the community 

partnership. It should state what needs to be done, 

when, and by whom. The action plan should 

incorporate the roles and skills of the members 

and the desired results. With a common mission 

and vision as the focus and with strong leadership 

in place, members can identify gaps in service 

delivery, needed resources, and strategies for crafting 

a comprehensive response for families in need. 

Examples of approaches addressed in action plans 

include demonstration projects, legislative or policy 

changes, or multidisciplinary boards that address cooccurring child maltreatment issues, such as domestic 

violence and substance abuse.26 

The following concepts should guide the development 

of the action plan: 

• 	 Specifi city. State very briefly what actions are 

to be taken and when they should be started 

and completed. Vague statements can result in 

activities that do not lead the partnership toward 

its specifi ed goals. 

• 	 Responsibilities. Include descriptions of 

the work to be completed, the roles and 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

19 
 

responsibilities of the partnership members, and 

the expected completion dates. 

• 	 Budget. Detail anticipated expenses and funding. 

It may be useful to organize expenditures by task 

or phase. 

• 	 Communication. Determine who is necessary 

for each action, when they need to be contacted, 

by whom, and for what purpose.27 

DEVELOPING OTHER FRAMEWORK
 

DOCUMENTS
 

Once the partnership completes its strategic plan, 


it will have a roadmap toward its vision. Th e 


partnership, however, still needs documents to help 

define its rules and culture. Just as the strategic 

plan will vary among partnerships depending on 

the needs of the community, the rules and the 

culture of the partnership will vary depending on 

the needs of its members. Two documents that 

community partnerships should consider developing 

are confidentiality regulations and memoranda of 

understanding (MOUs). 

Confi dentiality Regulations 

Organizations’ confidentiality regulations diff er. 

Members of the community partnership should 

understand each member’s legal mandates regarding 

confidentiality and openly discuss what information 

Using Evidence-Based Research to Develop Programs28 

Partnerships may want to review recent research and literature about evidence-based practices related to 

their goals and activities. Possible sources of information include: 

• Blueprints for Violence Prevention (Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence) at 

www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints 

• California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare 

www.cebc4cw.org/ 

• Guide for Child Welfare Administrators on Evidence Based Practice (National Association of Public Child Welfare 

Administrators) at 

www.aphsa.org/home/doc/Guide-for-Evidence-Based-Practice.pdf 

• Model Programs Guide (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention) at 

www.dsgonline.com/mpg2.5 

• National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration) at www.nrepp.samhsa.gov 

• Promising Practices Network at www.promisingpractices.net/about_ppn.asp 

• Child Welfare Information Gateway at www.childwelfare.gov 

• Children’s Bureau Training and Technical Assistance webpage at www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/tta/index.htm. 

In addition, Identifying and Selecting Evidence-Based Interventions, published by the Substance Abuse 

and Mental Health Services Administration, offers guidance on how organizations can determine which 

evidence-based practices and programs are the best fit for their goals. This document is available at http:// 

prevention.samhsa.gov/evidencebased/evidencebased.pdf. 

Note: The inclusion of the above resources is not an endorsement of the programs they may describe, and 

each organization may use different criteria to evaluate the strength of a program’s supporting evidence. 

20 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
 

 

will be needed and how best to obtain it. Additionally, 

the partnership should establish its own confi dentiality 

rules and procedures, including definitions of what 

information is considered confidential and how to 

treat confidential information that is shared. Each 

member should sign a confi dentiality statement, 

which will help establish the boundaries for 

disclosure of sensitive information and ensure that 

confidentiality rules and procedures are understood 

and upheld. 

MOUs 

MOUs are formal agreements between two or more 

parties that outline the roles, responsibilities, and 

expectations of each party. MOUs generally are 

developed to ensure that the participants understand 

the scope and boundaries of their relationships to 

one another. In addition, MOUs should outline 

the process for any conflict resolution in case any 

differences of opinion arise among the group. See 

Appendix I, Memorandum of Understanding, for more 

information. 

ANTICIPATING CHALLENGES FOR A
 

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP
 

Even with careful preparation and commitment, 


community partnerships designed to prevent and treat 


child abuse and neglect can face unexpected obstacles. 

In order to maximize its impact, a community 

partnership should anticipate these challenges and 

develop ways to avoid or lessen their effects. Common 

challenges include competing interests, diff erences in 

operating procedures and organizational capacity, 

and the involvement of informal partners. 

Rising Above Competing Interests 

Organizations and agencies involved in partnerships 

may have a history of competing with one another 

for funding or clients. Additionally, there may be 

existing partnerships or coalitions that feel threatened 

by the presence of a new group. Since two of the 

main goals of collaboration are coordination and 

cooperation, competing interests can be a critical 

barrier to successful collaboration. Agencies often 

have different priorities, funding regulations, and 

ways of operating. The partnership’s leadership 

should be aware of these potential “turf issues” and 

address them as quickly as possible by, for example, 

appealing to the members’ sense of the common 

goal or by describing how the partnership will help 

improve the community. The leadership also may 

need to demonstrate how working collaboratively can 

best serve each partner’s own interests.29 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

21 
Lessons Learned: Coordinating Community Partnership Meetings 

Meetings may be the forum for many partnership activities and decision-making. During meetings, 

partnership members should emphasize shared expectations and open discussion so that trust can be 

established and maintained throughout the project. The following are suggestions for coordinating 

meetings: 

Before each meeting: 

• Poll members to determine the best or most convenient date, time, or location 

• Coordinate meeting logistics, such as refreshments 

• Provide any materials for the participants to review, such as the minutes of the prior meeting. 

At the beginning of each meeting: 

• State the purpose of the meeting 

• Allow members to review and to discuss proceedings and action steps from previous meetings 

• Review what needs to be accomplished, divide tasks, and assign responsibilities 

• Acknowledge contributions and participation. 

At the first meeting, discuss: 

• The ground rules for participation and decision-making, noting that the group will finalize a set of rules 

• What members want to get out of the partnership 

• The advantages and the drawbacks of the partnership 

• Any potential contributors who may not be present 

• The roles of the participants (e.g., clarifying any conflicts of interest or other relationships) 

• How to handle information (e.g., data, confidentiality, minutes, dissemination) 

• Compensation (if applicable) 

• How different traditions or cultures can be incorporated into the partnership’s proceedings and work 

• Preparing a mission statement 

• The desired results and action steps, as well as their timeframes. 

After the meeting: 

• Write and distribute the meeting minutes as soon as possible to all partnership members.30 

22 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
 

 

Decision Impasse: A Note on Confl ict Resolution 

With most groups, conflicts will occur, and effectively resolving them can strengthen a partnership. In 

collaborative work, it is important to address conflicts as or before they arise and resolve them within the 

context of the partnership by considering the following: 

• What is the confl ict about? Because many conflicts stem from different beliefs or ideologies, the members should 

separate the current conflict from larger struggles. 

• Who is being heard? When conflict arises, the partnership should make sure that all viewpoints are heard. Ask 

for input from those who may not be decided or may be reluctant to express dissent. 

• Who will resolve the confl ict? Someone who is viewed as neutral by the conflicting parties can lead a mediation 

process. It may be necessary for those involved in the conflict to meet with the mediator separately from the group 

to facilitate discussing the problem. 

• What happens next? Everyone must resume working together once the conflict is resolved. Th e partnership 

cannot always undo the damage caused by words or actions during the conflict, but it should attempt to help those 

involved reconcile, if necessary.31 

For more information on resolving conflicts, see Appendix J, Managing Conflict. 

Minimizing Differences in Operating Procedures
 

and in Organizational Capacity
 

Working within a community partnership is quite 

different from working within one’s own organization. 

In a partnership, participants are responsible for joint 

decisions and for shared interventions, as well as their 

own agency’s priorities. Every organization has its 

own policies, practices, and procedures, which may 

not necessarily be the same as those of the community 

partnership. Members of the partnership should 

identify any potential issues and bring them to the 

attention of the partnership’s governing body or to 

the group as a whole so that they may be addressed 

effectively. Differences among member organizations 

can include: 

• 	 Philosophical approaches and organizational 

missions 

• 	 Operating procedures and organizational 

capacities to serve children and families 

• 	 Policies related to confi dentiality 

• 	 Methods of meeting with and relating to families 

• 	 Approaches to case planning, types of 

interventions, tracking of progress, and case 

closure.32 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

23 
Eff ective Communication 

Effective communication is essential for establishing successful partnerships, developing a common 

purpose, helping to minimize differences, and coordinating efforts, particularly when diverse professional, 

geographic, social, or ethnic cultures work together. The following are some guidelines for eff ective 

communication: 

• Use language that is appropriate for all the participants’ levels of understanding and that supports openness, 

honesty, and cooperation. Frequently encourage members to ask for clarification if they do not understand 

something. Members also should not speak in technical terms or use acronyms or jargon without fi rst explaining 

what they mean. 

• Ensure that all partners receive information about meetings, events, and activities. Be mindful that not everyone 

has Internet or email access. 

• Document meeting proceedings and decisions, and send reports to all members. 

• Keep any communication as direct and brief as possible. Potential partners often are busy people with numerous 

roles and responsibilities. Use their time wisely. 

• Provide continuous, convenient opportunities for feedback.33 

 Involving Informal Partners
 

Formal partners may face certain challenges when 

working with informal partners, who may have 

differing cultures, values, and priorities. Challenges 

in working with informal partners can include: 

• 	 Defining their roles in order to ensure meaningful 

and appropriate involvement 

• 	 Developing explicit confidentiality policies and 

procedures for sharing case information with 

informal partners 

• 	 Incorporating the views and involvement of 

informal resources without the lead agency 

providing any guidelines for doing so 

• 	 Developing different patterns of accountability 

for informal partners regarding the fulfi llment of 

their roles and commitments 

• 	 Encouraging and sustaining their meaningful 

involvement 

• 	 Determining whether compensation will be 

provided to informal partners who are not 

involved with the partnership as a part of 

their jobs (e.g., a family member from the 

community).34 

Lessons Learned: How to Involve Informal Partners 

The following are examples from the field of ways to involve informal partners: 

• Develop significant and specific roles for and in conjunction with them 

• Discuss the shared responsibility for keeping children safe 

• Understand the levels and types of participation they seek and their motivations for becoming involved 

• Respect their roles as important members of the partnership 

• Expend the energy and resources necessary to nurture their involvement 

• Seek their input continuously.35 

24 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership
Using Volunteers 

Some informal partners, as well as other individuals who may assist the partnership but are not full 

members, participate as volunteers. Volunteers are an excellent source of support for community 

partnerships, but, as with paid staff or staff who participate as a part of another job, volunteer roles and how 

they are managed must be clearly outlined. Community partnerships may want to utilize the following in 

order to establish an effective volunteer program: 

• A designated coordinator 

• A defined volunteer program that outlines volunteers’ roles, position descriptions, boundaries, and expectations 

• A training program and supporting materials (e.g., a handbook) 

• A clear set of rules for volunteers and for staff working with volunteers 

• A recruitment and management plan 

• A recognition program, such as an annual awards ceremony.36 

As a part of their volunteer programs, partnerships also should institute a screening process. Th is process 

may vary depending on the roles of their volunteers, but the following are steps partnerships should 

consider: 

• Requiring volunteers to submit applications that provide basic information, such as contact information, past 

volunteer/career experience, references, why they want to volunteer, and their expected time commitment 

• Contacting references 

• Holding in-person interviews 

• Conducting a background check that includes criminal and CPS record checks, especially for any volunteers who 

will have contact with children or access to their records 

• Requesting verification of licensure or educational credits (e.g., proof of being a licensed clinical social worker or 

having obtained an associate’s degree), when required for the position.37 

INCORPORATING CULTURAL COMPETENCE 

Cultural sensitivity is a critical element in sustaining 

a community partnership, as well as in working 

with families, individuals, and groups outside the 

partnership. Two important principles to consider 

when working with people from different cultures are: 

• 	 Believing that diversity is a good thing and 

that having different ideals, customs, attitudes, 

practices, and beliefs does not, in and of itself, 

constitute deviance or pathology 

• 	 Accepting that everyone has biases and prejudices. 

This helps increase objectivity and guards against 

judgments affected by unconscious biases.38 

A community partnership can work to be culturally 

competent by: 

• 	 Being sensitive to cultural values and ways in 

which decisions are made 

• 	 Providing materials that are translated into other 

languages or hiring interpreters, if required by 

members of the partnership or by recipients of 

the partnership’s services 

• 	 Being respectful of others’ beliefs 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

25 
• 	 Making sure that all materials produced by the ways the partnership can better meet the needs of 

partnership are culturally appropriate these populations 

• 	 Being willing to provide training to partnership • Inviting individuals from groups served by the 

members on cultural competence partnership to join as members.39 

• 	 Being open to feedback from representatives of 

ethnic, religious, racial, and other groups about 

To access child welfare materials in Spanish, including a glossary of English to Spanish and Spanish to English 

terms, visit Child Welfare Information Gateway at www.childwelfare.gov/spanish/. 

Establishing Partnerships with Tribes 

Partnerships should ensure that they involve Tribes that are part of their communities. When working with 

Tribes, partnerships should keep in mind the cultural characteristics of the Tribes, as well as how the Tribes’ 

political status and issues (e.g., sovereignty) may affect their participation and expectations. American 

Indian and Alaska Native Tribes are recognized as separate government entities by the U.S. government. 

There are various Federal laws that govern Tribal status and rights, including several that focus on child 

welfare, such as the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Act. 

These laws determine issues such as which types of funds Tribes can directly receive, jurisdiction over child 

welfare cases, and the placement of Tribal children. Tribes may also have separate agreements with States 

and localities or be affected by laws or policies at those levels. Partnerships should be aware of Federal, 

State, and local laws and agreements that affect the rights of Tribal populations, including the impact on 

funding streams. 

The following are ways community partnerships can better work with Tribes and Tribal members: 

• Be aware of both the federally recognized and nonrecognized Tribes in their community 

• Recruit representatives from each Tribe to be in the partnership and do not expect a representative from one Tribe 

to speak for another; each Tribe has a unique culture and may have differing opinions about child welfare and 

related issues 

• Ensure that members have opportunities to learn about the culture, history, and child welfare issues of the Tribes in 

the community 

• Help enact systems change in the child welfare and related agencies to ensure that they regularly communicate with 

Tribal child welfare systems and leaders, understand Tribal issues, determine if clients have a Tribal affi liation, and 

are in compliance with applicable laws.40 

For more information about Tribal child welfare issues, visit the National Indian Child Welfare Association 

at www.nicwa.org and Child Welfare Information Gateway at www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/ 

cultural/families/indian.cfm. 

For information about incorporating cultural competence when working with families involved with the 

child welfare system, see Appendix K, Cultural Sensitivity When Working with Families. 

26 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
 

Working with Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth 

Gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) youth are significantly more likely to report being the 

victims of physical and sexual abuse than heterosexual youth.41 GLBT youth also have a higher risk of 

substance abuse, depression, dropping out of school, homelessness, depression, and suicide and may 

frequently be harassed by other youth or significant adults in their lives.42 When community partnerships 

work with GLBT youth, they should: 

• Understand that GLBT youth face similar developmental stages and challenges as heterosexual youth, but often 

have additional challenges, such as “coming out” to family and friends 

• Not assume that their stresses or other issues are necessarily caused by their sexual identity 

• Keep an open and positive attitude 

• Learn about GLBT identity development and other issues they face 

• Maintain confidentiality for all self-disclosures of being GLBT 

• Provide information, as needed, about organizations and services that support GLBT youth.43 

Additionally, partnerships can learn about how GLBT youth are perceived within the community and 

assess the partnership’s practices—and the practices of the agencies that comprise the partnership—to 

ensure that: 

• Members receive training about issues pertinent to working with GLBT youth 

• GLBT youth have the opportunity to discuss their experiences and needs with the partnership 

• Services provided by the partnership are welcoming and nonjudgmental toward GLBT youth and, when necessary, 

target specific issues they may face.44 

For more information about working with GLBT youth, visit Child Welfare Information Gateway at www. 

childwelfare.gov/systemwide/cultural/lgbtq.cfm and the National Resource Center for Permanency and 

Family Connections at www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/info_services/lgbtq-issues-and-childwelfare.html. 

For more information about how CPS agencies can work with families and other community members, 

refer to Chapter 4, Partnering with Child Protective Services. 

SECURING FUNDING AND OTHER RESOURCES 

Obtaining grants or other funding is key to building 

and sustaining the work of a community partnership. 

Exploring funding options should be an ongoing 

activity, not something that is done only when a 

funding source is about to expire. Two of the most 

common funding strategies community partnerships 

can employ are braided and blended funding. 

• Braided funding: several members provide funds 

to the partnership, but each member’s funds 

maintain their distinct requirements. The use of 

the funds is clearly defined and cannot change. 

For example, if a partner has funds that could be 

used for training and those funds are provided to 

the partnership, those funds would still need to be 

used for training. 

• Blended funding: funds provided by members 

to the partnership are pooled and do not have 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

27 
 

 

 

 

 

 

any restrictions on their use. This is more 

flexible than braided funding because the 

funds are allocated collectively and can be used 

however they are needed to achieve the goals 

of the partnership. For example, with blended 

funding, if a community agency provided funds 

to the partnership that were originally intended 

to purchase office supplies at the agency, the 

partnership would not have to use the funds to 

purchase office supplies. The funds could be 

allocated as necessary by the partnership.45 

Funders frequently require that applicants collaborate 

with other agencies and organizations before they 

can apply for funding. A community partnership 

demonstrates to potential funders that a program has 

local support, has a history of resource sharing, and is 

operating in a cost-eff ective manner.46 

Community partnerships can seek funding from 

various sources, including Federal, State, and local 

governments; foundations; businesses; communityand faith-based organizations; and individuals. For 

a comparison of typical funding sources, see Exhibit 

3-2. 

Exhibit 3-2
 

Comparison of Funding Sources47 

Funding 

Sources Advantages 

• 	 Largest source of giving 

• 	 Ongoing source one can build upon 

• 	 Once a giver, typically also an 

advocate 

• 	 May also be a volunteer 

• 	 Source of large sums of money 

• 	 Accessible, professional staff 

• 	 Clear guidelines and process 

• 	 Most likely to research your request 

• 	 Board volunteers can help, but are 

not always key 

• 	 Similar to large family foundations 

• 	 Staff may be accessible 

• 	 May fund ongoing operating expenses 

• 	 Personal influence with board 

members might help 

• 	 Guidelines often broad 

• 	 Not very concerned about grant 

format 

Individuals 

Large Family 


Foundations
 

Community 


Foundations
 

Small Family 


Foundations
 

Disadvantages 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Costly to develop (i.e., small return 

compared to eff ort) 

Hard to find such individuals, except through 

a broad-based campaign 

Risky for the inexperienced fundraiser 

Need significant assistance from the 

organization’s board and volunteers 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Often start-up funds only 

Lengthy application process 

More difficult to access through personal 

infl uence 

Proposals may be longer 

• 

• 

A particular foundation may be part of a 

larger foundation 

Most money is allocated to special funds 

• 

• 

• 

Hard to access; often no professional staff 

Often not large sums of money 

May not be possible without personal 

infl uence 

28 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
Large 

Corporations/ 

Corporate 

Foundations 

Small 

Corporations 

Federated Funds 

(e.g., United 

Way) 

Government 

Faith-based and 

Community 

Organizations 

Disadvantages 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Large sums of money are not ongoing 

Hard to get around staff 

Must be within their guidelines 

Not likely to contribute if they are not 

headquartered locally or have a strong local 

consumer base 

Often want board representation 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Small amounts of money 

Narrow range of interest 

Personal contacts are key 

Generally cannot be a start-up organization 

Must be a social service and fit a priority 

focus 

Lengthy entry process 

Time-consuming; must be part of yearly 

fundraising process with periodic in-depth 

review 

• 

• 

• 

Application procedures may be long and 

tedious 

Unspent monies may need to be returned 

Diffi cult recordkeeping 

• 

• 

In-kind services most likely 

Need to fit their service focus, usually a 

neighborhood or religious outlook 

Exhibit 3-2
 

Comparison of Funding Sources (Continued) 

Funding 

Sources Advantages 

• 	 Can be source of large sums of money 

• 	 Smaller amounts of money may be 

ongoing 

• 	 Professional staff often accessible 

• 	 May be tied to volunteer involvement 

• 	 Business strategy may be clear 

• 	 Source of cause-related marketing 

• 	 Very informal approach 

• 	 Funding may be ongoing 

• 	 Personal connections might suffi ce 

• 	 Neighborhood focus will help 

• 	 Steady source of relatively large sums 

of money 

• 	 Clear process 

• 	 Professional staff 

• 	 Large sums of money possible 

• 	 Clear process 

• 	 Political clout can help 

• 	 May be source of ongoing funding 

• 	 Often looking for group projects 

When attempting to secure funding, especially 

from foundation and corporate sources, community 

partnerships should keep in mind that funders often 

value applicants that: 

• 	 Have a mission and services that match the 

funders’ goals or interests 

• 	 Work with other organizations and avoid 

duplicating eff orts 

• 	 Will continuously communicate with them, 

reporting on progress and achievements and any 

unforeseen challenges that aff ect success 

• 	 Will recognize their contribution and improve 

their public image 

• 	 Have a history of stability, strong leadership, and 

eff ective governance 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

29 
 

• 	 Are focused on and can demonstrate results and 

have a record of success 

• 	 Are fiscally sound and use resources eff ectively 

• 	 Have multiple sources of support (e.g., in-kind 

donations, other grants, volunteers).48 

Additionally, community partnerships should be 

aware of common “pet peeves” of funders, such as: 

• 	 Failing to follow the grant proposal guidelines 

• 	 Not tailoring requests to specific funders (e.g., 

obviously using form letters) 

• 	 Ignoring preferred procedures (e.g., contacting 

corporate executives directly rather than fi rst 

approaching the donations department) 

• 	 Asking for an amount of money that is inconsistent 

with the applicant’s or funder’s average gift size 

(e.g., asking for $1 million when the partnership 

has an annual budget of $250,000 or when the 

funder generally provides awards of $50,000 or 

less) 

• 	 Submitting grant proposals with typos, misspelled 

words, or poor grammar 

• 	 Failing to articulate clear goals and anticipated 

results 

• 	 Not doing their homework before they ask for 

support (e.g., requesting funds for a child welfare 

program when the funder only provides awards 

for animal rescue organizations).49 

Community partnerships also can secure nonfi nancial 

or in-kind resources to achieve their goals. Th ese 

resources may include items such as time from 

volunteers, office space, food donated by restaurants, 

or supplies. These types of resources can be just as 

integral to the partnership as monetary resources. 

Community partnerships also can create MOUs to 

establish the resources that each agency or individual 

will provide. (For more information on MOUs, 

see Appendix I, Memorandum of Understanding.) 

Additionally, community partnerships should 

establish who in the partnership will be responsible for 

collecting, dispersing, and otherwise managing funds. 

For example, will one partner have responsibility for 

the funds, will a separate entity be created to manage 

them, or will each partner maintain control of its own 

funds and disperse them as needed?50 Community 

partnerships also should develop any other necessary 

guidelines regarding how funds can be used or 

managed. 

For more information about funding, including 

sources of Federal, State, foundation, and corporate 

funding and grant writing, visit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway at www.childwelfare. 

gov/systemwide/funding/, and see Appendix L, 

Funding Resources for Community Partnerships. 

SUSTAINING A COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP 

Sustaining community partnerships is a continual 

challenge. They evolve and add or remove members 

as the needs of CPS, the community, or the target 

population change. The partnership should work to 

maintain the interest and the commitment of existing 

members, as well as to seek out, when necessary, new 

members who embrace the vision of the partnership 

(often known as “new blood”). The partnership also 

should continuously work to obtain the resources 

necessary to carry out its activities and anticipate 

challenges that may arise. 

In order to sustain a community partnership, it is 

necessary to keep members interested and involved. 

There are numerous ways to maintain high interest, 

including: 

• 	 Ensuring that the meetings are productive, brief, 

and focused 

• 	 Staying on track and continuing to work toward 

the goals outlined in the strategic plan 

30 Building and Sustaining the Foundation for a Community Partnership 
• 	 Highlighting successes and milestones so that activities or programs or the demographics of the 

members can see progress and achievements population may change) 

• 	 Being flexible and willing to adapt to changes • Asking members for their input on ways the 

in the community (e.g., political or legislative partnership can be improved. 

changes may lead to opportunities for new 

Collaboration Self-Assessment 

Partnerships can use self-assessments to gauge their readiness or progress and to determine adjustments 

that might improve their success. Children and Family Futures developed the Collaborative Values 

Inventory to help multidisciplinary professionals develop common principles for their work together and 

the Collaborative Capacity Instrument to help staff at child welfare and substance use disorder agencies 

assess their readiness to work more closely with each other. Web-based and printable versions of the selfassessments can be found at www.cff utures.org/resources/policy-tools. 

An additional instrument can be found in Appendix M, Community Partnership Self Assessment. 

Twenty Factors for Successful Partnerships51 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

31 

 

CHAPTER 4 

Partnering with Child 

Protective Services 

In This Chapter 

• 	 Changing the CPS response to child 

maltreatment 

• 	 The CPS process 

• 	 Differential response systems 

• 	 Enhancing the relationship between CPS and 

service providers 

• 	 Involving families and communities 

• 	 Working with military families 

As a community partnership develops, child 

protective services (CPS), often as a lead agency, 

may need to adapt the way it responds to cases of 

child maltreatment and the way it interacts with 

other agencies and the broader community. 

CHANGING THE CPS RESPONSE TO
 

MALTREATMENT
 

Social services agencies and processes are not always 


structured to work in partnership with other agencies, 


groups, or individuals. In order to ease the transition 


into a community partnership, agencies may need to 

make changes at varying systemic or practice levels, 

including how they respond to cases. 

Forging community partnerships may necessitate 

changes in the CPS response to cases. Th e traditional 

response to child maltreatment has been from a single 

agency and generally focuses on obtaining the facts 

and information about a child abuse or neglect case 

and determining whether the child was or is at risk of 

being maltreated. Exhibit 4-1 shows the traditional 

structure of the CPS process. The current shift, 

however, is toward a response that integrates CPS, 

other agencies and service providers, families, and 

the community. Partnerships can engage families in 

a more comprehensive manner and include families’ 

existing support systems, such as extended families 

or faith communities. Some of the lower risk cases 

previously served by CPS (or not served at all) might 

become the responsibility of other agencies in the 

partnership, as appropriate. For example, agencies 

that specialize in substance abuse assessment and 

treatment could perform the initial intake for cases 

in which substance abuse is the primary cause for 

the need to protect the children. These agencies can 

provide the services that the families need, as well 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

33 
For information about how the child welfare system, substance use disorder treatment providers, and the 

courts can partner to improve the response to families affected by substance use disorders, refer to the 

following materials developed by the National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare: 

• 	 Screening and Assessment for Family Engagement, Retention, and Recovery (SAFERR) at www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/ 

fi les/SAFERR.pdf 

• 	 Improving System Linkages at www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/improving/improving-linkages-2.aspx 

• 	 Framework and Policy Tools for Improving Linkages Between Alcohol and Drug Services, Child Welfare Services, and 

Dependency Courts at www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/fi les/NewFramework.pdf. 

For information about how faith-based organizations can be involved in community partnerships, see 

Appendix N, Faith-based Organizations and Community Involvement. 

34 Partnering with Child Protective Services 
Exhibit 4-1 

The CPS Process 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

35 
 

as work with CPS to obtain services to protect the 

children.52 

To achieve this type of shift, many States and other 

jurisdictions use a differential response system (also 

known as “dual-track,” “multi-track,” “multiple 

response,” or “alternative response”), which permits 

CPS to respond according to the degree of risk 

present and the family’s need for support services. 

For instance, rather than a traditional investigation 

of all child maltreatment reports, investigations 

may be reserved for more severe allegations or for 

cases in which the parents are not cooperative. In 

less severe cases in which the parents are willing to 

receive assistance, both CPS and the families may 

benefit from a less adversarial process whose goals are 

to assess the families’ needs and connect them with 

the appropriate services.53 A statutory change at the 

State or local level might be required to have more 

than one type of response to reports of maltreatment. 

See Exhibit 4-2 for an illustration of a diff erential 

response system. 

Other ways in which States and other jurisdictions 

are changing their response to cases of suspected child 

maltreatment include: 

• 	 Using co-located substance abuse screeners in 

child welfare offices 

• 	 Having law enforcement officers investigate 

serious physical and sexual abuse cases either 

alone or with child welfare staff 

• 	 Utilizing child advocacy centers to conduct 

multidisciplinary investigations for cases of 

serious physical or sexual abuse. 

For additional information about different types of child welfare practice, see the National Quality 

Improvement Center on Differential Response in Child Protective Services at www.diff erential 

responseqic.org/ and Appendix O, Child Welfare Practice Comparison: Conventional, Family-centered, and 

Community-centered. 

36 Partnering with Child Protective Services 
Exhibit 4-2 

Differential Response System54 

Report screened to 

determine appropriateness 

of child welfare agency 

intervention 

Report is screened out. 

Referral for other community 

services may be made. 

Alternative Response Screening 

1. Is there an administrative rule requiring 

that the report be investigated? 

2. Are there other factors that would 

necessitate an investigation? Family Assessment 

1. Safety and Risk Assessments 

2. Complete assessment of family 

strengths, needs and resources. 

Investigation 

(Is this a Child in Need of Protective Services?) 

1. Safety and Risk Assessments 

2. Gathering of Evidence 

Assessment Outcome 

Disposition 

Re. Child in Need of 

Protective Services 

Family declines 

needed services 

Voluntary Services 

Recommended Services are 

Needed 

Agency 

assesses that 

services are 

needed to 

maintain child 

safely at home. 

Unsubstantiated Substantiated 

No Yes 

No 

Yes 

No Services 

No services 

needed 

Family and 

agency agree 

upon services 

Family 

declines 

services 

Family 

accepts 

needed 

services 

Category IV 

Voluntary 

services 

recommended 

Category V 

No services are 

needed 

Category I 

Removal 

required 

Category II 

Court mandated 

services 

required 

Category III 

Services are 

needed 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

37 
 

 

 

Changing Staff Organization and Development 

A CPS agency can enhance its capacity to work in a community partnership by restructuring the way it 

organizes and develops its staff. One way to achieve this is by stationing CPS staff in schools, community 

centers, or family resource centers so that they are working within the community setting. Th e following 

are tips for placing CPS workers in community settings: 

• Establish a team, including frontline workers, to outline the goals, structure, and policies that will shape this type 

of position 

• Consider the logistical requirements, such as office space, equipment, and communication 

• Approach potential partners in other fields (e.g., mental health, domestic violence, substance abuse) about the 

possibility of co-locating staff in the community 

• Start with staff who are already proponents of this approach 

• Before staff are placed in the community setting, research what organizations, services, and supports are already 

available in the community, how they are compatible with what the agency can provide, and how they are valued. 

Other ways to make staff and organizational changes include: 

• Restructuring the organization of frontline workers by geographical area or by specialization 

• Generating position descriptions, employee evaluation factors, and caseload size criteria that foster partnership 

activities 

• Cross-training staff from different agencies and having CPS workers shadow staff from partner agencies, as 

discussed later in this chapter 

• Providing staff with compensatory time for working with the partnership outside of their normal working hours.55 

ENHANCING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN 

CPS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS 

Service providers and CPS workers, despite any 

differences, share one primary goal—serving children 

and families. To achieve this mutual goal, CPS 

workers can take the initiative to build collaborative 

relationships with service providers and to develop a 

common understanding of their respective roles and 

responsibilities. The following sections outline how 

this can be achieved. 

Shadowing Activities 

Visiting another practitioner’s or organization’s office 

can be a simple but effective way to build relationships. 

Similarly, CPS workers can invite service providers to 

listen in on child abuse hotline calls or to accompany 

them on a child abuse investigation, provided this is 

allowed and confidentiality procedures are followed. 

By doing so, service providers can learn when CPS 

accepts a referral for assessment, how they conduct 

an assessment to determine child safety, and how 

they make the decision that a case meets the legal 

definitions for abuse or neglect. The partners will see 

that many of the families entering the CPS system 

have multiple needs and that CPS workers face the 

difficult task of assessing and responding to several 

problems in addition to child maltreatment, such 

as substance abuse, housing concerns, or domestic 

violence. 

Cross-training Opportunities 

Regardless of who hosts the training or its focus, 


cross-training allows CPS workers and other service 


providers to receive and provide relevant information 


38 Partnering with Child Protective Services 
 

 

Community Partnership Training for Child Welfare Workers 

The National Child Welfare Resource Center for Family-Centered Practice, with assistance from the State 

of Maryland Department of Human Resources, In-Home Services, and Department of Social Services staff 

from Baltimore City, developed a curriculum to provide child welfare workers with the knowledge, values, 

and skills to create, use, and sustain community partnerships. To view the curriculum, go to http://tatis. 

muskie.usm.maine.edu/pubs/pubdetailWtemp.asp?PUB_ID=B060059. 

simultaneously about their respective processes 

and subject areas. CPS workers can invite service 

providers to inservice trainings where they provide 

important information regarding the defi nitions of 

child maltreatment, the legal mandate CPS must 

follow, the criteria for reporting to CPS, and the 

CPS process. Th is offers an opportunity to clarify 

any misconceptions about roles, responsibilities, 

and authority. CPS workers likely will see that 

some partner agencies struggle with mandatory 

reporting requirements because they fear that 

victims will be “revictimized,” that it will cause the 

family to lose its children, or that they are breaking 

client confidentiality. CPS workers can ease such 

apprehensions by explaining the criteria for case 

substantiation, the reasons behind protective custody 

decisions, and the required legal steps in the child 

protection process. Further, CPS workers can off er 

to help partner agencies develop protocols and staff 

trainings on mandatory reporting to CPS. Similarly, 

service providers and other organizations can invite 

CPS workers to relevant trainings, such as on 

appropriate safety measures for victims of domestic 

violence, perpetrator intervention programs, and 

community aftercare programs for families dealing 

with maltreatment. 

Integrating Case Practice Knowledge 

and Expertise 

CPS workers can include other service providers in 

making case decisions and hold interagency staff 

meetings at critical decision-making points. It also 

may be helpful to have the service providers facilitate 

family group decision-making sessions for CPS 

cases. (Family group decision-making is discussed in 

more detail later in this chapter.) This integration of 

specialized knowledge contributes to more informed 

decisions, thereby benefiting the safety and wellbeing of all family members. It also engages service 

providers in the CPS process, helps them understand 

the Adoption and Safe Families Act timelines (e.g., 

the requirement to initiate the termination of 

parental rights if a child has been removed from the 

home for 15 of the last 22 months), and increases 

their awareness of service planning efforts. Service 

providers can also observe juvenile court proceedings 

to learn when protective custody is necessary, 

the implications of reunifi cation efforts, and the 

conditions for recommending termination of parental 

rights. 

Sharing Information 

Information sharing and confi dentiality issues 

frequently present barriers to collaboration and can 

generate negative stereotypes. Service providers 

often may be considered uncooperative with CPS 

and overly protective of their clients. On the other 

hand, the service providers may perceive CPS workers 

as unwilling to share information when they will 

not provide information about shared clients. CPS 

workers can help counteract this misconception by 

explaining that case record information is protected 

through agency policy or statutes limiting their 

ability to share information. They can collaborate 

by informing service providers of case decisions 

(when appropriate and allowed), explaining the 

CPS process, consulting with them on practice 

approaches, and including them in case planning. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

39 
Service providers can explain to CPS workers their 

confidentiality policies and their clients’ expectations 

that the sensitive information they discuss will 

not be used against them. They can also ask CPS 

workers for recommendations for developing practice 

guidelines for reporting to CPS and for sharing client 

information. In some instances, clients may be asked 

to sign consent forms so that case information may be 

shared with other service providers.56 (For additional 

information on consent forms, see Exhibit 4-3. For a 

sample form, see Appendix P, Sample Consent Form.) 

INVOLVING FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES 

A key component of a successful community 

partnership is the involvement of families, youth, 

and children. Active engagement and involvement 

of families is too vast a subject to be explored fully 

in this manual, but systems of care and family group 

decision-making are two models currently used in 

child welfare practice that incorporate many of the 

factors discussed throughout this chapter. 

Systems of Care 

Systems of care is a framework that builds upon 


the idea of community partnerships by using a 


multidisciplinary, integrated approach to support 

children and families who have complex needs. A 

child-centered, family-focused, community-based, 

and culturally and linguistically competent philosophy 

guides the systems of care framework. (For a full 

description of the core values and principles of the 

systems of care approach, see Appendix Q, Systems of 

Care Values and Principles.) Communities embracing 

these values bring together various agencies, families, 

and other formal and informal support systems 

to share resources and responsibilities in order to 

provide seamless services and supports to children 

and families. It also can be a catalyst for changing the 

way public agencies organize, purchase, and provide 

services for children and families with multiple needs. 

This approach enables cross-agency coordination 

of services regardless of where or how children and 

families enter the system. To build systems of care, 

partners should: 

• 	 Agree on common goals, values, and principles, 

including safety, permanency, and well-being, 

that will guide their activities 

• 	 Develop a shared infrastructure to coordinate 

efforts toward these common goals 

• 	 Work within that infrastructure to ensure the 

availability of a high-quality array of communityExhibit 4-3 

Developing and Using Consent Forms 

The following may be helpful to community partnerships when developing and using consent forms: 

• Include all necessary parties. The consent form should include all parties that may need access to case 

information (e.g., CPS workers, attorneys, service organizations, substance abuse treatment professionals), as well 

as all parties required to grant that access (e.g., all legal caregivers or guardians, the child, guardian ad litem). 

• Define the information to be shared. The consent form should define and limit the information that can be 

shared between parties and include the purpose for the information sharing. 

• Specify the duration of the consent. The form should specify a date, event (e.g., filing of termination of parental 

rights), or condition (e.g., child returns to biological family) for the consent to expire. 

• Obtain consent as early as possible. This helps ensure that information can reach the appropriate parties early in 

the case, intervention, or assistance process, which can save valuable time and assist in creating a collaborative and 

comprehensive process.57 

40 Partnering with Child Protective Services 
• 

 

 

based services to support families and to preserve 

children safely in their homes and communities.58 

For more information on systems of care, visit 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/reform/soc/. 

Family Group Decision-Making
 

Families who believe that their feelings and concerns 

are heard are more likely to be engaged. Th erefore, 

decisions regarding outcomes, goals, and tasks should 

be a collaborative process involving the CPS worker, 

family, family network, and other providers. CPS 

workers should help the family maintain a realistic 

perspective on what can be accomplished and on how 

long it will take. 

Family group decision-making includes various 

approaches in which family members are brought 

together to make decisions about the care of their 

children and to develop a plan for services. Several 

other names may be used for this type of intervention, 

including family team conferencing, family team 

meetings, family group conferencing, family team 

decision-making, family unity meetings, and team 

decision-making. There are some diff erences among 

these approaches, but most include several phases and 

often a trained facilitator or coordinator.59 

In family group decision-making, the family, service 

providers, and other individuals or agencies of the 

family’s choosing discuss a plan for the protection of 

the child. The goal is to develop a case plan based on 

the child’s safety and needs, the family’s priorities, and 

the availability of services and resources to support 

the necessary changes. The meetings can be organized 

by any member of the partnership and should be 

attended by all relevant partner agencies.60 

Involving the family has many benefits, among them: 

• 	 Enhancing the essential helping relationship 

because the family’s feelings and concerns have 

been heard, respected, and considered 

• 	 Facilitating the family’s investment in and 

commitment to the outcomes, goals, and tasks 

• 	 Empowering parents or caregivers to take 

the necessary action to change the behaviors 

and conditions that contribute to the risk of 

maltreatment 

• 	 Maintaining family continuity and connection 

• 	 Ensuring that the agency and family are working 

toward the same end.61 

For more information about family group decisionmaking, visit the National Resource Center for 

Permanency and Family Connections website at 

www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/info_ 

services/family-group-conferencing.html. 

For additional information about how CPS and service providers can work with families and communities 

to strengthen families and prevent maltreatment, view the Strengthening Families and Communities: 2010 

Resource Guide at www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/res_guide_2010/. This document includes information 

about engaging communities, discusses protective factors, and offers tip sheets (in both English and 

Spanish) for parents and caregivers. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

41 
Working with Military Families 

Community partnerships, as well as the traditional child welfare system, should be aware of the unique 

experiences and situations of military families that may affect the prevention of and response to child 

maltreatment. In addition to stress factors experienced by many civilian families (e.g., fi nances, careers), 

military families may be affected by the deployment of members to combat duty, as well as their 

reintegration. Deployment is associated with increased stress in nondeployed parents and stress and 

behavioral problems in children—all of which increase the risk of child maltreatment.62 Recent studies 

have shown that levels of child maltreatment among military families increase during deployments and that 

nonmilitary caretakers were most often the perpetrator.63 

The military, as well as civilian organizations and agencies, provide prevention, treatment, and outreach 

services specifically for military families at risk for child maltreatment. In 1984, the Department of 

Defense established the Family Advocacy Program (FAP) to address child maltreatment and domestic 

violence in military families. Each military branch has its own FAP, and local FAPs are located on military 

bases. FAPs work closely with military command, military law enforcement, medical staff, family center 

personnel, chaplains, and civilian organizations (such as CPS) to assist children and families.64 FAPs may 

provide a variety of services, including stress management, parent education, conflict resolution, safety 

education, and victim advocacy and support. 

Military families can report suspected child maltreatment to the Department of Defense Child Abuse 

Safety and Violation Hotline at (800) 336-4592, to their local FAP (visit MilitaryHOMEFRONT at 

www.militaryinstallations.dod.mil to find local FAP contact information), or to their State’s child abuse 

and neglect reporting hotline (see Appendix C, State Telephone Numbers for Reporting Suspected Child 

Maltreatment). If the FAP is contacted first, it will alert the local CPS agency and work with that agency to 

investigate the suspected maltreatment. 

For additional information about military support for children and families, visit www.militaryhomefront. 

dod.mil/. 

42 Partnering with Child Protective Services 
 

CHAPTER 5 

Measuring the Results 

of a Community Partnership 

In This Chapter 

• 

• 

• 

Understanding the importance of an 

evaluation 

Engaging partners in the evaluation 

Conducting an evaluation 

– Prepare 

– Develop the logic model and evaluation 

plan 

– Collect data 

– Analyze data 

– Share and use the results 

Evaluation should be built into any program 

that provides supportive services to children 

and families. Conducting an evaluation, therefore, 

should be a part of any community partnership. It 

is not a one-time-only activity, but a cyclical process 

that involves careful thought about the people being 

served, the challenges they face, and the changes that 

the partnership’s services might bring. Evaluation 

allows partnerships and programs to measure their 

results and to determine if they are achieving their 

goals. But the process does not end there. Rather, 

good evaluation requires reflecting upon what has 

been learned and adjusting the services, programs, 

or partnership accordingly. The net result will be 

stronger and more effective community-based child 

abuse prevention programs.65 

Partnerships that receive funding from a Federal 

grant or contract, and many programs receiving 

State, local, or private funds, are required to collect 

data in order to demonstrate the impact of their 

projects. Organizations’ experience in data collection 

and evaluation can range from developing quasiexperimental research projects to having minimal or 

no experience. 

UNDERSTANDING THE IMPORTANCE OF AN
 

EVALUATION
 

An evaluation serves a variety of purposes and can 

enhance the work of the community partnership. 

It should be a shared process among all the partners 

and key stakeholders and does not need to be timeconsuming or expensive to be useful. Although 

funders may require an evaluation, the children, 

families, and communities affected also deserve this 

investment of time, money, and effort so that they 

understand the effectiveness of the programs intended 

to serve them. Evaluation helps: 

• 	 Determine what is and is not working 

• 	 Show funders and the community what the 

partnership does and how it benefi ts the 

community 

• 	 Raise additional money for the partnership 

program by providing evidence of its eff ectiveness 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

43 
 

• 	 Improve the partners’ work by identifying Partnerships should identify clear outcomes and 

strengths and weaknesses	 indicators to help answer whether and how the 

practices and services are working, as well as how or 

• 	 Add to the existing knowledge in the child welfare 

and human services fi elds.66 

if they should be adjusted when it appears that the

desired outcomes are not being reached. 

Engaging Partners in the Evaluation 

The following strategies may help a partnership engage its members in the evaluation: 

• Demystify evaluation by explaining that it does not have to be difficult and is something that everyone can do 

• Explain that evaluation is a way to answer questions and obtain information that can be useful to the partnership, 

such as uncovering its strengths and weaknesses and making needed changes (i.e., how does the partnership know if 

what it is doing works?) 

• Have members think about ways in which evaluation can help the partnership improve and achieve its goals 

• Brainstorm ways that evaluation can serve the partnership’s interests, such as giving members information that they 

can bring back to their agencies or organizations in order to gain more support 

• Integrate evaluation into day-to-day work so that it is not an overwhelming task to be done at the end of the 

partnership or project. 

• Share information about the effect that evaluations of other initiatives have had on funding, support, public 

visibility, and other important factors. For example, only programs that have been evaluated can be called 

“evidence-based.67 

CONDUCTING AN EVALUATION 

The scope and complexity of an evaluation can vary 

greatly and depend on the needs and the capabilities 

of the organizations involved. The following basic 

steps to conducting an evaluation were adapted from 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Administration for Children and Families materials 

and the Evaluation Toolkit from the FRIENDS 

National Resource Center for Community-based 

Child Abuse Prevention.68 They are applicable to all 

evaluations, no matter their size or complexity. 

Prepare for the Evaluation 

All evaluations deserve careful planning. Since 


members of the partnership have a stake in the results 


and will likely be assisting in the implementation 


of the evaluation, they should all be involved in its 

planning. This includes a discussion of: 

• 	 The evaluation management and the timeline 

• 	 How the results will be used 

• 	 The potential challenges and facilitators 

• 	 The necessary resources, including funds and 

time 

• 	 Any prior evaluation efforts that may be similar 

in scope and issue area 

• 	 Whether to include outside organizations or 

individuals who have additional experience with 

evaluations (i.e., an independent evaluator).69 

44 Measuring the Results of a Community Partnership 
Develop a Logic Model
 

A logic model is a “map” of the partnership’s 

program. It is a simple, understandable illustration 

of what the program does, why it does it, and how 

to know if the program is successful. There are a 

wide variety of logic model formats, but most show 

the relationships between a partnership’s inputs (e.g., 

staff, funds), the outputs (e.g., partnership activities, 

services provided), and the outcomes that result from 

the program (e.g., increased public awareness of the 

dangers of child neglect, improved parenting skills, 

reduced family violence). A logic model can help 

the partners determine what will be measured during 

an evaluation and also can be useful in the planning 

stages of a community partnership. Exhibit 5-1 

shows an example of a logic model. 

Exhibit 5-1 

A Logic Model70 

The core components in this model are as follows: 

1. The situation and priorities assessment includes an analysis of the problem to be addressed, the partnership’s

priorities, and how factors such as the partnership’s mission statement and values will affect the solution. 

2. The inputs are the resources, the contributions, and the investments that go into the program. 

3. The outputs are the activities, the services, the events, and the products that reach the children and families who 

participate or who are targeted. 

4. The outcomes are the results or the changes for the individuals, the groups, the communities, the organizations, 

or the systems. 

5. The assumptions are the beliefs the partnership members have about the program, the people involved, and the 

context and the way in which the members think the program will work. 

6. The external factors are the environment in which the program exists and includes those factors that interact 

with and that influence the program’s actions and outcomes (e.g., the economy, the neighborhoods, grassroots 

support). 

For more information on logic models, including a logic model builder, visit the Child Welfare Information 

Gateway website at www.childwelfare.gov/preventing/developing/toolkit/. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 45

to Child Maltreatment 
 

Develop an Evaluation Plan
 

To help the partnership determine if it is achieving 

its goals, its members can use the logic model to 

develop measurable indicators of success or progress 

(e.g., decreasing the number of child maltreatment 

recurrences).  They also should determine how to 

collect this information, such as using: 

• Surveys and questionnaires 

• Interviews 

• Standardized tests and instruments 

• Observations 

• Focus groups 

• Case studies 

• Program records 

• Existing data.71 

The measurement tools can be as simple and basic 

as staff observations and self-reported participant 

satisfaction surveys, or they may include more 

complicated methods, such as standardized tests. 

For an annotated list of measurement tools, go to 

http://friendsnrc.org/outcome/toolkit/annot. 

htm. Also, refer to Appendix R, Sample Evaluation 

Implementation Plan. 

Collect Data 

Data for the evaluation should be collected at 


appropriate intervals. Data sometimes are collected 


only once during the evaluation, while other data 


may be gathered on a more regular basis. In order 

to preserve the credibility (or “integrity”) of the 

evaluation, the data collection should be completed 

on schedule and as planned. The partnership should 

keep in mind any legal or ethical issues, such as 

confidentiality and consent, which may arise when 

collecting data. 

Analyze the Data 

The partnership should organize and analyze the data 

once all necessary information has been collected. Th e 

presentation of the data does not need be complicated 

to be meaningful. If the partnership wants to conduct 

a more indepth analysis of the data, but does not have 

any members who are experienced in this area, it 

may want to consult with outside resources, such as 

a university. 

The faculty, staff, or students from a local college or 

university who are involved with the issues being 

addressed can be valuable resources for a partnership. 

For example, in Cook County, Illinois, graduate 

students in social work were involved in community 

partnerships. The students used data about the 

partnerships’ activities for their theses and for program 

evaluation, giving the partnerships the benefits of the 

students’ expertise and analysis.72 

Share and Use the Results 

Once the data have been collected and analyzed, the 

results should be shared with the partnership, the 

stakeholders, the funding sources, the community, 

and other relevant outside sources. Th e results 

of the evaluation should assist the partnership 

Institutional Review Boards (IRB) 

Before they can begin, many evaluations are required to participate in a hearing before an IRB. This is a 

committee of researchers, community advocates, and others that ensures that an evaluation is ethical and 

that the rights of the participants in the study are protected.73 The partnership’s evaluator or funder will be 

able to provide guidance on whether an IRB is required. 

46 Measuring the Results of a Community Partnership 
 

in strengthening its activities and in serving the 

community better. Tips to keep in mind when 

sharing the results include: 

• 	 Remember that a picture (graph, table, or photo) 

is often better than a lot of numbers and words 

• 	 Ensure that each graph or table asks a question 

and then answers it 

• 	 Be concise 

• 	 Offer explanations or possible reasons for negative 

fi ndings 

• 	 Write a bulleted summary at the beginning or 

end (no more than 1–2 pages) 

• 	 Close the report with one or two stories to enliven 

the report and to “put a face” on the statistics 

• 	 Present the report to the board and staff before 

releasing it to the public.74 

It is important to remember that the primary reason 

for the partnership’s evaluation is to improve services to 

children and families. Sharing the results in a report 

or a presentation allows the partnership to refl ect on 

how services should be strengthened or altered to 

meet the needs of families better. 

CONCLUSION 

Because of their ability to make the response to child 

abuse and neglect more comprehensive, effi cient, and 

inclusive, community partnerships are a promising 

approach to improving the safety, permanency, 

and well-being of children. When developing and 

sustaining community partnerships, the members 

frequently are required to shift from their traditional 

roles and to work in a more collaborative manner. 

This may not always come naturally to members of a 

partnership, but through their deep commitment to 

child, family, and community well-being, they will be 

able to improve their response to the complex issue of 

child maltreatment. 

For additional information about community 

partnerships, refer to Appendix S, Community 

Partnership Resources. 

For more information about conducting an 

evaluation, visit www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ 

opre/other_resrch/pm_guide_eval/index. 

html. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

47 

Endnotes
 

1	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Administration for Children and Families (ACF). 

(2010). Child maltreatment 2008. Available: www. 

acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm08/index.htm. 

2	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

ACF. (2005a). National Survey of Child and 

Adolescent Well-being (NSCAW): CPS sample 

component wave 1 data analysis report. Available: 

www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/abuse_neglect/ 

nscaw/reports/cps_sample/cps_title.html; U.S. 

Government Accountability Offi ce. (2006). Child 

welfare: Improving social service program, training, 

and technical assistance information would help 

address long-standing service-level and workforce 

challenges (GAO-07-75). Available: www.gao.gov/ 

new.items/d0775.pdf. 

3	 Walter R. McDonald & Associates, Inc. (2001). 

National Study of Child Protective Services Systems 

and Reform Efforts: Literature review. Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, ACF, & U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services, Office of Assistant 

Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE); 

National Resource Center for Family-Centered 

Practice. (2000). Community collaborations: A 

growing promise in child welfare. Best Practice, 

Next Practice, 1(2), 1–3; National Child 

Welfare Resource Center for Organizational 

Improvement. (2005a). Stakeholder involvement 

in child welfare. Child Welfare Matters. Available: 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/rcpdfs/ 

cwmatters2.pdf; Center for the Study of Social 

Policy, Center for Community Partnerships in 

Child Welfare. (2003). Child welfare summit: 

Looking to the future: An examination of the 

state of child welfare and recommendations for 

action. Available: www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/CSSP_ 

ChildWelfare_FINAL.pdf. 

4	 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2000). 

Communities have the power to prevent child abuse 

and neglect. Available: http://cbexpress.acf.hhs. 

gov/articles.cfm?&issue_id=2000-03&article_ 

id=37. 

5	 Winer, M., & Ray, K. (1994). Collaboration 

handbook: Creating, sustaining, and enjoying the 

journey (p. 24). Saint Paul, MN: Amherst H. 

Wilder Foundation. 

6	 Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2005a). Building 

community partnerships, step by step. Available: 

www.aecf.org/upload/pdffiles/familytofamily/ 

bcp_step_by_step.pdf. 

7	 National Child Welfare Resource Center 

for Organizational Improvement. (2005b). 

Developing community partnerships in child 

welfare. Available: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/ 

helpkids/rcpdfs/CWPartners.pdf. 

8	 U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, ACF, & U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services, ASPE. (2001). National 

Study of Child Protective Services Systems and 

Reform Efforts: Literature review. Available: 

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/protective01; Schene, P. 

(2005). The emergence of diff erential response. 

Protecting Children, 20(2 and 3). Available: www. 

americanhumane.org/site/DocServer/PSchene_ 

article.pdf?docID=4529; Waldofogel, J. (1998). 

Rethinking the paradigm for child protection. 

Future of children, 8(1), 104–119; U.S. General 

Accounting Office. (1997). Child protective 

services: Complex challenges require new strategies. 

Washington, DC: Author; Farrow, F. (1997a). 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

49 
Child protection: Building community partnerships. 

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. 

9 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2008). 

Differential response to reports of child abuse and 

neglect. Available: www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/ 

issue_briefs/diff erential_response/ index.cfm. 

10	 National Child Welfare Resource Center for 

Family-Centered Practice. (2000). 

11	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

ACF, & U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, ASPE. (2001); U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, ACF, & U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services, 

ASPE. (2003). National Study of Child Protective 

Services Systems and Reform Efforts: Findings on local 

CPS practices. Available: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/ 

CPS-status03/cps-practices03; Merkel-Holguin, 

L., Kaplan, C., & Kwak, A. (2006). National Study 

on Differential Response in Child Welfare [Online]. 

Available: www.americanhumane.org/site/ 

DocServer/National_Study.pdf?docID=4761. 

12	 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2009). 

Collaborating with your community. Available: 

www.childwelfare.gov/preventing/developing/ 

community.cfm; Taylor-Powell, E., Rossing, B., 

& Geran, J. (1998). Evaluating collaboratives: 

Reaching the potential. Madison, WI: University 

of Wisconsin-Extension; Promising Practices 

Network. (2004). Forming, funding, and 

maintaining partnerships and collaborations. Santa 

Monica, CA: RAND Corporation 

13	 Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2005a). 

14	 Kot, V., Bruner, C., & Scott, S. (2001). Citizen 

review panels for the child protective system: 

Guidelines and protocols. Chicago: Prevent Child 

Abuse America. 

15	 Kelly, K. J., Plested, B. A., Edwards, R. W., Jumper 

Thurman, P., Comello, M. L. G., & Slater, M. 

D. (2003). The Community Readiness Model: A 

complementary approach to social marketing. Available: 

www.biz.colostate.edu/SocialIssues/Marketing%20 

Theory%202003.pdf; National Network for 

Collaboration. (1995). Collaboration framework: 

Addressing community capacity. Available: http://crs. 

uvm.edu/nnco/collab/framework.html. 

16	 Williams Torres, G., & Margolin, F. S. (2003). 

The collaboration primer: Proven strategies, 

considerations, and tools to get you started. Available: 

www.hret.org/hret/programs/content/colpri.pdf. 

17	 Williams Torres, G., & Margolin, F. S. (2003); 

Bragg, H. L. (2003). Child protection in 

families experiencing domestic violence. Available: 

www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/ 

domesticviolence. 

18	 Brown, E. G., Amwake, C., Speth, T., & ScottLittle, C. (2002). The continuity framework: 

Building home, school, and community partnerships. 

Available: http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v4n2/brown.html; 

National Network for Collaboration. (1995); 

Taylor-Powell, E., Rossing, B., & Geran, J. 

(1998). 

19	 Bryan, S., & Southern, L. (2004). Walk a mile in 

my shoes. Available: www.cyc-net.org/cyc-online/ 

cycol-0304-bryan.html. 

20	 Center for the Study of Social Policy. (2001). 

Community partnerships for protecting children. 

Available: www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/Rollout%20 

Guidance.pdf. 

21	 National Child Welfare Resource Center for 

Organizational Improvement, & National Child 

Welfare Resource Center for Youth Development. 

(2007). 2007 CFSR toolkit for youth development: 

Engaging youth in the Child and Family Services 

Review. Available: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/ 

helpkids/rcpdfs/CFSRtoolkit.pdf. 

22	 Oregon State University, Chandler School for 

Community Leadership. (n.d.). Communitybased collaboration: Community wellness 

multiplied. Available: http://crs.uvm.edu/nnco/ 

collab/wellness.html#enhance; Williams Torres, 

G., & Margolin, F. S. (2003). 

23	 National Child Welfare Resource Center for 

Organizational Improvement. (2002, Spring). 

Strategic planning for child welfare agencies. 

Managing Care for Children and Families. 

Available: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/ 

rcpdfs/mcIV1.pdf. 

24	 Kettner, P. M., Moroney, R. M., & Martin, L. 

L. (1999). Designing and managing programs: An 

eff ectiveness-based approach (2nd ed.). Th ousand 

Oaks, CA: Sage. 

25	 Oregon State University, Chandler School for 

Community Leadership. (n.d.); Williams Torres, 

G., & Margolin, F. S. (2003). 

26	 Aron, L. Y., & Olson, K. K. (1997). Eff orts 

by child welfare agencies to address domestic 

violence. Public Welfare 55(3), 4–13; Beeman, S. 

50 Endnotes 
 

K., Hagemeister, A. K., & Edleson, J. L. (1999). 

Child protection and battered women services: 

From conflict to collaboration. Child Maltreatment, 

4(2), 116–126; Carter, J., & Schechter, S. (1997). 

Child abuse and domestic violence: Creating community 

partnerships for safe families—Suggested components of 

an effective child welfare response to domestic violence. 

San Francisco: Family Violence Prevention Fund; 

Findlater, J., & Kelly, S. (1999). Michigan’s 

domestic violence and child welfare collaboration. 

In J. L. Edleson & S. Schechter (Eds.), In the 

best interests of women and children: Child welfare 

and domestic violence services working together (pp. 

167–174). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Spears, 

L. (2000). Building bridges between domestic violence 

organizations and child protective services. Available: 

www.vawnet.org/NRCDVPublications/BCSDV/ 

Papers/BCS7_cps.pdf. 

27	 Winer, M., & Ray, K. (1994). 

28	 U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, ACF. (2009). Strengthening families and 

communities: 2009 resource guide. Available: www. 

childwelfare.gov/pubs/res_guide_2009/. 

29 Wolff, T. (1997). Barriers to coalition building 

and strategies to overcome them. In G. Kaye & 

T. Wolff (Eds.), From the ground up: A workbook 

on coalition building and community development 

(pp. 40–50). Amherst, MA: AHEC/Community 

Partners. 

30	 Brown, E. G., et al. (2002). 

31	 Winer, M. & Ray, K. (1994). 

32	 Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2002). A model 

for public and private child welfare partnership: 

Collaboration for change. Available: www.aecf.org/ 

initiatives/familytofamily/tools/16938.pdf. 

33	 Williams Torres, G., & Margolin, F. S. (2003); 

Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2002). 

34	 Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2002); DePanfi lis, 

D., & Salus, M. (2003). Child protective services: A 

guide for caseworkers. Available: www.childwelfare. 

gov/pubs/usermanuals/cps/index.cfm. 

35	 Williams Torres, G., & Margolin, F. S. (2003). 

36	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration (SAMHSA). (2005a). Successful 

strategies for recruiting, training, and utilizing 

volunteers: A guide for faith- and community-based 

service providers. Available: www.samhsa.gov/fbci/ 

Volunteer_handbook.pdf. 

37	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

SAMHSA. (2005a). 

38	 Abney, V. (1996). Cultural competency in 

the field of child maltreatment. In J. Briere, L. 

Berliner, J. A. Bulkely, C. Jenny, & T. Reid (Eds.), 

The APSAC handbook on child maltreatment (pp. 

409–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

39	 DePanfilis, D., & Salus, M. (2003). 

40	 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2005a). 

Tribal-state relations. Available: www.childwelfare. 

gov/pubs/issue_briefs/tribal_state/index.cfm; 

National Child Welfare Resource Center for 

Organizational Improvement. (n.d.). Approaches 

to collaboration: State-Tribal partnerships. 

Available: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/ 

rcpdfs/tribal.pdf. 

41	 Saewyc, E. M., Skay, C. L., Pettingell, S. L., Reis, 

E. A., Bearinger, L., Resnick, M., et al. (2006). 

Hazards of stigma: The sexual and physical abuse 

of gay, lesbian, and bisexual adolescents in the 

United States and Canada. Child Welfare, 85, 

195–213. 

42	 Poirier, J. M., Francis, K. B., Fisher, S. K., 

Williams-Washington, K., Goode, T. D., & 

Jackson, V. H. (2008, Spring). Practice brief 1: 

Providing services and supports for youth who are 

lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, 

intersex or two-spirit. Available: www11. 

georgetown.edu/research/gucchd/NCCC/ 

documents/lgbtqi2s.pdf; Morrow, D. F. (2004). 

Social work practice with gay, lesbian, bisexual, 

and transgender adolescents. Families in Society: 

The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 85(1), 

91–99. 

43	 Poirier, J. M. et al. (2008, Spring). 

44	 Poirier, J. M. et al. (2008, Spring). 

45	 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2005b). 

Collaborative funding strategies. Available: 

http://childwelfare.gov/preventing/developing/ 

collaborativefunding.cfm. 

46	 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2005b). 

47	 McNamara, C. (n.d.). Overview of nonprofi t 

fundraising sources and approaches. Available: 

www.managementhelp.org/fndrsng/np_raise/ 

fndraise.htm. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

51 
 

48	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

SAMHSA. (2005b). Maximizing program services 

through private sector partnerships and relationships: 

A guide for faith- and community-based service 

providers.. Available: www.samhsa.gov/FBCI/docs/ 

PartnerHandbook_feb2006.doc. 

49	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

SAMHSA. (2005b). 

50	 Pires, S. A. (2002). Building systems of care: A 

primer. Available: http://gucchd.georgetown. 

edu/fi les/products_publications/TACenter/ 

PRIMER_ALL.pdf. 

51	 Mattessich, P. W., Murray-Close, M., & Monsey, 

B. R. (2001). Collaboration: What makes it work 

(2nd ed.). Saint Paul, MN: Amherst H. Wilder 

Foundation. 

52	 Farrow, F. (1997b). Building community 

partnerships for child protection: Getting from here 

to there. Available: www.offi ce-for-children.vic. 

gov.au/children/ccdnav.nsf/obj/x_pdf_ip/$fi le/ 

cp_inov_farrow.pdf. 

53	 Shusterman, G. R., Hollinshead, D., Fluke, J. D., 

& Yuan, Y. T. (2005). Alternative responses to child 

maltreatment: Findings from NCANDS. Available: 

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/05/child-maltreat-resp/ 

index.htm; Loman, A., & Siegel, G. (2004). 

Differential response in Missouri after fi veyears. Available: 

www.iarstl.org/papers/MODiff Resp2004a.pdf; 

Loman, A. (2005). Differential response improves 

traditional investigations: Criminal arrests for severe 

physical and sexual abuse. Available: www.iarstl.org/ 

papers/Diff RespAndInvestigations.pdf; Child 

Welfare Information Gateway. (2008). 

54	 Schene, P., & Kaplan, C. (2007, November). 

Getting started with diff erential response: 

Fundamentals and fi rst steps. Presented at the 

Second National Conference on Diff erential 

Response, Long Beach, CA. 

55	 Center for the Study of Social Policy, Center 

for Community Partnerships in Child Welfare. 

(2005, Spring). Establishing a positive 

community presence for public child welfare 

agencies. Safekeeping. Available: www.cssp.org/ 

uploadFiles/safekeeping-Spring05-v5.pdf. 

56	 Bragg, H. L. (2003). 

57	 Drabble, L. Osterling, K. L., Tweed, M., & 

Pearce, C. A. (2008). Pathways to collaboration: 

Factors that help and hinder collaboration between 

substance abuse and child welfare fi elds. Available: 

www.csulb.edu/projects/ccwrl/Drabble_II.pdf; 

Legal Action Center. (2003). Confi dentiality and 

communication: A guide to the federal drug & 

alcohol confidentiality law and HIPAA. New York: 

Author. 

58	 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2004). 

Systems of care and child welfare. Available: www. 

childwelfare.gov/systemwide/service/soc/soc_ 

childwelfare.cfm. 

59	 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2007). 

Family group decision-making approaches. 

Available: www.childwelfare.gov/famcentered/ 

overview/approaches/family_group.cfm. 

60	 Iowa Department of Health and Human 

Services. (n.d.). Community partnerships for 

protecting children: Family team decision-making. 

Available: www.dhs.state.ia.us/dhs2005/cppc/ 

family_team; Annie E. Casey Foundation. 

(2005b). Family to Family: Key characteristics 

of family meetings. Available: www.aecf.org/ 

initiatives/familytofamily/tools/tdm/revision_ 

matrix_3_6_05.pdf. 

61 DePanfilis, D., & Salus, M. (2003); MerkelHolguin, L. (2000). How do I use family 

meetings to develop optimal service plans? In H. 

Dubowitz & D. DePanfi lis (Eds.), Handbook for 

child protection practice (pp. 373–378). Th ousand 

Oaks, CA: Sage. 

62	 Gibbs, D. A., Martin, S. L., Kupper, L. L., & 

Johnson, R. E. (2007). Child maltreatment in 

enlisted soldiers’ families during combat-related 

deployments. Journal of the American Medical 

Association, 298, 528–535; Rentz, E. D., Marshall, 

S. W., Loomis, D., Casteel, C., Martin, S. L., & 

Gibbs, D. A. (2007). Effect of deployment on 

the occurrence of child maltreatment in military 

and nonmilitary families. American Journal of 

Epidemiology, 165, 1199–1206. 

63	 Gibbs, D. A. et al. (2007); Rentz, E. D. et al. 

(2007). 

64	 U.S. Department of Defense. (n.d.). Family 

Advocacy Program. Available: www.defenselink. 

mil/fapmip/. 

65	 FRIENDS National Resource Center for 

Community-based Child Abuse Prevention. 

(n.d.). Evaluation toolkit. Available: www. 

friendsnrc.org/outcome/toolkit/index.htm. 

52 Endnotes 
66	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

ACF. (2005b). The program manager’s guide to 

evaluation. Available: www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ 

opre/other_resrch/pm_guide_eval/index.html. 

67	 Taylor-Powell, E., Rossing, B., & Geran, J. 

(1998). 

68	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

ACF. (2005c). Steps in evaluating prevention 

programs. Available: http://childwelfare.gov/ 

preventing/developing/steps.cfm; FRIENDS 

National Resource Center for Community-based 

Child Abuse Prevention. (n.d.). 

69	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

ACF. (2005c). 

70	 Taylor-Powell, E., Jones, L., & Henert, E. (2002). 

Enhancing program performance with logic models. 

Available: www1.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse/. 

71	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

ACF. (2005c). 

72	 Fiermonte, C., & Sidote Salyers, N. (2005). 

Improving outcomes together: Court and child 

welfare collaboration. Available: http://jeritt. 

msu.edu/Documents/ABA_Collaboration_ 

Final_06-21-05.pdf. 

73	 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and 

Research. (2006). Glossary of clinical trial terms. 

Available: http://clinicaltrials.mayo.edu/glossary. 

cfm. 

74	 FRIENDS National Resource Center for 

Community-based Child Abuse Prevention. 

(n.d.). 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

53 

APPENDIX A 

Glossary of Terms 

Adjudicatory Hearings – held by the juvenile and 

family court to determine whether a child has been 

maltreated or whether another legal basis exists for 

the State to intervene to protect the child. 

Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) – signed 

into law November 1997 and designed to improve 

the safety of children, to promote adoption and other 

permanent homes for children who need them, and 

to support families. The law requires child protective 

services (CPS) agencies to provide more timely and 

focused assessment and intervention services to the 

children and families who are served within the CPS 

system. 

CASA – court-appointed special advocates (usually 

volunteers) who serve to ensure that the needs 

and interests of a child in child protection judicial 

proceedings are fully protected. 

Case Closure – the process of ending the relationship 

between the CPS worker and the family that often 

involves a mutual assessment of progress. Optimally, 

cases are closed when families have achieved their 

goals and the risk of maltreatment has been reduced 

or eliminated. 

Case Plan – the casework document that outlines the 

outcomes, goals, and tasks necessary to be achieved in 

order to reduce the risk of maltreatment. 

Caseworker Competency – demonstrated 

professional behaviors based on the knowledge, skills, 

personal qualities, and values a person holds. 

Central Registry – a centralized database containing 

information on all substantiated/founded reports 

of child maltreatment in a selected area (typically a 

State). 

Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 

(CAPTA) – see Keeping Children and Families Safe 

Act. 

Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) – a 

review of State child and family services programs 

that is conducted by the Children’s Bureau of the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services. Th e 

intent of the CFSR is to assess the States for substantial 

conformity with certain Federal requirements for child 

protective, foster care, adoption, family preservation 

and family support, and independent living services. 

Child Protective Services (CPS) – the designated 

social services agency (in most States) to receive 

reports, investigate, and provide intervention and 

treatment services to children and families in which 

child maltreatment has occurred. Frequently, this 

agency is located within larger public social service 

agencies, such as departments of social services. 

Concurrent Planning – identifies alternative forms 

of permanency by addressing both reunifi cation or 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

55 
 

legal permanency with a new parent or caregiver if 

reunifi cation eff orts fail. 

Confi dentiality – a principle that dictates that certain 

information discussed or divulged between two parties 

should not be divulged to a third party. Th e exact 

definition of confidentiality, and its implications, 

varies according to legal codes, professions, and 

organizations. 

Cultural Competence – a set of attitudes, behaviors, 

and policies that integrates knowledge about groups 

of people into practices and standards to enhance the 

quality of services to all cultural groups being served. 

Diff erential Response – an area of CPS reform that 

offers greater flexibility in responding to allegations 

of abuse and neglect. Also referred to as “dual track” 

or “multi-track” response, it permits CPS agencies to 

respond differentially to children’s needs for safety, 

the degree of risk present, and the family’s needs for 

services and support. See Dual Track. 

Dispositional Hearings – held by the juvenile 

and family court to determine the disposition of 

children after cases have been adjudicated, such as 

whether placement of the child in out-of-home care 

is necessary and the services the children and family 

will need to reduce the risk of maltreatment and to 

address the effects of maltreatment. 

Dual Track – term reflecting new CPS response 

systems that typically combine a nonadversarial 

service-based assessment track for cases in which 

children are not at immediate risk with a traditional 

CPS investigative track for cases where children 

are unsafe or at greater risk for maltreatment. See 

Diff erential Response. 

Evaluation of Family Progress – the stage of the 

CPS case process where the CPS caseworker measures 

changes in family behaviors and conditions (risk 

factors), monitors risk elimination or reduction, 

assesses strengths, and determines case closure. 

Family Assessment – the stage of the child 

protection process during which the CPS caseworker, 

community treatment provider, and the family reach 

a mutual understanding regarding the behaviors and 

conditions that must change to reduce or eliminate 

the risk of maltreatment, the most critical treatment 

needs that must be addressed, and the strengths on 

which to build. 

Family Group Conferencing – a family meeting 

model used by CPS agencies to optimize family 

strengths in the planning process. Th is model brings 

the family, extended family, and others important 

in the family’s life (e.g., friends, clergy, neighbors) 

together to make decisions regarding how best to 

ensure the safety of the family members. See Family 

Group Decision-Making. 

Family Group Decision-Making – includes various 

prevention and intervention approaches in which 

family members are brought together to make 

decisions about how to care for their children and to 

develop a plan for services. Several names may be 

used for this type of intervention, including family 

team conferencing, family team meetings, family 

group conferencing, family team decision-making, 

family unity meetings, and team decision-making. 

See Family Group Conferencing. 

Family Unity Model – a family meeting model used 

by CPS agencies to optimize family strengths in the 

planning process. This model is similar to the Family 

Group Conferencing model. 

Formal Partners – public or private agencies that 

provide or fund time-limited, direct services to 

children, youth, and families in order to address a 

particular problem. (e.g., CPS, drug and alcohol 

abuse treatment agencies). 

Full Disclosure – CPS information to the family 

regarding the steps in the intervention process, the 

requirements of CPS, what is expected of the family, 

the consequences if the family does not fulfi ll the 

expectations, and the rights of the parents to ensure 

that the family completely understands the process. 

Guardian ad Litem – a lawyer or lay person who 

represents a child in juvenile or family court. Usually 

56 Appendix A—Glossary of Terms 
this person considers the best interest of the child 

and may perform a variety of roles, including those 

of independent investigator, advocate, advisor, and 

guardian for the child. A lay person who serves in this 

role is sometimes known as a court-appointed special 

advocate or CASA. 

Home Visitation Programs – prevention programs 

that offer a variety of family-focused services to 

pregnant mothers and families with new babies. 

Activities frequently encompass structured visits to 

the family’s home and may address positive parenting 

practices, nonviolent discipline techniques, child 

development, maternal and child health, available 

services, and advocacy. 

Immunity – established in all child abuse laws to 

protect reporters from civil law suits and criminal 

prosecution resulting from filing a report of child 

abuse and neglect. 

Informal Partners – organizations or individuals 

that provide ongoing support to children, youth, 

and families, but whose primary relationship with 

them is not necessarily providing direct services (e.g., 

faith organizations, family members, neighbors, 

community leaders). 

Initial Assessment or Investigation – the stage of the 

CPS case process during which the CPS caseworker 

determines the validity of the child maltreatment 

report, assesses the risk of maltreatment, determines 

if the child is safe, develops a safety plan if needed to 

ensure the child’s protection, and determines services 

needed. 

Institutional Review Board (IRB) – a board or 

committee that reviews and monitors research and 

evaluation initiatives to ensure that the participants’ 

rights and welfare is upheld. 

Intake – the stage of the CPS case process during 

which the CPS caseworker screens and accepts reports 

of child maltreatment. 

Interview Protocol – a structured format to ensure 

that all family members are seen in a planned strategy, 

that community providers collaborate, and that 

information gathering is thorough. 

Juvenile and Family Courts – established in most 

States to resolve conflict and to otherwise intervene 

in the lives of families in a manner that promotes the 

best interest of children. These courts specialize in 

areas such as child maltreatment, domestic violence, 

juvenile delinquency, divorce, child custody, and 

child support. 

Keeping Children and Families Safe Act – the 

Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003 (P.L. 

108-36) included the reauthorization of CAPTA in 

its Title I, Sec. 111. CAPTA provides minimum 

standards for defining child physical abuse and neglect 

and sexual abuse that States must incorporate into 

their statutory definitions in order to receive Federal 

funds. CAPTA defines child abuse and neglect as “at 

a minimum, any recent act or failure to act on the 

part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, 

serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or 

exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents 

an imminent risk of serious harm.” 

Kinship Care – formal child placement by the 

juvenile court and child welfare agency in the home 

of a child’s relative. 

Liaison – a person within an organization who 

has responsibility for facilitating communication, 

collaboration, and coordination between agencies 

involved in the child protection system. 

Logic Model – a simple, logical illustration of what 

a program does, why it does it, and how to know if 

the program is successful. There are a wide variety of 

logic model formats, but most show the relationships 

between a program’s inputs (e.g., staff, funds), the 

outputs (e.g., partnership activities, services provided), 

and the outcomes that result from the program (e.g., 

increased public awareness of the dangers of child 

neglect, improved parenting skills, reduced family 

violence). 

Mandated Reporter – groups of professionals 

required by State statutes to report suspected child 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

57 
abuse and neglect to the proper authorities (usually 

CPS or law enforcement agencies). Mandated 

reporters typically include educators and other 

school personnel, healthcare and mental health 

professionals, social workers, childcare providers, and 

law enforcement officers. 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) – a 

written agreement that clarifies the relationships and 

the responsibilities between two or more organizations 

that share services, clients, and resources. 

Multidisciplinary Team – established between 

agencies and professionals within the child protection 

system to discuss cases of child abuse and neglect 

and to aid in decisions at various stages of the CPS 

case process. These teams may also be designated by 

different names, including child protection teams, 

interdisciplinary teams, or case consultation teams. 

Neglect – the failure to provide for the child’s basic 

needs. Neglect can be physical, educational, or 

emotional. Physical neglect can include not providing 

adequate food or clothing, appropriate medical care, 

supervision, or proper weather protection (heat or 

coats). Educational neglect includes failing to provide 

appropriate schooling, failing to address special 

educational needs, or allowing excessive truancies. 

Psychological neglect includes the lack of any emotional 

support and love, chronic inattention to the child, 

exposure to spouse abuse, or exposure to drug and 

alcohol abuse. 

Out-of-Home Care – child care, foster care, or 

residential care provided by persons, organizations, 

and institutions to children who are placed outside 

their families, usually under the jurisdiction of 

juvenile or family court. 

Parens Patriae Doctrine - originating in feudal 

England, a doctrine that vests in the State a right of 

guardianship of minors. This concept gradually has 

evolved into the principle that the community, in 

addition to the parent, has a strong interest in the care 

and nurturing of children. Schools, juvenile courts, 

and social service agencies all derive their authority 

from the State’s power to ensure the protection and 

rights of children as a unique class. 

Parent or Caretaker – person responsible for the care 

of the child. 

Physical Abuse – the inflicting of a nonaccidental 

physical injury. This may include burning, hitting, 

punching, shaking, kicking, beating, or otherwise 

harming a child. It may, however, have been the 

result of over-discipline or physical punishment that 

is inappropriate to the child’s age. 

Protective Factors – strengths and resources that 

appear to mediate or serve as a buff er against 

risk factors that contribute to vulnerability to 

maltreatment or against the negative eff ects of 

maltreatment experiences. 

Protocol – an interagency agreement that delineates 

joint roles and responsibilities by establishing criteria 

and procedures for working together on cases of child 

abuse and neglect. 

Psychological Maltreatment – a pattern of caregiver 

behavior or extreme incidents that convey to children 

that they are worthless, flawed, unloved, unwanted, 

endangered, or only of value to meeting another’s 

needs. This can include parents or caretakers using 

extreme or bizarre forms of punishment or threatening 

or terrorizing a child. Psychological maltreatment 

is also known as emotional abuse or neglect, verbal 

abuse, or mental abuse. 

Response Time – a determination made by CPS 

and law enforcement regarding the immediacy of the 

response needed to a report of child abuse or neglect. 

Review Hearings – held by the juvenile and family 

court to review dispositions (usually every 6 months) 

and to determine the need to maintain placement in 

out-of-home care or court jurisdiction of a child. 

Risk – the likelihood that a child will be maltreated 

in the future. 

Risk Assessment – the measurement of the likelihood 

that a child will be maltreated in the future; frequently 

58 Appendix A—Glossary of Terms 
 

carried out through the use of checklists, matrices, 

scales, and other methods of measurement. 

Risk Factors – behaviors and conditions present in 

the child, parent, or family that will likely contribute 

to child maltreatment occurring in the future. 

Safety – absence of an imminent or immediate threat 

of moderate to serious harm to the child. 

Safety Assessment – a part of the CPS case process 

in which available information is analyzed to identify 

whether a child is in immediate danger of moderate 

or serious harm. 

Safety Plan – a casework document developed when 

it is determined that the child is in imminent or 

potential risk of serious harm. In the safety plan, 

the caseworker targets the factors that are causing or 

contributing to the risk of imminent serious harm to 

the child, and identifies, along with the family, the 

interventions that will control the safety factors and 

ensure the child’s protection. 

Secondary Prevention – activities targeted to prevent 

breakdowns and dysfunction within families that have 

been identified as being at risk for abuse and neglect. 

Service Agreement – the casework document 

developed between the CPS caseworker and the 

family that outlines the tasks necessary to achieve risk 

reduction goals and outcomes. 

Service Provision – the stage of the CPS casework 

process during which CPS and other providers 

provide specific services geared toward the reduction 

of risk of maltreatment. 

Sexual Abuse – inappropriate adolescent or adult 

sexual behavior with a child. It includes fondling 

a child’s genitals, making the child fondle the 

adult’s genitals, intercourse, incest, rape, sodomy, 

exhibitionism, sexual exploitation, or exposure to 

pornography. To be considered child abuse, these 

acts have to be committed by a person responsible for 

the care of a child (for example a babysitter, a parent, 

or a daycare provider) or related to the child. If a 

stranger commits these acts, it would be considered 

sexual assault and handled solely by the police and 

criminal courts. 

Strategic Plan – an outline of an organization’s 

direction, including decisions about how it will 

pursue those items, allocate resources, and determine 

if it has reached its objectives. 

Substantiated – an investigation disposition 

concluding that the allegation of maltreatment or risk 

of maltreatment was supported or founded by State 

law or State policy. A CPS determination means that 

credible evidence exists that child abuse or neglect has 

occurred. 

Systems of Care – a prevention and intervention 

framework that uses a multidisciplinary approach 

to support children and families who have complex 

needs and utilizes a child-centered, family-focused, 

community-based, and culturally and linguistically 

competent approach. 

Treatment – the stage of the child protection case 

process during which specific services are provided 

by CPS and other providers to reduce the risk of 

maltreatment, support families in meeting case goals, 

and address the effects of maltreatment. 

Unsubstantiated (not substantiated) – an 

investigation disposition that determines that there is 

not sufficient evidence under State law or policy to 

conclude that the child has been maltreated or is at 

risk of maltreatment. A CPS determination means 

that credible evidence does not exist that child abuse 

or neglect has occurred. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

59 

 

APPENDIX B 

Resource Listings for Selected 

National Organizations Concerned 

with Child Maltreatment 

Listed here are several representatives of the many 

national organizations and groups dealing with 

various aspects of child maltreatment. Please visit 

www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanual.cfm to 

view a more comprehensive list of resources and visit 

www.childwelfare.gov/organizations/index.cfm to 

view an organization database. Inclusion on this list 

is for information purposes and does not constitute 

an endorsement by the Office on Child Abuse and 

Neglect or the Children’s Bureau. 

GENERAL CHILD WELFARE ORGANIZATIONS 

American Humane
 

Children’s Division
 

address: 63 Inverness Drive, East 

Englewood, CO 80112-5117 

phone: (800) 227-4645 

fax: (303) 792-5333 

e-mail: info@americanhumane.org 

website: www.americanhumane.org 

Conducts research, analysis, and training to help 

public and private agencies respond to child 

maltreatment. 

American Professional Society on the Abuse of 

Children (APSAC) 

address: 350 Poplar Avenue 

Elmhurst, IL 60126 

phone: (630) 941-1235 

(877) 402-7722 

fax: (630) 359-4274 

e-mail: apsac@apsac.org 

website: www.apsac.org 

Provides professional education, promotes research to 

inform eff ective practice, and addresses public policy 

issues. 

American Public Human Services Association 

(APHSA) 

address: 1133 19th Street, NW, Suite 400 

Washington, DC 20036 

phone: (202) 682-0100 

fax: (202) 289-6555 

website: www.aphsa.org 

Addresses program and policy issues related to the 

administration and delivery of publicly funded 

human services. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

61 
 

AVANCE 

address: 	 118 N. Medina 

San Antonio, TX 78207 

phone: (210) 270-4630 

fax: (210) 270-4636 

website: www.avance.org 

Operates a national training center to share and 

disseminate information, material, and curricula 

to service providers and policymakers interested in 

supporting high-risk Latino families. 

Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) 

address: 	 2345 Crystal Drive, Suite 250 

Arlington, VA 22202 

phone: 	(703) 412-2400 

fax: 	(703) 412-2401 

website: 	www.cwla.org 

Provides training, consultation, and technical 

assistance to child welfare professionals and agencies 

while also educating the public about emerging issues 

aff ecting children. 

National Black Child Development Institute 

address: 1313 L Street, NW, Suite 110 

Washington, DC 20005-4110 

phone: (202) 833-2220 

fax: (202) 833-8222 

e-mail: moreinfo@nbcdi.org 

website: www.nbcdi.org 

Operates programs and sponsors a national training 

conference through Howard University to improve 

and to protect the well-being of African-American 

children. 

National Children’s Advocacy Center (NCAC)
 

address: 210 Pratt Avenue 

Huntsville, AL 35801 

phone: (256) 533-KIDS 

fax: (256) 534-6883 

website: www.nationalcac.org 

Provides prevention, intervention, and treatment 

services to physically and sexually abused children and 

their families within a child-focused team approach. 

National Indian Child Welfare Association 

(NICWA) 

address: 	 5100 SW Macadam Avenue, Suite 300 

Portland, OR 97239 

phone: (503) 222-4044 

fax: (503) 222-4007 

website: www.nicwa.org 

Disseminates information and provides technical 

assistance on Indian child welfare issues. Supports 

community development and advocacy eff orts to 

facilitate Tribal responses to the needs of families and 

children. 

62 Appendix B—Resource Listings For Selected National Organizations 

Concerned with Child Maltreatment 
NATIONAL CHILD WELFARE 

RESOURCE CENTERS 

National Child Welfare Resource Center for 

Organizational Improvement 

address: Catherine E. Cutler Institute for Child 

and Family Policy 

P.O. Box 9300, 34 Bedford Street 

Portland, ME 04104-9300 

phone: (800) HELPKID (435-7543) 

fax: (207) 780-5817 

e-mail: helpkids@usm.maine.edu 

website: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/ 

Offers technical assistance, training, teleconferences, 

and publications to assist States with the Child and 

Family Services Reviews, including strategic planning, 

evaluating outcomes, facilitating collaboration, 

implementing quality control, and structuring 

public-private partnerships. 

National Resource Center for Adoption 

address: 	 16250 Northland Drive, Suite 120

 Southfield, Michigan 48075 

phone: (248) 443-0306 

fax: (248) 443-7099 

e-mail: nrc@nrcadoption.org 

website: www.nrcadoption.org/ 

Assists States, Tribes, and other federally funded child 

welfare agencies in building their capacity to ensure 

the safety, well-being, and permanency of abused 

and neglected children through adoption and postlegal adoption services program planning, policy 

development, and practice. 

National Resource Center for Child Protective 

Services 

address: 	 925 #4 Sixth Street, NW 

Albuquerque, NM 87102 

phone: 	 (505) 345-2444 

fax: 	 (505) 345-2626 

website: 	www.nrccps.org 

Focuses on building State, local, and Tribal capacity 

through training and technical assistance in Child 

Protective Services, including meeting Federal 

requirements, strengthening programs, eligibility for 

the CAPTA grant, support to State Liaison Officers, 

and collaboration with other National Resource 

Centers. 

National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data 

and Technology 

address: 	 2345 Crystal Drive, Suite 250 

Arlington, VA 22202 

phone: 	(703) 263-2024 

e-mail: 	nrccwdt@cwla.org 

website: 	www.nrccwdt.org 

Provides a broad range of technical assistance to State 

and Tribal child welfare agencies and the courts on 

data and system issues in order to improve outcomes 

for children and families. 

National Resource Center for Community-Based 

Child Abuse Prevention (FRIENDS) 

address: 	 800 Eastowne Drive, Suite 105 

Chapel Hill, NC 27514 

phone: 	(919) 490-5577 

fax: 	(919) 490-4905 

website: 	http://www.friendsnrc.org/ 

Offers knowledge and expertise in the implementation 

of family support strategies in a variety of settings 

and for many purposes. Provides Child and Family 

Services Reviews assistance, including building 

networks, collecting data, and promoting stakeholder 

involvement. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

63 
 

National Resource Center for In-Home Services 

address: 	 University of Iowa Research Park 

W206 Oakdale Hall 

Iowa City, IA 52242 

phone: (319) 335-4932 

website: http://nrcinhome.socialwork.uiowa.edu/ 

Provides technical assistance and training to States 

and Tribes to build their capacity to provide eff ective 

family preservation and post-reunifi cation services. 

National Resource Center for Permanency and 

Family Connections 

address: 	 Hunter College School of Social Work 

129 East 79th Street 

New York, NY 10075 

phone: 	 (212) 452-7053 

fax: 	 (212) 452-7475 

website: 	www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/ 

Provides on- and offsite training and technical 

assistance to build capacity in child welfare systems 

and to support States, Territories, and Tribes in 

achieving sustainable, systemic change resulting 

in greater safety, permanency, and well-being for 

children, youth, and families. 

National Resource Center for Recruitment and 

Retention of Foster and Adoptive Parents at 

AdoptUsKids 

address:	 Adoption Exchange Association 

8015 Corporate Drive, Suite C 

Baltimore, MD 21236 

phone: (888) 200-4005 

e-mail: info@adoptuskids.org 

website: www.adoptuskids.org/ 

Raises public awareness about the need for foster 

and adoptive families for children in the public 

child welfare system and assists States, Territories, 

and Tribes to recruit and retain foster and adoptive 

families and connect them with children. 

National Resource Center for Tribes
 

address: 8235 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 211 

West Hollywood, CA 90046 

phone: (323) 650-5467 

e-mail: info@NRC4Tribes.org 

website: www.nrc4tribes.org/ 

Assists Tribes in the enhancement of child welfare 

services and the promotion of safety, permanency, 

and well-being for American Indian/Alaska Native 

children and families. 

National Resource Center for Youth Development 

address: 	 4502 East 41st Street, Building 4W 

Tulsa, OK 74135-2512 

phone: 	(918) 660-3700 

fax: 	(918) 660-3737 

website: 	www.nrcyd.ou.edu/ 

Increases the capacity and resources of States and 

Tribes to effectively help youth in care establish 

permanent connections and achieve successful 

transitions to adulthood. 

National Resource Center on Legal and 

Judicial Issues 

address: 	 ABA Center on Children and the Law 

740 15th Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20005-1019 

phone: (800) 285-2221

 (202) 662-1720 

fax: (202) 662-1755 

website: www.abanet.org/child/rclji 

Promotes improvement of laws and policies aff ecting 

children and provides education in child-related law. 

For a full listing of the Children’s Bureau Training 

& Technical Assistance Network, including the 

Quality Improvement Centers and Implementation 

Centers, visit www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ 

cb/tta/. 

64 Appendix B—Resource Listings For Selected National Organizations 

Concerned with Child Maltreatment 
 

PREVENTION ORGANIZATIONS 

National Alliance of Children’s Trust and 

Prevention Funds 

address: P.O. Box 51142 

Seattle, WA 98115 

e-mail: info@ctfalliance.org 

website: www.ctfalliance.org 

Assists State children’s trust and prevention funds 

to strengthen families and to protect children from 

harm. 

Prevent Child Abuse America 

address: 	 228 South Wabash Avenue, 10th Floor 

Chicago, IL 60604 

phone: (312) 663-3520 

fax: (312) 939-8962 

e-mail: mailbox@preventchildabuse.org 

website: www.preventchildabuse.org 

Conducts prevention activities, such as public 

awareness campaigns, advocacy, networking, 

research, and publishing, and provides information 

and statistics on child abuse. 

COMMUNITY PARTNERS 

National Center for Substance Abuse 

and Child Welfare 

address:	 4940 Irvine Blvd., Suite 202 

Irvine, CA 92620 

phone: 	 (714) 505-3525 

fax: 	 (714) 505-3626 

e-mail: 	 ncsacw@cff utures.org 

website: 	www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov 

Disseminates information, provides technical 

assistance, and develops knowledge that promotes 

effective practice and organizational and system 

changes related to substance use disorder and child 

welfare issues at the local, State, and national levels. 

National Exchange Club Foundation 

address: 	 3050 Central Avenue 

Toledo, OH 43606-1700 

phone: (800) 924-2643

 (419) 535-3232 

fax: (419) 535-1989 

e-mail: info@nationalexchangeclub.org 

website: http://preventchildabuse.com/ 

Conducts local campaigns in the fight against child 

abuse by providing education, intervention, and 

support to families affected by child maltreatment. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

65 
 

National Fatherhood Initiative
 

address: 20410 Observation Drive, Suite 107 

Germantown, MD 20876 

phone: (301) 948-0599 

fax: (301) 948-4325 

website: www.fatherhood.org 

Works to improve the well-being of children by 

increasing the proportion of children growing up 

with involved, responsible, and committed fathers. 

National Technical Assistance Center for 

Mental Health 

address: Georgetown University Center for Child 

and Human Development 

Box 571485 

Washington, DC 20057-1485 

phone: (202) 687-5000 

fax: (202) 687-1954 

e-mail: childrensmh@georgetown.edu 

website: http://gucchdtacenter.georgetown.edu/ 

Provides information, technical assistance, and 

training on system and service strategies for achieving 

positive outcomes for children and youth with mental 

health needs and their families. 

FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC 

Childhelp 

address: 15757 North 78th Street, 

 Suite #B 

Scottsdale, AZ 85260 

phone: (800) 4-A-CHILD 

(800) 2-A-CHILD (TDD line)

 480) 922-8212 

fax: (480) 922-7061 

website: www.childhelp.org/ 

Provides crisis counseling to adult survivors and child 

victims of child abuse, offenders, and parents, and 

operates a national hotline. 

National Center for Missing and Exploited 

Children (NCMEC) 

address: Charles B. Wang International Children’s 

Building 

699 Prince Street

 Alexandria, VA 22314-3175 

phone: (800) 843-5678 (24-hour hotline)

 (703) 224-2150 

fax: (703) 224-2122 

website: www.missingkids.com 

Provides assistance to parents, children, law 

enforcement, schools, and communities in recovering 

missing children and in raising public awareness about 

ways to help prevent child abduction, molestation, 

and sexual exploitation. 

66 Appendix B—Resource Listings For Selected National Organizations 

Concerned with Child Maltreatment 
Parents Anonymous Inc.
 

address: 675 West Foothill Boulevard, Suite 220 

Claremont, CA 91711 

phone: (909) 621-6184 

fax: (909) 625-6304 

e-mail: parentsanonymous@parentsanonymous. 

org 

website: www.parentsanonymous.org 

Leads mutual support groups to help parents provide 

nurturing environments for their families. 

FOR MORE INFORMATION 

Child Welfare Information Gateway
 

address: 1250 Maryland Avenue, SW 

Eighth Floor 

Washington, DC 20024 

phone: (800) 394-3366 

e-mail: info@childwelfare.gov 

website: www.childwelfare.gov/ 

Collects, stores, catalogs, and disseminates information 

on all aspects of child maltreatment and child welfare 

to help build the capacity of professionals in the fi eld. 

A service of the Children’s Bureau. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

67 

 

APPENDIX C 

State Telephone Numbers 

for Reporting Suspected 

Child Maltreatment 

Each State designates specific agencies to receive and investigate reports of suspected child abuse and neglect. 

Typically, this responsibility is carried out by child protective services (CPS) within a Department of Social 

Services, Department of Human Resources, or Division of Family and Children Services. In some States, police 

departments also may receive reports of child abuse or neglect. 

Many States have local or toll-free telephone numbers, listed below, for reporting suspected maltreatment. Th e 

reporting party must be calling from the same State where the child allegedly is being maltreated for most 

of the following numbers to be valid. 

For States not listed, or when the reporting party resides in a different State from the child, please call Childhelp, 

800-4-A-Child (800-422-4453), or your local CPS agency. States may occasionally change the telephone 

numbers listed below. To view the most current contact information, including State Web addresses, visit www. 

childwelfare.gov/pubs/reslist/rl_dsp.cfm?rs_id=5&rate_chno=11-11172. 

Alabama (AL) Delaware (DE) 

334-242-9500 800-292-9582 

Alaska (AK) District of Columbia (DC) 

800-478-4444 202-671-SAFE (7233) 

Arizona (AZ) Florida (FL) 

888-SOS-CHILD 800-96-ABUSE 

(888-767-2445) (800-962-2873) 

Arkansas (AR) Hawaii (HI) 

800-482-5964 808-832-5300 

Colorado (CO) Idaho (ID) 

303-866-5932 800-926-2588 

208-332-7205 (TDD) 

Connecticut (CT) 

800-842-2288 Illinois (IL) 

800-624-5518 (TDD) 800-252-2873 

217-524-2606 

Indiana (IN) 

800-800-5556 

Iowa (IA) 

800-362-2178 

Kansas (KS) 

800-922-5330 

Kentucky (KY) 

800-752-6200 

Maine (ME) 

800-452-1999 

800-963-9490 (TTY) 

Massachusetts (MA) 

800-792-5200 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

69 
Michigan (MI) 

800-942-4357 

Mississippi (MS) 

800-222-8000 

601-359-4991 

Missouri (MO) 

800-392-3738 

573-751-3448 

Montana (MT) 

866-820-5437 

Nebraska (NE) 

800-652-1999 

Nevada (NV) 

800-992-5757 

New Hampshire (NH) 

800-894-5533 

603-271-6556 

New Jersey (NJ) 

877-652-2873 

800-835-5510 (TDD/TTY) 

New Mexico (NM) 

800-797-3260 

505-841-6100 

New York (NY) 

800-342-3720 

518-474-8740 

800-369-2437 (TDD) 

Oklahoma (OK) 

800-522-3511 

Pennsylvania (PA) 

800-932-0313 

Puerto Rico (PR) 

800-981-8333 

787-749-1333 

Rhode Island (RI) 

800-RI-CHILD 

(800-742-4453) 

South Carolina (SC) 

803-898-7318 

Tennessee (TN) 

877-237-0004 

Texas (TX) 

800-252-5400 

Utah (UT) 

800-678-9399 

Vermont (VT) 

800-649-5285 (after hours) 

Virginia (VA) 

800-552-7096 

804-786-8536 

Washington (WA) 

866-END-HARM 

(866-363-4276) 

800-562-5624 (after hours) 

800-624-6186 (TTY) 

West Virginia (WV) 

800-352-6513 

70 Appendix C—State Telephone Numbers for Reporting Suspected Child Maltreatment 
APPENDIX D 

Reference Guide for 

Identifying Possible Child 

Maltreatment 

The following page contains signs and risk factors that may help in the identification of possible child maltreatment. 

They are meant to act as general guidelines for identifying the possibility of each type of maltreatment. Please 

note that the presence of signs of child maltreatment does not indicate absolutely that child maltreatment has 

occurred. Actual child maltreatment can be determined only after a thorough response and investigation. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

71 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signs and Risk Factors of Possible Child Maltreatment
 

Signs of possible physical abuse1 

• Extensive bruises, especially in areas of 

the body that are not normally vulnerable 

• Bruises of different colors (which may 

indicate various stages of healing) 

• Frequent bruises around the head or face, 

the abdomen or midway between the wrist 

and elbow 

• Bruises in specific shapes, such as 

handprints, hanger marks, or belt buckles 

• Marks that indicate hard blows from an 

object, such as an electrical cord or other 

whip-like object that makes a burn around 

the body 

• Bruises on multiple parts of the body 

(which may indicate blows from different 

directions) 

• Unexplained internal bleeding that might 

be observed as discoloration under the skin 

or blood-filled lumps 

• Extreme sensitivity to pain or complaints 

of soreness and stiffness or awkward 

movements as if caused by pain 

• Bald spots from severe hair pulling 

• Adult-sized, human bite marks 

• Burns, especially those that appear to be 

from objects such as cigarettes, irons, etc. 

• Injuries for which the explanation given is 

inadequate 

Signs of possible neglect5 

• Seem inadequately dressed for the 

weather (e.g., wearing shorts and 

sandals in freezing weather) 

• Appear excessively listless and 

tired (due to no routine or structure 

around bedtimes) 

• Report caring for younger siblings 

(when they themselves are underage 

or are developmentally not ready to 

do so) 

• Demonstrate poor hygiene or smell 

of urine or feces 

• Seem unusually small or thin or 

have a distended stomach (indicative 

of malnutrition) 

• Have unattended medical or dental 

problems, such as infected sores or 

badly decayed or abscessed teeth 

• Appear withdrawn 

• Crave unusual amounts of 

attention, even eliciting negative 

responses in order to obtain it 

Signs of possible psychological2 

maltreatment 

• Extremes in behavior (e.g., manically 

happy or very depressed) 

• Withdrawal (e.g., no verbal or physical 

communication with others) 

• Self-destructive behavior (e.g., cutting 

oneself) 

• General destructive behavior (e.g., setting 

fires) 

• Cruelty to others, including animals 

• Rocking, thumb-sucking that is 

developmentally inappropriate, or headbanging 

• Enuresis (i.e., wetting one’s pants) or 

soiling at an age or a developmental level 

when such behavior is inappropriate 

• Substance abuse 

• Physical manifestations, such as frequent 

stomachaches or headaches or an 

unexplained weight loss or gain 

Signs of possible sexual abuse3 

Children may have been sexually abused if 

they: 

• Have bruises in the inner thigh or genital 

area 

• Have difficulty walking or sitting 

• Complain of genital or anal itching, pain, 

or bleeding 

• Frequently vomit 

• Become pregnant at a young age 

• Have any sexually transmitted diseases 

Additionally, children may have been 

sexually abused if they exhibit: 

• Exceptional secrecy 

• More sexual knowledge than is age 

appropriate, especially in younger children 

• In depth sexual play with peers that is not 

developmentally appropriate 

• Extreme compliance or withdrawal 

• Overt aggression 

• An inordinate fear of males or females 

• Seductive behavior 

• Sleep problems or nightmares 

• Crying without provocation 

• A sudden onset of wetting or soiling of 

pants or bed 

• Suicide attempts or thoughts of wanting to 

kill themselves 

• Numerous attempts at running away from 

home 

• Cruelty to animals (especially those that 

would normally be pets) 

• Setting fires and enjoying watching them 

burn 

• Self-mutilation (e.g., cutting or scratching 

to draw blood) 

Behavioral clues that may indicate 

possible child maltreatment4 

• Be aggressive, oppositional, or defiant 

• Cower or demonstrate a fear of adults 

• Act out, displaying aggressive or 

disruptive behavior 

• Be destructive to self or others 

• Come to school too early or not want to 

leave school—indicating a possible fear of 

being at home 

• Show fearlessness or extreme risk-taking 

• Be described as “accident prone” 

• Cheat, steal, or lie (may be related to too 

high expectations at home) 

• Be a low achiever 

• Be unable to form good peer relationships 

• Wear clothing that covers the body and 

that may be inappropriate in warmer 

months, such as wearing a turtleneck 

sweater in the summer (Be aware that this 

may possibly be a cultural issue instead.) 

• Show regressive or less mature behavior 

• Dislike or shrink away from physical 

contact (e.g., may not tolerate physical 

praise, such as a pat on the back) 

Risk factors for maltreatment6 

• Born prematurely or low birth 

weight 

• Perceived as unusual or different in 

terms of appearance or temperament 

• Be unhealthy or with congenital 

abnormalities 

• Have a physical, emotional, or 

developmental disability 

• Be irritable or display behaviors that 

are contrary to the expectations of the 

parents 

• Live in poverty 

• Live in an environment in which 

there is drug abuse, crime, or 

violence 

• Live in a single-family home 

• Have parents who lack education 

• Have parents who abuse 

substances 

72 Appendix D—Reference Guide for Identifying Possible Child Maltreatment 
 

References
 

1	 Crosson-Tower, C. (2002). How can we recognize child abuse and neglect? When children are abused: 

An educator’s guide to intervention. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. 

2	 Crosson-Tower, C. (2003). The role of educators in preventing and responding to child abuse and neglect. Available: 

http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/educator/index.cfm; Hart, S., & Brassard, M. (1991). 

Psychological maltreatment: Progress achieved. Development and Psychopathology, 3(1), 61–70 

3	 Christian, C. W., & Rubin, D. M. (2002). Sexual abuse. In A. P. Giardino & E. R. Giardino (Eds.), Recognition 

of child abuse for the mandated reporter (3rd ed., pp. 23–37). St. Louis, MO: G.W. Medical; Crosson-Tower,

 C. (2002). 

4	 Crosson-Tower, C. (2003); Crosson-Tower, C. (2002). 

5	 Crosson-Tower, C. (2003); Crosson-Tower, C. (2002). 

6	 Farley, R. H., & Reece, R. M. (1996). Recognizing when a child’s injury or illness is caused by abuse. Available:

 http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/160938.pdf; Whitman, B. (2002). Psychological and psychiatric issues. 

In A. P. Giardino & E. R. Giardino (Eds.), Recognition of child abuse for the mandated reporter (3rd ed., pp. 

137–156). St. Louis, MO: G.W. Medical. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

73 

APPENDIX E 

Examples of Community 

Partnerships 

States and localities across the Nation have created community partnerships of different scopes and sizes. 

Following are examples, organized alphabetically by State, of community partnerships dedicated to child safety 

and well-being that also reflect diverse purposes, partners, target populations, and activities. 

The partnership examples are presented for informational purposes only and to provide new and expanding 

partnerships with links to resources so that they may learn from the experiences of others. Their inclusion does not 

connote an endorsement by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

• Alameda County, California – Another Road to Safety 

• Jacksonville, Florida – Community Partnership for Protecting Children 

• Marion County, Indiana – Dawn Project 

• Iowa (statewide) – Iowa Community Partnerships for Protecting Children 

• Louisville, Kentucky – Neighborhood Place Ujima 

• Dorchester and North Quabbin, Massachusetts – Patch 

• St. Louis, Missouri – Circle of Hope 

• Grafton County, New Hampshire – Grafton County Greenbook Project 

• North Carolina (statewide) – North Carolina State Collaborative for Childr

• North Dakota (Indian Reservations) – Medicine Moon Initiative 

• Cuyahoga County, Ohio – Cuyahoga Family to Family 

• Medford, Oregon – OnTrack, Inc. 

• Travis County, Texas – Parenting in Recovery Project 

en, Youth and Families 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

75 
 

ANOTHER ROAD TO SAFETY (ALAMEDA 

COUNTY, CALIFORNIA) 

Another Road to Safety is an interagency collaboration 

that builds on community and family strengths using 

a differential response program model. Recognizing 

the need to work with families to prevent crisis, 

the Alameda County Department of Children and 

Family Services implemented Another Road to Safety 

to provide intervention and prevention services for 

selected families who are reported to the county 

hotline for allegations of abuse or neglect. Home 

visits are a key element of the Another Road to Safety 

program, along with an array of family-focused 

services. 

Another Road to Safety is a partnership between 

the Alameda County Social Services Agency, the 

Alameda County Health Care Service Agency, First 

Five’s Every Child Counts, and two communitybased organizations. Various levels of stakeholder 

input and needs assessments guided the development 

of the partnership, including an in-home family 

survey, community asset mapping, and feedback from 

community-based organizations and policymakers. 

A shared vision, agreed-upon guiding principles, and 

clearly defined outcome indicators have contributed 

to the success of this collaborative effort. A webbased, cross-agency data collection and information 

sharing system has helped the partnership track its 

performance and identify needs for improvement. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 Another Road to Safety: A Study of Early 

Intervention and Prevention Services in Alameda 

County. Soriano, C. S. (2005). 

http://cssr.berkeley.edu/bassc/cases/2005/ 

Soriano.pdf 

• 	 Another Road to Safety: Program Replication 

Guide: An Alternative Response Collaboration in 

Alameda County, California. Conley, A. (2005). 

http://fi rst5ecc.org/Documents/reports_docs/ 

eval/10-28-05%20ARS%20GUIDE4.pdf 

• Sustaining Community Partnerships on Behalf of 

Young Children and Families. In Zero to Th ree. 

Bremond, D., Milder, T, & Burger, J. (2006). 

www.zerotothree.org 

Website 

• Every Child Counts 

http://fi rst5ecc.org/index.php 

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP FOR PROTECTING
 

CHILDREN (JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA)
 

From 1996 through 2006, the Community Partnership 

for Protecting Children initiative, begun by the Edna 

McConnell Clark Foundation and now housed at 

the Center for the Study of Social Policy, sought to 

change how society protects children. It based its 

community partnerships approach on the premise 

that no single factor is responsible for child abuse and 

neglect and that no one public agency can safeguard 

children. Children’s safety depends on strong families, 

and strong families depend on connections with a 

broad range of people, organizations, and community 

institutions. Jacksonville’s project, one of the four 

original Community Partnership for Protecting 

Children pilot sites, focused on child safety in fi ve 

housing developments with its mission of protecting 

children by strengthening the community. Th e 

partnership built relationships between public child 

welfare agency caseworkers, local service providers, 

and residents of the housing communities to support 

each other and protect children. 

As the public child welfare agency began focusing 

more on the communities it served, it chose to 

station frontline and administrative staff in the 

neighborhoods for part of the week. Agency staff 

became knowledgeable of both the formal and 

informal leaders in the communities and worked with 

them to connect families with needed services, such as 

76 Appendix E—Examples Of Community Partnerships 
 

 

domestic violence counseling, drug treatment services, 

tutoring, youth programs, and prenatal care resources. 

Multiple services for parents were co-located at a 

local high school to make them more accessible, and 

caseworkers implemented “Individualized Courses of 

Action” to encourage families to set their own goals 

and to help find community support to achieve them. 

The housing development residents served as the core 

of the partnership. Organizers placed a great emphasis 

on identifying local leaders, reaching out broadly to 

residents, and organizing neighborhood celebrations. 

The partnership established a governance committee 

composed of residents, government agencies, and 

nonprofit organizations who together serve as a board 

of directors and guide partnership efforts. Most of the 

members live or work in the housing developments; 

the others come from nonprofi t organizations 

and government agencies. The partnership also 

reviews data from the self-evaluation process, plans 

whatever changes are needed, works together to plan 

neighborhood celebrations, and identifi es ongoing 

needs and available resources to further the work of 

the partnership. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 Citizen Power for Stronger Families. Community 

Partnerships for Protecting Children: Jacksonville, 

Florida. White, A. (2001). 

www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/Jacksonville.pdf 

• 	 Community Partnerships for Protecting Children. 

Lessons, Opportunities, and Challenges. A Report 

to the Field. Center for the Study of Social 

Policy. (2005). 

www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/Lessons_Opp__ 

Challenges.pdf 

• 	 Strengthening Communities: A Family-Centered 

Strategy in Jacksonville, Florida. 

In Best Practice, Next Practice. White, A. (Fall 

2000). 

www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/ 

downloads/newsletter/BPNPFall00.pdf 

Websites
 

• 	 Florida Department of Children and Families 

www.dcf.state.fl .us/programs/cbc/ 

• 	 Center for the Study of Social Policy, Center for 

Community Partnerships in Child Welfare 

www.cssp.org/center/community_partnership2. 

html 

DAWN PROJECT (MARION COUNTY, INDIANA) 

The Dawn Project, established by State and local 

officials in Marion County (Indianapolis), created a 

system of care to serve children with serious emotional 

and behavioral problems who are separated or at risk 

of separation from their families. These children and 

families are involved in multiple systems, and the 

Dawn Project works to integrate these systems to 

carry out a comprehensive plan for them. Th rough 

wraparound support, the project has decreased 

the amount of time youth are served outside their 

community. The project uses a strengths-based and 

family- and community-centered approach that 

emphasizes the importance of family involvement at 

all levels of service delivery. 

The Dawn Project uses pooled funding and is 

governed by a cross-system consortium, which 

regularly brings together administrators from the 

child-serving systems in Marion County, as well as 

family members. The project is run by Choices, Inc., 

a nonprofit care management organization. Referrals 

are made through the Marion County child welfare 

system, as well as the juvenile justice and education 

systems. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 Impact of the Dawn Project on the Marion County 

Children’s Social Services System. Anderson, J., & 

Wright, E. (2005). 

https://archives.iupui.edu/bitstream/handle 

/2450/520/158_DawnSep05.pdf?sequence=1 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

77 
 

 

 

• Making Interagency Initiatives Work for 

Children and Families in the Child Welfare 

System. In Promising Approaches for 

Behavioral Health Services to Children and 

Adolescents and Their Families in Managed 

Care. Hepburn, K., & McCarthy, J. (2003). 

http://rtckids.fmhi.usf.edu/rtcpubs/hctrking/ 

pubs/promising_approaches/toc_03.html 

Websites 

• Choices 

www.choicesteam.org/dawn.html 

IOWA COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS FOR
 

PROTECTING CHILDREN (STATEWIDE)
 

Iowa’s initiative began in Cedar Rapids as one of the 

four Edna McConnell Clark Community Partnership 

for Protecting Children pilot sites. Encouraged by 

improvements in community-based family supports 

in Cedar Rapids, State leaders decided in 2001 to 

roll out the partnership model across the State. 

They integrated partnerships with established 

State funding streams for community-based social 

services programs, built a training infrastructure, 

and established quality assurance measures. In 2008, 

there were 39 community partnerships affi liated with 

child welfare offices, which encompasses nearly all of 

Iowa’s counties. 

Each partnership creates a network and a community 

hub to support child protection and family support 

efforts. Members of the networks typically include 

the public child protective services (CPS) agency, 

parents, schools, faith institutions, mental health 

professionals, healthcare providers, substance abuse 

and domestic violence programs, child care providers, 

law enforcement, and neighborhood groups. CPS staff 

associated with the community hubs are accessible to 

families and work closely with other service providers 

to meet the specific needs of the community. Th e 

partnerships encourage family engagement through 

family team meetings and emphasize shared decisionmaking with stakeholders outside the child welfare 

system in policy and practice decisions. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 Community Partnerships in Iowa. In Child 

Welfare Matters. National Child Welfare 

Resource Center on Organizational 

Improvement. (Fall 2005). 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/rcpdfs/ 

cwmatters2.pdf 

• 	 Community Partnerships for Protecting Children. 

Lessons, Opportunities, and Challenges. A Report 

to the Field. Center for the Study of Social 

Policy. (2005). 

www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/Lessons_Opp__ 

Challenges.pdf 

• 	 Scale of Change: Creating and Sustaining 

Collaborative Child Welfare Reform Across Cities 

and States. White, A. (2008). 

www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/ScaleOfChange.web. 

pdf 

Websites 

• 	 Iowa Department of Human Services 

www.dhs.state.ia.us/cppc/ 

• 	 Center for the Study of Social Policy, Center 

for Community Partnerships in Child Welfare 

www.cssp.org/center/community_partnership2. 

html 

NEIGHBORHOOD PLACE UJIMA (LOUISVILLE, 


KENTUCKY)
 

The residents of the West End neighborhood of 

Louisville, Kentucky had been dissatisfied with the way 

social services were administered. Many community 

leaders were concerned by the fragmented services, 

a lack of community input into decisions, and the 

absence of a positive presence in the neighborhood. 

78 Appendix E—Examples Of Community Partnerships 
In response, a partnership of agencies and community 

residents established the Neighborhood Place Ujima 

(pronounced Oo-gee’-ma, which means “collective 

responsibility” in Swahili) as a one-stop, decentralized 

social services center. Initially supported by the 

Edna McConnell Clark Foundation’s Community 

Partnership for Protecting Children initiative, 

Neighborhood Place Ujima grew from one to eight 

centers in Jefferson County. 

The neighborhood centers provide increased access 

to coordinated health, education, employment, and 

human services, including afterschool programs, 

child care, adult education programs, and Alcoholics 

Anonymous meetings. The centers co-locate these 

services and providers in accessible neighborhood 

facilities, which often are schools. When parents 

from the neighborhood need child care, food stamps, 

counseling, or help with their children, or if they are 

ordered by the courts to work with child welfare, they 

can access most of the necessary supports through the 

neighborhood center. 

The importance of including community leaders and 

local residents in the governance of Neighborhood 

Place Ujima has been an important feature from 

the start. Each center has a community council to 

monitor, evaluate, and shape its programs. Th ey also 

routinely collect and use data to improve decisions 

about services. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 Collaboration Demands Respect. Making Decisions 

in Common: Community Partnerships for 

Protecting Children, Louisville, Kentucky. White, 

A. (2001). 

www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/Louisville.pdf 

• 	 Community Partnership for Protecting Children, 

Louisville, Kentucky: A Report to the Community 

1996–2006. Center for the Study of Social 

Policy. (2007). 

www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/Celebrating%20 

cppc%2010.pdf 

• 	 Community Partnerships for Protecting Children. 

Lessons, Opportunities, and Challenges. A Report 

to the Field. Center for the Study of Social 

Policy. (2005). 

www.cssp.org/uploadFiles/Lessons_Opp__ 

Challenges.pdf 

• 	 Louisville’s Neighborhood Place System: A Model 

Approach to Measure Collaboration. Michalczyk, 

L., Lentz, T., & Martin, L.D. (n.d.). 

www.louisvilleky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/913F03A9­

2390-4C04-A6B0-5E453037DF36/0/ 

NParticleMay2005.pdf 

Websites 

• 	 Neighborhood Place 

www.louisvilleky.gov/NeighborhoodPlace 

• 	 Center for the Study of Social Policy, Center for 

Community Partnerships in Child Welfare 

www.cssp.org/center/community_partnership2. 

html 

PATCH (DORCHESTER AND NORTH QUABBIN, 


MASSACHUSETTS)
 

The Massachusetts Department of Social Services 

(DSS) adapted the British Patch approach (“patch” 

means neighborhood) as a strategy to link public child 

welfare agencies with family support and prevention 

efforts in neighborhood settings. During the 1980s, 

DSS invested Federal title IV-B funds to develop 

family support services through a set of Community 

Connections Coalitions. These coalitions increased 

capacity for family-based services, but they operated 

in isolation from the public child welfare system. 

In response, DSS established two Patch sites—one 

in Dorchester (a part of Boston) and one in North 

Quabbin—in which DSS local offi ces were joined 

with existing Community Connections Coalitions. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

79 
At the two Patch sites, neighborhood teams made up of 

DSS caseworkers, other State agency representatives, 

and staff from community family support agencies 

work to strengthen community-based services and to 

connect families to available resources. Combining 

both child protection and prevention efforts in a 

neighborhood setting, the Patch approach works to 

break down barriers between agencies and the people 

they serve. Families connect to community resources 

more quickly, thereby minimizing the need for 

lengthy DSS interventions. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 The Patch Approach: Blending Prevention and 

Protection in the ASFA Era. National Child 

Welfare Resource Center for Family-Centered 

Practice. (2000). 

www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/ 

downloads/newsletter/BPNPFall00.pdf 

Websites 

• 	 Massachusetts Department of Health and 

Human Services 

www.mass.gov/?pageID=eohhs2terminal&L= 

4&L0=Home&L1=Consumer&L2=Family+S 

ervices&L3=Child+Abuse+and+Neglect&sid 

=Eeohhs2&b=terminalcontent&f=dss_c_fsi_ 

overview&csid=Eeohhs2 

CIRCLE OF HOPE (ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI) 

The purpose of the Circle of Hope project is 

to increase the well-being of and improve the 

permanency outcomes for children aff ected by 

methamphetamine or other substance abuse within 

Missouri’s Southwestern Region. The project off ers 

intensive in-home services and community-based 

support for children and families involved with 

methamphetamine in order to allow children to 

remain safely at home while parents receive drug 

treatment and counseling services. 

Th e project is a collaboration among One Hope 

United, the Missouri DSS/Children’s Division, the 

Missouri Department of Mental Health/Division 

of Alcohol and Drug Abuse, and the Missouri 

Institute of Mental Health. In addition, One Hope 

United is working with the Missouri Juvenile Justice 

Association and other State and community partners 

to strengthen interagency collaboration and integration of programs and services through the creation 

of a statewide Missouri Alliance for Drug Endangered 

Children. Circle of Hope is funded through the 

Regional Partnership Grant Program of the Children’s 

Bureau, U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services. 

Websites 

• 	 Missouri Alliance for Drug Endangered 

Children 

www.mo-dec.org/ 

• 	 Missouri Department of Mental Health, 

Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse 

http://dmh.mo.gov/ada/adaindex.htm 

• 	 Missouri DSS, Children’s Division 

www.dss.mo.gov/cd/index.htm 

• 	 Missouri Institute of Mental Health 

www.mimh.edu/ 

• 	 One Hope United 

www.onehopeunited.org/ 

GRAFTON COUNTY GREENBOOK PROJECT 

(GRAFTON COUNTY, NEW HAMPSHIRE) 

The Grafton County Greenbook Project was one of 

six sites participating in the Greenbook Initiative, 

an interdepartmental demonstration initiative of the 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

and the U.S. Department of Justice that sought to 

strengthen the capacity of communities to address the 

co-occurrence of child maltreatment and domestic 

80 Appendix E—Examples Of Community Partnerships 
 

 

violence. The primary partners for the Grafton 

County project included the Grafton County Family 

Division Courts, the State and local district offi ces of 

the Division for Children, Youth and Families, and 

various domestic violence agencies that serve Grafton 

County residents (Women’s Supportive Services 

in Claremont, Women’s Information Services in 

Lebanon, Voices Against Violence in Plymouth, and 

The Support Center in Littleton). 

The primary activities of the project included 

developing system-specific practice guides and 

protocols; enhancing the Domestic Violence Specialist 

Project through training, policy development 

and standardization of practice; structured, 

multidisciplinary practice/philosophical discussions; 

cross-system training; training on working with men 

who batter and other topics designed to enhance 

understanding and practice across the disciplines; 

setting up a process for case reviews within the 

Division for Children, Youth and Families; and 

sustainability planning. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 The Greenbook National Evaluation Team. 

(2008). The Greenbook Initiative Final 

Evaluation Report. 

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/08/SR/Greenbook/ 

index.shtml. 

• 	 Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(7) [Entire 

issue devoted to the Greenbook Initiative]. 

Websites 

• 	 Grafton County Greenbook Project 

www.thegreenbook.info/grafton.htm 

• 	 New Hampshire Division for Children, Youth 

and Families 

www.dhhs.state.nh.us/DHHS/DCYF/default. 

htm 

NORTH CAROLINA STATE COLLABORATIVE FOR 

CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES (STATEWIDE) 

The North Carolina State Collaborative for Children, 

Youth and Families has adopted a systems of care 

approach to provide a forum for collaboration, 

advocacy, and action. Members of the collaborative 

include parents, public and private agencies serving 

children and families, and other community partners. 

The collaborative provides a forum for decisionmakers to discuss issues related to the needs of children 

and families and then return to their own agencies to 

make informed decisions that fit the efforts of other 

members. As a result of the collaborative, there is an 

increased understanding among agencies at the State 

and local levels about who does what and why. 

In addition, the collaborative develops 

recommendations for the coordination of services, 

funding, and training, and provides support for 

other State and local collaborative initiatives. 

Several products intended for shared use have been 

developed, including a list of tools public agencies can 

use to screen and assess children, matrices of funding 

sources and data sources used by diff erent agencies, 

and a common training curriculum. 

North Carolina also has implemented a multiple 

response system (MRS) as part of a comprehensive 

reform of its child welfare system. Based on the 

philosophy of family-centered practices, the MRS 

seeks to provide a more individualized response to 

children and families involved with the child welfare 

system. MRS reform is also coupled with North 

Carolina’s movement toward incorporating systems 

of care values and principles. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 Child Welfare Perspectives on Systems of Care: 

North Carolina. National Child Welfare Resource 

Center for Organizational Improvement. In 

Child Welfare Matters (2008, Spring/Summer). 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/rcpdfs/ 

cwmatters7.pdf 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

81 
• 	 North Carolina System of Care Handbook for 

Children, Youth, and Families. North Carolina 

Families United. (2006). 

www.nccollaborative.org/intranet/download 

ManagerControl.php?mode=getFile&elem 

entID=45&type=5&atomID=13 

Websites 

• 	 North Carolina Collaborative for Children, 

Youth, and Families 

www.nccollaborative.org/management/1/Home/ 

• 	 North Carolina Division of Social Services – 

MRS 

www.dhhs.state.nc.us/dss/mrs/index.htm 

MEDICINE MOON INITIATIVE (INDIAN
 

RESERVATIONS ACROSS NORTH DAKOTA, 


INCLUDING FORT BERTHOLD, SPIRIT LAKE, 


STANDING ROCK, AND TURTLE MOUNTAIN)
 

The Medicine Moon Initiative, which is funded by a 

grant from the Children’s Bureau, U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services, is a collaborative 

effort to improve Tribal child welfare outcomes 

across North Dakota. Administered through the 

Native America Training Institute in partnership with 

four Tribal nations in North Dakota, the initiative 

promotes the development of a comprehensive, 

culturally appropriate system of care for Native 

American children and families involved with the 

child welfare system. 

The initiative builds on a decade of planning and 

development efforts, as well as experience gained 

through the Sacred Child Project, a grant funded 

by the Center for Mental Health Services, U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services. Th e 

initiative emphasizes systems of care and infrastructure 

development in the Tribal child welfare system by: 

• 	 Formalizing linkages among the emerging Tribal 

and State systems of care 

• 	 Improving Tribal-State planning 

• 	 Increasing capacity to collect and use data to 

improve child welfare outcomes 

• 	 Monitoring fidelity to the wraparound process 

• 	 Instituting quality assurance processes. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 Medicine Moon Initiative to Improve Tribal 

Child Welfare Outcomes: Five Year Strategic 

Plan. Medicine Moon Initiative. (n.d.). 

www.nativeinstitute.org/mmi%20pdf/ 

MMIstratvision.pdf 

Websites 

• 	 Native American Training Institute 

www.nativeinstitute.org/mmi.htm 

• 	 Child Welfare Information Gateway, Systems 

of Care Grantees 

www.childwelfare.gov/management/ 

reform/soc/communicate/initiative/profi le. 

cfm?grantee=9&menu=about 

CUYAHOGA FAMILY TO FAMILY (CUYAHOGA
 

COUNTY, OHIO)
 

With support from the Annie E. Casey Foundation 

Family to Family Initiative, the Cuyahoga County 

Department of Children and Family Services in 

Cleveland, Ohio, developed a decentralized system of 

community-based foster care. Through this initiative, 

the child welfare system places children together 

with their siblings in their own neighborhood, and 

birth and foster families build bridges to support 

the children better. The neighborhood focus makes 

82 Appendix E—Examples Of Community Partnerships 
 

it easier to provide ongoing services, such as afterschool programs and respite care, for foster families. 

The Family to Family Initiative has evolved into part 

of a more comprehensive partnership, the Cuyahoga 

Tapestry System of Care, which is supported by 

the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration, U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services. The Tapestry System of Care builds 

on the neighborhood concept and has broadened 

it to foster stronger working relationships among 

neighborhood provider organizations and childserving systems, including child welfare, mental 

health, juvenile justice, and drug and alcohol 

prevention. 

Selected Publications 

• 	 Child Welfare Perspectives on Systems of Care: 

Cuyahoga County. In Child Welfare Matters. 

(2008, Spring/Summer). 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/rcpdfs/ 

cwmatters7.pdf 

• 	 More Foster Families, Fewer Children Entering 

Care: Rebuilding Family Foster Care in Cuyahoga 

and Anne Arundel Counties. Pascual, P. In 

AdvoCasey. (1999/2000, Fall/Winter). 

www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfi les/ 

advocasey_fall1999.pdf 

• 	 The Story of Family to Family. Th e Early Years 

1992-2006. An Initiative to Improve Child 

Welfare Systems. Fiester, L. (2008). 

www.aecf.org/~/media/PublicationFiles/ 

F2F%20Book%20layout%20DRAFT%20 

9%2012.pdf 

Websites 

• 	 Cuyahoga County Department of Children and 

Family Services 

http://cfs.cuyahogacounty.us/ 

• 	 Cuyahoga Tapestry System of Care 

www.cuyahogatapestry.org/ 

• 	 Annie E. Casey Foundation, Family to Family 

Initiative 

www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/Family%20 

to%20Family.aspx 

ONTRACK, INC. (MEDFORD, OREGON) 

This partnership between CPS, OnTrack Inc., Court 

Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), the Circuit 

Court, OPTIONS of Southern Oregon, and the 

local Commissions on Children and Families, seeks 

to reduce the number of children in Jackson and 

Josephine Counties who are placed into foster care 

due to parental substance abuse. Services include: 

• 	 Increased access to model residential and 

outpatient substance abuse treatment for parents 

and children 

• 	 Case management 

• 	 Emergency housing 

• 	 Mental health services 

• 	 Location of family resources 

• 	 Foster parent training 

• 	 Family advocacy to bridge and mediate systems. 

The project provides short- and long-term support for 

families that will help them gain and maintain sobriety, 

build stronger parent-child bonds, move toward selfsufficiency, and ensure safety and permanency for 

children. OnTrack is funded through the Regional 

Partnership Grant Program of the Children’s Bureau, 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

83 
Websites
 

• 	 OnTrack, Inc. 

www.ontrackrecovery.org/ 

• 	 Options for Southern Oregon, Inc. 

www.optionsonline.org/ 

• 	 Oregon Commission on Children and Families 

www.oregon.gov/OCCF/ 

PARENTING IN RECOVERY PROJECT (TRAVIS
 

COUNTY, TEXAS)
 

Parenting in Recovery is led by a coalition of 

community service providers who cooperatively 

provide a flexible, comprehensive continuum of 

services to women, children, and families who are 

involved in the State child welfare system as a result of 

maternal drug or alcohol dependence. Th ese services 

may include residential substance abuse treatment 

for mothers and children, assistance in accessing 

stable housing, employment training and education, 

child care, and wraparound support. The goal of the 

Parenting in Recovery coalition is to help mothers of 

young children recover from substance dependence, 

maintain or regain custody of their children, and 

establish safe and healthy lives and homes. 

The Parenting in Recovery core partnership includes 

Travis County Health & Human Services, the CPS 

Division of the Texas Department of Family and 

Protective Services, the Travis County Family Drug 

Treatment Court, Austin Recovery, and Foundation 

Communities. Parenting in Recovery is funded 

through the Regional Partnership Grant Program of 

the Children’s Bureau, U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services. 

Websites 

• 	 Austin Recovery 

www.austinrecovery.org/ 

• 	 Foundation Communities 

www.foundcom.org/ 

• 	 Texas Department of Family and Protective 

Services, CPS Division 

www.dfps.state.tx.us/Child_Protection/About_ 

Child_Protective_Services/ 

• 	 Travis County Health & Human Services 

www.co.travis.tx.us/health_human_services/ 

 84 Appendix E—Examples Of Community Partnerships 
 

 

APPENDIX F 

Partnerships with 

the Courts 

The courts are often a key member of community 

partnerships working to strengthen and support 

families. The following are several programs and 

projects that involve the court system. 

THE STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 

(CIP) – U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES, ADMINISTRATION FOR 

CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, CHILDREN’S BUREAU 

The State Court Improvement Program (CIP) was 

created as part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation 

Act of 1993 (P. L. 103-66) to provide Federal 

funds to States and Tribes to support change and 

improvements in the court system for children and 

families involved with the child welfare system. 

Typical activities conducted by the grantees include 

the development of mediation programs, joint 

agency-court training, automated docketing and 

case tracking, linked agency-court data systems, one 

judge/one family models, time-specifi c docketing, 

formalized relationships with the child welfare 

agency, improvement of representation for children 

and families, Child and Family Services Review 

program improvement plan (PIP) development and 

implementation, and legislative changes.1 

The CIP has also launched a new online community 

for all who are concerned with child welfare and the 

court system. The CIP Community of Practice is an 

open exchange of information, experience, initiatives, 

and ideas on court improvement. Features include 

What’s New and a calendar of upcoming events; users 

can join or initiate a discussion, comment on a work 

in progress, or access reference documents and links.2 

For more information, visit the CIP Community of 

Practice website at http://inotes.icfconsulting.com/ 

hhs/cip.nsf/home?openform. 

HEALING THE YOUNGEST CHILDREN: MODEL
 

COURT-COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS – 


AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
 

A 2007 article by the American Bar Association 

highlighted four model court-community 

partnerships that apply research to court practices 

in order to improve outcomes for maltreated 

infants, toddlers, and their families. In addition to 

descriptions of the projects and the interventions 

used, sample cases showed how each model serves 

and improves outcomes for young children and their 

families. 

1

 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (ACF). (2009). Court Improvement 

Program. Available: www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/programs_fund/state_tribal/ct_imprv.htm. 

2

 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ACF. (2009, April). Court Improvement Program community of practice. Available: 

http://cbexpress.acf.hhs.gov/index.cfm?event=website.viewArticles&issueid=104§ionid=1&articleid=2572. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

85 
 

One of the models highlighted is the Court Teams 

for Maltreated Infants and Toddlers project. In this 

partnership, the Miami (FL) Court Team, ZERO 

TO THREE, and others work with juvenile and 

family court judges to improve the health and wellbeing of children and families by breaking the cycle 

of intergenerational violence. They help establish a 

partnership between a judge and a local community 

coordinator to create a court-community team 

composed of key child-serving stakeholders, to build 

knowledge and raise awareness of the needs of young 

children in foster care, and to complete a community 

needs assessment that identifi es available services and 

gaps. Based on the needs assessment, the teams then 

work to provide additional services for babies, such 

as court-ordered referrals for health and dental care, 

quality child care, behavioral and developmental 

assessments, therapeutic services, and frequent visits 

with parents.3 

The American Bar Association also shares tips 

for implementing successful court-community 

partnerships that are drawn from the four models 

profiled. Although each project differs, they all 

share three basic beliefs that can help others working 

to develop community partnerships involving the 

courts: 

• 	 Relationships are key to changing systems 

and practices. Success hinges on relationships 

between the judge and the other project 

members; the judge and clients; clients and their 

service providers; parents’ and children’s service 

providers; and, most importantly, between the 

parents and their children. 

• 	 Interventions informed by early childhood 

development research lead to better outcomes for 

children and families. 

• 	 Communication and collaboration among 

partnership members and families lead to service 

plans that address the specific needs of young 

children and families. Because relationships take 

time to develop, it is important to have a longterm view and to continue with the intervention, 

even when experiencing challenges or setbacks.4 

For more on these and other court models, go to 

www.childlawpractice.org. 

THE CHILD VICTIMS ACT MODEL COURT
 

PROJECT – NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE
 

AND FAMILY COURT JUDGES (NCJFCJ)
 

Building on reforms and other work already underway, 

the NCJFCJ launched its national Child Victims 

Act Model Court Project. Funded by the Offi ce of 

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. 

Department of Justice, it includes 36 jurisdictions 

across the country. The Model Courts engage in 

reform efforts by bringing together a broad range 

of system stakeholders to critically review how well 

the court and other systems are meeting the needs of 

children and families, including identifying barriers to 

the timeliness of court events and delivery of services 

for children and families in care. The Model Courts 

then design and implement court- and agencybased practice and policy changes to address these 

barriers and provide training to local legal and other 

professionals about effective leadership, foundational 

practice issues, and emerging challenges. As they 

implement and assess reform efforts at the local level, 

the Model Courts use their experiences, successes, 

and lessons learned to support statewide reform 

efforts. NCJFCJ facilitates the reform process at both 

3

 Hudson, L., Klain, E., Smariga, M., & Youcha, V. (2007, February). Healing the youngest children: Model court-community 

partnerships. Child Law Practice, 25(12). Available: www.abanet.org/child/court-com.pdf. 

4

 Hudson, L., Klain, E., Smariga, M., & Youcha, V. (2007, February). 

86 Appendix F—Partnerships with the Courts 
the local and State levels and links the efforts of the For more information on the Model Courts and other 

Model Courts to other national reform eff orts.5 programs, go to www.ncjfcj.org. 

5

 National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (2009). The resource guidelines: Supporting best practices and building 

foundations for innovation in child abuse and neglect cases. Looking back and moving forward. Available: www.ncjfcj.org/images/stories/

dept/ppcd/pdf/rg.supporting%20best%20practices%20and%20building%20foundations%20for.pdf. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

87 

 

APPENDIX G 

The Collaboration 

Checklist1 

Starting a partnership—or even knowing if your organization is ready to begin a close working relationship with 

others—can be diffi cult. The checklist below pinpoints the conditions required for a successful collaboration 

and provides questions to help determine whether collaboration makes sense. Not all questions may have 

answers, or even favorable ones, especially for a new partnership. But it is very helpful to have a clear sense 

of circumstances at the outset so that potential problems can be brought to the surface and preemptive action 

taken, as appropriate. 

❑ The host organization is ready. 

❏ Does your organization have goals it cannot meet alone? 

❏ What do you gain from participating in a collaborative initiative? What do you lose? Do the gains outweigh 

the losses? 

❏ Are you prepared to allocate time, staff, and other resources to the effort as needed? 

❏ Do you understand how your own organization operates? 

❏ How will it transition from working alone to working as part of a system? What is the incentive to do so? 

What has to change? 

❏ Is your organization willing to devote staff and resources to develop trust and skills in the partnership? 

❑ The right partners are involved. 

❏ What organizations and people have a stake in or share the partnership’s goals? 

❏ What organizations and people have the knowledge, expertise, and resources to make them happen? 

❏ Can each of these organizations and people commit to being quality partners? Will they commit time, staff , 

and other resources as needed? 

❏ What can each partner contribute? Include financial and nonfinancial/in-kind contributions (e.g., credibility, 

access to population, staff, technology, data, equipment, space). 

❏ Does the partnership include meaningful representation of those who will be directly affected by its eff orts, 

such as community residents, service providers, and local officials? 

1 Williams Torres, G., & Margolin, F. S. (2003). The collaboration primer: Proven strategies, considerations, and tools to get you started. 

Available: www.hret.org/hret/programs/content/colpri.pdf. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

89 
❑	 A shared vision unifies the partners. 

❏ What motivates each of the partners to be involved? 

❏ What do they most want to accomplish through their involvement? 

❏ Do the key words and phrases used to respond to the above questions match the vision and objectives of the 

partnership? 

❏ If not, can they be used as a basis for further discussion and refinement of a shared vision? 

❏ What is the partnership’s mission statement? How does it relate to the home organization’s mission? 

❑	 Partners are aware of what is expected of them. 

❏ What are the ground rules for participating in the partnership? 

❏ Are roles and responsibilities within the partnership clearly defi ned? 

❑	 Partners know the partnership’s goals

 and objectives. 

❏ What are the partnership’s goals? Think of goals as long-term activities that help implement a mission and 

vision. Achieving them will serve as a measure of progress toward realizing the mission and vision. 

❏ Are the objectives clear and realistic? Objectives are short-term activities that help implement a goal and serve 

as a measure of progress on achieving that goal. 

❑	 People to do the work have been identifi ed, 

assigned, and made accountable. 

❏ Who is best suited to achieve an objective? 

❏ Who will be accountable? Workgroups? Individuals? Organizations? 

❏ Have specific individuals and organizations been linked to the specific objectives you have identified to ensure 

that the objectives will be carried out in a timely manner? 

❏ Is staff paid or volunteer? 

❏ Do partners donate staff? What challenges does this arrangement present? 

❏ How is staff accountable to the partnership? 

❏	 “Best practices” have been researched and 

shared in the partnership. 

❏ What kinds of interventions and programs work well for the goals the partnership is trying to achieve? 

❏ What do you know about other collaborative efforts that have similar missions and goals? 

❏ What are some lessons your collaborative can learn from these eff orts? 

❏ Financial needs for the partnership are known 

 and addressed. 

❏ How much money does the partnership need, and how will it be secured in a timely manner? 

❏ What kinds of funding sources are necessary to be successful? 

❏ Is there a written financial plan and a clear strategy with identified responsibilities for implementing it? 

❏ Has the partnership made certain that the organization through which funding flows does not have greater 

decision-making authority in the collaborative because of this fiscal management role? 

90 Appendix G—The Collaboration Checklist 
❏	 The partnership encourages participation in and 

sustainability of its work. 

❏ What incentives and rewards are used to recognize and sustain partners’ contributions and the changes they 

make in their own organizations that are consistent with the shared vision, mission, and goals? 

❏ How does the partnership identify and encourage new members to participate? 

❏ How well are new members informed about the roles, responsibilities, and rewards of participation? 

❏ How well do new members reflect the diversity of the stakeholders that the partnership serves? 

❏	 There is a defined governance model. 

❏ Who makes decisions in the collaborative, and what authority do they have to make them? 

❏ How will governing responsibilities be rotated over time? 

❏ How will governance reflect and respect the diversity of the collaborative and its stakeholders? 

❏	 Leadership is eff ective. 

❏ How adequate is the leadership team in securing resources, managing conflict, and balancing needs and 

interests? 

❏ How is new leadership identified and rotated into key positions? 

❏ How is the partnership administered 


and managed?
 

❏What could be done to improve it? 

❏	 The partnership has a communications and 

 outreach plan. 

❏ How do people find out about the partnership’s activities? 

❏ How does the partnership publicize activities and provide effective stakeholder education and information 

about its work? 

❏ How well can the partnership inform and engage people, organizations, and communities with diverse cultural 

and ethnic interests or for whom English is not their dominant language? 

❏ Does the partnership communicate well and regularly with grassroots organizations? 

❏	 The partnership’s work is monitored, evaluated, 

and revised on a regular basis. 

❏ How is progress monitored and success evaluated in the partnership? 

❏ Are both the results and processes tracked? 

❏ What data, resources, and evaluation expertise are available to the partnership? 

❏ How can the findings of such evaluations be used to make changes in the partnership’s processes? 

❏	 The partnership knows what challenges it faces. 

❏ What barriers or conflicts make progress difficult? 

❏ How can those barriers or conflicts be resolved or overcome? 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

91 

APPENDIX H 

Potential Community 

Collaboration Partners1 

This list of potential community collaboration 

partners was developed by the American Bar 

Association Center on Children and the Law in 

relation to community collaborations for juvenile 

dependency court improvement; however, many of 

these partners may be appropriate in numerous and 

diverse community partnerships. There are many 

potential valuable contributors to a partnership, and 

this list is not intended to be exhaustive. 

Naming specific organizations does not constitute 

an endorsement by the U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services. 

Business and Financial Services 

Advertising and Public Relations Firms 

Banks and Credit Unions 

Business Development Centers 

Businesses That Focus on Youth, Such as 

 Sporting Goods 

Chambers of Commerce 

Economic Development Centers 

Children, Youth, and Teen Programs 

Boy and Girl Scouts of America 

Boys and Girls Clubs 

Camp Fire Girls 

Child Abuse Prevention Centers 

Child Care Providers 

Child Care Resource and Referral Programs 

Children First 

Children Formerly in Foster Care (Teens or Adults) 

Citizen Foster Care Review Boards 

Day Care Centers 

Families for Kids Projects 

Head Start 

Job Corps 

Juvenile Justice Organizations 

Parent Resource Centers 

Parents Who Have Been Through the Court System 

Relief Nurseries 

Youth Development Organizations 

Youth Service Teams 

1 American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law. (n.d.). Community partnerships for juvenile dependency court

improvement. Available: www.abanet.org/child/partnerships.html. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

93 
 

 

 

Crisis and Emergency Services 

American Red Cross (and Local Chapters) 

Crisis Centers 

Domestic Violence Programs 

Parents Anonymous 

Salvation Army 

Victim Assistance Programs 

Women’s Crisis Services 

Educational Institutions 

Community Colleges 

Departments of Education 

Early Childhood Development 

Early Intervention Programs 

Educational Service Districts 

Law Schools, Especially Child Advocacy 

Legal Clinics 

Parent Teacher Associations 

Schools for the Deaf and/or Blind 

Schools (Public and Private) 

State Colleges 

Universities and University-based Programs 

Employment Agencies 

Employee Assistance Programs 

Employment Departments 

JOBS Programs 

Jobs Training Partnership Act and Private 

 Industry Councils 

Sheltered Workshops and Community 

 Employment Programs 

Summer Youth Employment 

Unions 

Government and Government Associations 

Association of Counties 

City Governments 

Commission on Children and Families 

Council of State Governments 

Councils on Crime and Delinquency 

County Governments 

County Health Departments 

Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) 

Court Systems 

Crimes Against Children Units 

Department of Corrections 

Department of Human Resources/Social Services/

 Adult and Family Services 

Department of Transportation 

Disabilities Commission 

Disability Services Advisory Councils 

District Attorney Associations 

District Attorneys/Prosecutors 

Governor’s Offi ce 

Health Division 

Indian Law Centers 

Judges 

Juvenile Department Directors 

Law Enforcement 

Legal Aid Bureaus 

Legislatures 

Mental Health and Developmental Disability 

 Services Division 

Military/Armed Services/National Guard 

Neighborhood Associations 

Office of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs 

Office of Information Services 

Office of Medical Assistance 

Public Defender’s Offi ce 

Senior and Disabled Services Division 

Service Integration and Community 

 Partnership Projects 

Services to Children and Families 

Sheriff s’ Offices 

State Police 

Transit Organizations 

Trial Court Administrators 

Tribes and Tribal Courts 

Veterans Administration 

Vocational Rehabilitation Division 

Volunteer Program 

Health Services and Support Groups 

AIDS Organizations 

Alcohol and Drug Abuse Treatment and 

 Support Programs 

Deaf and Hard-of-hearing Organizations 

Group Homes 

94 Appendix H—Potential Community Collaboration Partners 
 

 

 

 

Health Insurance Companies 

Home Health Agencies 

Hospice Organizations 

Hospitals 

Independent Living Programs 

Long-term Care Facilities (Adult Foster Homes, 

Residential Care Facilities, Assisted Living 

 Facilities, Nursing Facilities) 

March of Dimes 

Medical Societies 

Mental Health Counseling and 

Treatment Programs 

Rehabilitation Organizations 

Respite Care Programs 

Retirement Centers 

Senior Centers 

Senior or Disability Programs 

Sexual Assault Programs 

National Organizations and Associations 

(and Their Local Chapters) 

American Adoption Congress 

American Alliance for Health, Physical 

Education, Recreation and Dance 

American Association of University Women 

American Bar Association Center on Children 

and the Law 

American Humane Association, 

 Children’s Division 

American Public Welfare Association 

Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law 

The Center for Law and Social Policy 

Center for the Study of Social Policy 

Center for the Study of Youth Policy 

Center on Social Welfare Policy and Law 

Child Welfare Institute 

Child Welfare League of America 

Children’s Defense Fund 

Children’s Rights, Inc. 

Family Builders by Adoption 

Homebuilders 

Juvenile Law Center 

Juvenile Rights Project 

National Adoption Center 

National Association of Child Advocates 

National Association of Counsel for Children 

National Association of Foster Care Reviewers 

National Association of Public Child 

Welfare Administrators 

National Association of Social Workers 

National Association of Women Judges 

National Center for Juvenile Justice 

National Center for Missing and 

 Exploited Children 

National Center for Prosecution of Child Abuse 

National Center for State Courts 

National Center for Youth Law/ 

Youth Law Center 

National Child Abuse Coalition 

National Child Welfare Resource Centers 

National Children’s Advocacy Center 

National Coalition to End Racism in America’s

 Child Care System 

National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse 

National Conference of Commissioners for 

 Uniform State Laws 

National Conference of State Legislatures 

National Council on Adoption 

National Council of Juvenile and Family 

 Court Judges 

National Court Appointed Special 

 Advocate Association 

National Foster Care Resource Center 

National Foster Parent Association 

National Indian Child Welfare Association 

National Legal Aid and Defenders Association 

National Organization for Victim Assistance 

North American Council on 

 Adoptable Children 

Northwest Resource Center for Children, 

Youth and Families 

Southern Regional Children’s Advocacy Center 

Support Center for Child Advocates 

Women’s Legal Defense Fund 

Professional Associations and Service Clubs 

Associations of Community Mental 

 Health Programs 

Business and Professional Women Associations 

Cable Telecommunications Associations 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

95 
Community College Associations 

Counselor and Social Worker Associations 

Downtown Associations 

Eagles Clubs 

Elks Clubs 

Fire Chiefs and Fire District Directors 

Associations 

Goodwill Industries 

Home Builders Associations 

Insurance Agents and Company Associations 

Kiwanis 

Lions Club 

Multi-family Housing Councils 

National Federation of Independent Businesses 

Physicians, Physician Assistants, Pharmacists, 

and other Health Care Provider Associations 

Realtors Associations 

Retired Teacher’s Association 

Rotary Clubs 

School Administrators Associations 

School Boards and Associations 

School Coaches Associations 

Sheriff s’ Associations 

Special Districts Associations 

State Bar Associations 

Utilities, Private and Public, including Rural 

Electric Cooperatives 

Religious and Spiritual Organizations 

Churches 

Ecumenical Ministries and Local Crossdenominational Organizations 

Synagogues 

Social Services Providers 

Adoption Services 

Caring Communities 

Community Action Programs 

Food Banks 

Gay and Lesbian Resources 

Housing Authorities 

Information and Referral Programs 

Multi-family Housing Organizations 

Planned Parenthood 

Retired Senior Volunteer Program 

School-based Health Clinics 

Tribal Health and Social Service Organizations 

United Way 

Veterans Programs 

Victim Assistance Programs 

Volunteer Programs 

WIC (Women, Infant, Children) Programs 

YMCA/YWCA 

96 Appendix H—Potential Community Collaboration Partners 
APPENDIX I 

Memorandum of 

Understanding1 

What is a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)? 

An MOU is a written agreement that clarifies the relationships and responsibilities between two or more 

organizations that share services, clients, and resources. 

Why is it important to have an MOU? 

MOUs help strengthen community partnerships by outlining clear roles between individuals, agencies, and 

other groups. Communities with MOUs report that the strengthened partnerships resulted in enhanced services 

for children and families. 

What is actually included in an MOU? 

MOUs can address a variety of issues and topics. Content areas to consider including in an MOU are: 

• Clarification of agency roles 

• Referrals across agencies 

• Assessment protocols 

• Parameters of confi dentiality 

• Case management intervention 

• Interagency training of staff 

• Agency liaison/coordination 

• Process for resolving interagency confl icts 

• Periodic reviews of the MOU. 

1

 Bragg, H. L. (2003). Child protection in families experiencing domestic violence. Available: www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/ 

domesticviolence/. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

97 
How do we know our community is ready to develop an MOU? 

Communities that are concerned about reducing the growing incidence of child maltreatment are excellent 

candidates for creating an MOU. In communities that are experiencing strained relationships between 

potential partners, the process of writing an MOU provides a unique opportunity to address misperceptions 

and differences and to work jointly to resolve gaps in service delivery. 

What strategies should we undertake as we begin the MOU process? 

Depending on pre-existing relationships within communities, one strategy may include inviting key supporters 

to meetings to explore the feasibility of MOU development. Communities have reported that once they had the 

commitment and investment from the various partners, the MOU process quickly crystallized and resulted in 

a written document. An additional strategy is inviting an outside consultant to facilitate a mutual partnership 

that leads to the development of an MOU. 

What are the potential problems that arise during the MOU development process? 

Problems may arise concerning misperceptions about each other’s goals, missions, and philosophies. Professionals 

from child welfare agencies report that the MOU meetings helped them better understand the other organizations’ 

language and history and provided a context to view other philosophies and missions. Additional problems may 

include diff ering confidentiality policies, assessment decisions, and levels of intervention. The MOU process 

provides an opportunity to address these critical issues. 

How does the MOU actually help families and children? 

Families affected by child maltreatment report that they are reluctant to request assistance, are required to 

participate in services that do not address the underlying issues, and frequently feel misunderstood by 

professionals. Communities with existing MOUs have found that children who were maltreated were less likely 

to be placed in out-of-home settings and that families were more motivated to work with professionals to reduce 

the risk of future child abuse and neglect. Additionally, when MOUs have been established, families report a 

higher level of satisfaction in working with professionals. 

98 Appendix I—Memorandum of Understanding 
APPENDIX J 

Managing Conflict1 

Potential Sources of Conflict Ways to Manage the Confl ict 

Vaguely stated results and outcomes Create a strategic plan 

• Members continually question the partnership’s • Develop or clarify the strategic plan, including 

direction or do not have the same understanding the desired results and outcomes. 

of the desired results and outcomes. 

• Build individual self-interests into the strategic 

• Self-interests are not being disclosed. plan so the partnership fulfills member needs. 

Lack of clear authority Clarify authority 

• Members pressure the partnership for quick 

action or for programs that meet the needs of 

individual members. 

• People attend infrequently, or members change 

often. 

• High demands are placed on members to 

work for the partnership and still fulfi ll other 

responsibilities. 

• Obtain signed agreements that outline the 

desired results, outcomes, and outputs. 

• Obtain agreement for consistent representation; 

clarify what it takes to build a collaborative 

culture. 

• Formalize, clarify, and revise duties, as necessary, 

in writing. 

Work not getting done Clarify agreements and reward workers 

• Members argue about how to do things. • Refer to the strategic plan at every meeting and 

• Members have different memories of what was base decisions on it. 

decided, and not everyone shares in the work. • Take meeting minutes that track who attended, 

• Members do not sustain their eff ort. what was decided, action items or next steps, 

who has responsibility for implementing the 

decisions (as well as with what authority and 

accountability), and what progress is being made 

on earlier decisions. 

• Review the strategic plan to ensure it is current 

with community and member needs 

• Ask nonactive people to resign from the 

partnership and replace them with others who 

are willing to do the work. 

1 Winer, M., & Ray, K. (1994). Collaboration handbook: Creating, sustaining, and enjoying the journey. Saint Paul, MN: Amherst H. 

Wilder Foundation. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

99 

APPENDIX K 

Cultural Sensitivity When 

Working with Families1 

To develop a rapport with families, whether during the family assessment or any other interaction, service 

providers should be sensitive to cultural similarities and differences with the client, as well as be aware of the 

uniqueness and the cultural or historical roots of the client. In all interactions and assessments, the client is the 

most important source of information about the family, including providing details about cultural aspects and 

lifestyles unique to that family. Effective cultural competence requires that service providers: 

• 	 Respect how the clients differ from them 

• 	 Be open to learning about cultural differences when assessing the strengths and the needs of families 

• 	 Avoid judgments and decision-making resulting from biases, myths, or stereotypes 

• 	 Ask the client about a practice’s history and meaning, if unfamiliar with it 

• 	 Explain the law that regards a particular cultural practice as abuse 

• 	 Elicit information from the client regarding strongly held family traditions, values, and beliefs, 

especially child-rearing practices. 

Particularly when assessing a family following a referral to child protective services, it is important to recognize 

that there are certain areas that may be affected by a person’s history and culture. The following questions may 

be used as a guide to understand cultural difference as part of the assessment. According to the family: 

• 	 What are the purpose and function of the nuclear family? 

• 	 What roles do males and females play in the family? 

• 	 What is the role of religion for the family? How do these beliefs influence its child-rearing practices? 

• 	 What is the meaning, identity, and involvement of the larger homogenous group (e.g., Tribe, race, 

nationality)? 

• 	 What family rituals, traditions, or behaviors exist? 

• 	 What is the usual role of children in the family? 

• 	 What is the perception of the role of children in society? 

1 This appendix was adapted from DePanfilis, D., & Salus, M. (2003). Child protective services: A guide for caseworkers. Available: www. 

childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/cps/index.cfm. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

101 
 

• 	 What types of discipline does the family consider to be appropriate? 

• 	 Who is usually responsible for child care? 

• 	 What are the family’s attitudes or beliefs regarding health care? 

• 	 What are the family’s sexual attitudes and values? 

• 	 How are cultural beliefs incorporated into family functioning? 

• 	 How does the family maintain its cultural beliefs? 

• 	 Who is assigned authority and power for decision-making? 

• 	 What tasks are assigned based on traditional roles in the family? 

• 	 How do family members express and receive aff ection? 

• 	 What are the family’s communication styles? 

• 	 How does the family solve problems? 

• 	 How do family members usually deal with conflict? Is anger an acceptable emotion? Do members 

yell and scream or withdraw from confl ict situations?2 

2

 Shepard, R. (1987). Cultural sensitivity. In D. DePanfi lis (Ed.), Enhancing child protection service competency: Selected readings. 

Charlotte, NC: ACTION for Child Protection. 

102 Appendix K—Cultural Sensitivity When Working with Families 
APPENDIX L 

Funding Resources for 

Community Partnerships 

The following are examples of potential funding sources and development resources for community partnerships: 

Federal 

• 	 General U.S. Government Sites: 

–	 www.grants.gov/ 

–	 www.business.gov/guides/non-profi ts/ 

• 	 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (general): 

–	 www.hhs.gov/grants/index.html 

–	 www.hhs.gov/grantsnet/ 

• 	 Administration for Children and Families: www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/ 

• 	 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: www.cdc.gov/about/business/funding.htm 

• 	 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: www.samhsa.gov/grants 

• 	 U.S. Department of Education: www.ed.gov/fund/landing.jhtml 

• 	 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: www.hud.gov/grants/index.cfm 

• 	 U.S. Small Business Administration, Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives: www.sba.gov/ 

aboutsba/sbaprograms/faithbased/index.html 

Foundations 

• 	 The Annie E. Casey Foundation: www.aecf.org/Home/AboutUs/GrantInformation.aspx 

• 	 The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation: www.rwjf.org/grants/ 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

103 
Listings of Funding Sources 

• 	 National Alliance of Children’s Trust and Prevention Funds: 

–	 www.ctfalliance.org/ (homepage) 

–	 www.msu.edu/user/nactpf/images/about/roster.doc (State contacts) 

• 	 Foundation Center: foundationcenter.org/fi ndfunders/ 

• GuideStar: www.guidestar.org/npo/index.jsp?source=dnresources 

Proposal Writing and Fundraising Resources 

• 	 FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention: www.friendsnrc. 

org/resources/print.htm#resources 

• 	 CharityChannel: http://charitychannel.com/Articles/GrantsandFoundationsReview/tabid/1676/ 

Default.aspx 

• 	 The Grantsmanship Center: www.tgci.com/ 

• 	 Foundation Center: http://foundationcenter.org/getstarted/learnabout/proposalwriting.html 

• 	 Non-Profi t Guides: www.npguides.org/ 

• 	 Free Management Library: www.managementhelp.org/fndrsng/np_raise/np_raise.htm 

• 	 Idealist: www.idealist.org/if/i/en/faqcat/100-7 

104 Appendix L—Funding Resources For Community Partnerships 
APPENDIX M 

Community Partnership 

Self-Assessment1 

The Community Partnership Self-Assessment is intended to help a community partnership determine the level 

of progress that has been made in its development and/or implementation. It will also allow the partnership to 

explore barriers that may need to be overcome to move forward. 

Note: The items featured are suggestions for partnership characteristics and processes that should be assessed. 

Community partnerships can review this tool to determine if items should be added, changed, or removed based 

on the partnership’s structure, mission, and other unique characteristics. 

1

 Adapted from Technical Assistance Partnership for Child and Family Mental Health. (2003). Sustainability self-assessment tool. Available: www.tapartnership.org/resources/sustainability/docs/assessment_tool.doc; Williams Torres, G., & Margolin, F. S. (2003). 

The collaboration primer: Proven strategies, considerations, and tools to get you started. Available: www.hret.org/hret/programs/content/ 

colpri.pdf. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

105 
 106 

Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Appendix M—Community Partnership Self-Assessment 

Rating of Progress: 1 – No plan to address 2 – Plan developed to address 3 – Early stage of implementing plan

4 – Good progress in implementing plan 5 – Plan fully implemented for sustaining or continuing partnership 

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

Vision and Philosophy A clear vision for sustaining the partnership has been 

defined and disseminated. 

 The “right” key stakeholders, representing the

diversity of the community served, have been involved in defining and communicating the vision. 

 Clear-cut objectives for the partnership have been 

identified through a planning process and have been developed and communicated. 

Service Array  Services that families and youth (inclusive of the full 

diversity of the community) prefer and find useful and that partner agencies support and/or fund are continuously being created and/or amended as needschange. 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

 Access to appropriate and effective services and 

supports has been increased to meet needs. 

 Ongoing mechanisms for providing individualized 

(with full recognition and support of cultural and linguistic preferences), integrated, and coordinated care are being implemented. 

 Mechanisms are in place to ensure a service array that 

meets the unique needs relevant to the demography of the community and that is based on age, race, ethnicity, language, spiritual identity, physical ability/disability, language, and legal status. 

 Ongoing mechanisms that have been developed to 

decrease reliance on out-of-community and out-ofstate placements are being implemented. 

 Ongoing training and technical assistance on

culturally and linguistically competent service delivery and on culturally and linguistically competentevidence-based and promising practices is being provided to partnership staff, family members, youth, community providers, and other stakeholders. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

107 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

Structure, Governance, and Coordination  The roles and responsibilities among partners are 

clearly defined. 

 Leadership for sustainability of the partnership’s 

efforts is maintained with a focus on continuity through training, workforce development, skillbuilding, and leadership development. 

 Leadership is committed to continuing the change 

process. 

 The partners share decision-making, self-assessment, 

and resource development responsibilities. 

 The partnership has an effective mechanism to resolve

conflicts among members. 

 The partners represent local nonprofit organizations, 

businesses, government, and residents. 

108 Appendix M—Community Partnership Self-Assessment 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

 There is a high level of trust among partners.  Ongoing mechanisms have been created for using data 

and evaluation to support planning, development, and maintenance of implementation efforts. 

 The results of the evaluation, data collection efforts, 

or other assessments are used to enhance the partnership and its efforts. 

 The partnership’s efforts have had the intended effects 

on the community. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

109 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

 Ongoing education and training are being provided.  Flexibility, innovation, and openness are built into the

leadership framework, policies, and structures. 

 The partnership has a system of accountability for all 

members.

Interagency Planning and Coordination  Ongoing mechanisms for interagency planning and 

coordination at the State/Tribal/Territorial and localpolicy and system levels are in place. 

 Ongoing mechanisms for interagency planning and 

coordination (inclusive of community and faith-based organizations and cultural and ethnic-specific entities) at the service delivery level are in place. 

110 Appendix M—Community Partnership Self-Assessment 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

 Ongoing, shared administrative processes among two

or more agencies that involve family members and/or youth are in place. 

Family and Youth Involvement Families and youth (reflective of the full 

demographics of the community) are actively involvedin policymaking, system reform, and administrative roles at the system level. 

 Families and youth are active participants in 

evaluation efforts. 

 Families and youth are involved in the service

planning and delivery process. 

 Families and youth participate in training both as 

trainers and as participants. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

111 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

Cultural Competence  Cultural and linguistic competence is evident at all 

levels. 

 Social marketing practices ensure that messages, 

images, and outreach strategies are culturally andlinguistically appropriate. 

 Policies are established that ensure cultural and

linguistic competence. 

 The service array is constructed to provide appropriate 

and acceptable services tailored for the unique demographics of the community. 

 Data collection methods are designed to track services, 

outcomes, and service satisfaction based on the unique demographics of persons served. 

112 Appendix M—Community Partnership Self-Assessment 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

 Cultural competence is infused into the core plans 

and operations of agencies, programs, and organizations involved in the partnership. 

 Diverse cultural and linguistic communities are

meaningfully involved in all components of the system of care—planning, administration, care coordination, service provision, and evaluation. 

 Mechanisms are in place to facilitate continual 

cultural knowledge development (e.g., trainings, forums) of all members of the partnership.

Political and Economic Support  Sufficient financial and other resources are mobilized 

and available. 

 Partnerships are developed and maintained to

establish mutually beneficial outcomes. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

113 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

 Evaluation/accountability results are integrated in the 

design and implementation of the partnership. 

 Key stakeholders representing the diversity of the 

community (including public officials) are involved in the initiative and are committed to sustaining and expanding the partnership. 

 Political support for the partnership has been 

generated at the State and local levels. 

 Policies have been reformed or developed to support 

system change at the State and local levels in order to sustain the partnership. 

 Coalition building among advocates, including those 

representing specific cultural, racial, ethnic, linguistic, religious, and other communities, is being supportedin order to effect change. 

 Strong interagency relationships are being cultivated 

or are in place. 

114 Appendix M—Community Partnership Self-Assessment 
Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Partnership Elements and

 Sustainability Objectives

(Where do we want to be? What do we want to sustain?) 

Key Indicators

of Success

(How will we know when we have gotten there?) 

Progress

Rating

(Use scale

above) 

Barriers to

Achievement

(What is standing in the way of our progress?)

Strategic Financing and Sustainability Strategies Strategies for utilizing existing resources have been 

developed and implemented. 

 Strategies for obtaining new resources have been 

developed and implemented. 

 Strategies for creating more flexibility in existing

funding streams have been developed andimplemented. 

 A system of incentives and rewards is in place to 

recognize and sustain partners’ contributions. 

 New members are actively recruited. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

115 
 116 

Community Partnership Self-Assessment

Appendix M—Community Partnership Self-Assessment 

Roster of Participants:


As members of the community, we actively participated in completing the Community Partnership Self Assessment. 


Name Affiliation Date 

Name Affiliation Date Name Affiliation Date Name Affiliation Date Name Affiliation Date Name Affiliation Date Name Affiliation Date 

Name Affiliation Date 
APPENDIX N 

Faith-based Organizations 

and Community 

Involvement 

A 2003 survey that examined 14,000 congregations of diverse faith groups found that 85 percent of these 

congregations offer at least one community service, usually providing food, money, clothing, or emergency 

shelter. More than one-third of the congregations are involved in more extensive social service efforts, such as 

providing health care services, tutoring children, ministering in prisons, offering substance abuse programs, or 

providing housing for the elderly.1 The following provides information about the assessment of a faith-based 

organization’s (FBO) readiness for joining a partnership or receiving government funds, describes potential 

barriers, and offers tips from FBOs and government agencies. 

Assessment of FBO Readiness 

FBOs now have many opportunities to seek public funding for their social service programs and to work with 

public social service agencies, such as child protective services. Each FBO needs to consider several questions 

before requesting funding or joining a partnership: 

• 	 Has the FBO documented a community need for this service? Is the service the FBO plans to provide a public 

service and not just a program for church members? 

• 	 Does the service produce outcomes that are important to the whole community? Can the FBO specify those 

outcomes? 

• 	 Is the FBO comfortable with the idea of choice? Program clients must be free not to participate in any 

inherently religious activities offered alongside the publicly funded service, and the FBO can only share its faith 

through acts of friendship and care. 

• 	 Will the place of worship support the service for which it seeks public funding with both money and 

volunteers? Is this a service the FBO plans to offer whether or not it is successful in obtaining public funding 

for it? 

• 	 Is the FBO comfortable with the significant increase in recordkeeping and accountability that inevitably 

accompanies public funding? Is the FBO willing to establish the appropriate structure for receiving and 

managing public dollars (i.e., setting up a separate 501(c) (3) nonprofit corporation with its own board of 

directors and financial accounting system)?2 

1 Sherman, A. L. (2003). Faith in communities: A solid investment. Society 40(2), 19–26.
 2 Mills, D. (2004). Self-assessment: Ten questions to determine whether your congregation is ready to compete for public funding. Available: 


www.fastennetwork.org/qryArticleDetail.asp?ArticleId=6BEFC73D-3CE8-496B-9A93-BEE1CFF7EEAC.
 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

117 
 

 

Partnering with Government Agencies 

In the past, many FBOs failed to participate in government-funded projects for fear they would have to 

compromise their religious character. Both Federal and State laws clarify that FBOs: 

• 	 Retain their independence from government interference. 

• 	 Are not required to remove religious art, icons, scripture, or other symbols, but must operate in compliance 

with Federal and State laws. Funds may not be used for worship, religious instruction, or proselytizing. 

• 	 Retain their exemption under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which allows them to employ staff 

based on religion. However, FBOs remain subject to all other nondiscrimination laws in hiring and all 

Federal, State, and local nondiscrimination laws in the delivery of services. 

• 	 Are subject to the same regulations as other service providers and, therefore, to audits.3 

In order not to break Federal regulations, it is important that FBOs be familiar with the laws governing their social 

services activities. Direct government funds cannot help fund worship, devotional activity, or other inherently 

religious acts. However, one study found that States did little to educate religious contractors or congregational 

leaders about constitutional constraints. In fact, 67 percent of congregational leaders participating in the study 

were unaware that government money cannot pay for devotional activities such as prayer and Bible study.4 

Faith and Community Liaisons 

It is important to contact the particular Federal, State, or local agency that administers the services 

the FBO wants to provide in its community. As FBOs increase their interest and involvement in the 

social services arena, these liaisons, often social workers, offer a broad set of skills, such as proposal and grant 

writing, case management, program evaluation, and counseling. Working together, agencies and FBOs can 

negotiate and shape partnerships that recognize and address potential conflicts in values by fi nding their 

common ground—the basis for eff ective partnerships.5 

. 

Potential Barriers 

It is sometimes difficult for FBOs to learn how government agencies operate, where to go for information, or 

how to clear barriers. Many FBOs are not incorporated; have not sought 501(c) (3) status; operate exclusively 

with volunteer staff; have inadequate funding; and have little or no formal experience in administering a grant, 

keeping client and financial records, or evaluating their results.6

 The funding agencies themselves are often 

anxious about the ability of some FBOs to meet their contractual requirements, but the same concern arises 

with the engagement of any new contractors. Agencies also are concerned about FBOs’ abilities to monitor 

huge amounts of money and fear the possible absence of accountability.7 

3 Virginia Department of Social Services. (n.d.). Faith-based and community initiative FAQ. Available: www.dss.state. va.us/community/faith_faq.html.

4 Associated Baptist Press. (2003). Study casts doubt on faith-based efforts. Christian Century 120(24), 13–15. 5

 Cnaan, R. A., & Boddie, S. C. (2002). Charitable choice and faith-based welfare: A call for social work. Social 

Work, 47(3), 224–235. 6 Virginia Department of Social Services. (n.d.). About faith-based and community initiatives. Available: www.dss.state.va.us/
 

community/faith_about.html.


7 Crew, R. F., Jr. (2003). Faith-based organizations and the delivery of social services in Florida. Available: www.
 religionandsocialpolicy.org/docs/events/2003_annual_conference/case_study_2003_fl orida.pdf.
 

118 Appendix N—Faith-Based Organizations and Community Involvement 
 

 

In addition to understanding that public agencies have legal requirements that they must meet regarding the 

populations they serve and the services they provide, there are several other key items for FBOs to remember 

when partnering with them: 

• 	 Congregations may not be well equipped to screen and to assess needy families. Working with agencies can 

more eff ectively coordinate faith-based eff orts to serve families and to ensure that the appropriate kind of 

service is off ered. 

• 	 Congregations often have the desire to help, but are not sure how to proceed. Agencies can often help 

provide the training, support, and infrastructure needed. 

• 	 While agencies can provide assistance and often are interested in soliciting help from the faith community, 

they may be unfamiliar with the FBOs’ cultures or expectations, or they may lack experience in recruiting, 

mobilizing, training, and supporting FBOs.8 

Tips from FBOs and Government Agencies 

At numerous conferences, community organizations, FBOs, and human services and workforce development 

administrators have discussed the importance of collaboration and partnerships in supporting families more 

effectively. The participants developed the following recommendations: 

• 	 Always remain faithful to the mission. Do not go after funding that does not coincide with that mission. 

• 	 Conduct a needs assessment to know which services are needed and to understand community strengths 

and limitations better. This should be coupled with an analysis of the FBO’s capabilities to serve the 

community’s needs. 

• 	 Accept those who the FBO is trying to help. Recognize and address the clients’ multitude of strengths and 

barriers to issues. 

• 	 Strengthen management capacity. Know the clients in the community, and recruit capable and committed 

staff and volunteers who can work with them best. Make sure that staff and volunteers are well trained by 

holding orientations and ongoing trainings and by developing specific job descriptions. 

• 	 Build and strengthen partnerships with other congregations, government agencies, nonprofi t community 

organizations, and businesses. Identify partners that can increase the FBO’s strengths and resources. Th ese 

partners may include public schools, law enforcement, job training organizations, community development 

corporations, social services and juvenile justice agencies, housing departments, private businesses, and 

other FBOs. 

• 	 Consider alternatives to conventional contracts, such as partnering or subcontracting with bigger 

organizations and collaboratives. 

• 	 Build evaluation and assessment designs into your program. 

• 	 Obtain technical assistance on regulations, grant and contract processes, outcomes, evaluation, and 

accountability standards. Also check with universities and other professionals who may provide pro bono 

services. 

8 Raymond, W. L. (2002.) Faith-based collaborations: Transforming congregations and communities. Available: www.nacsw. org/Raymond_fi les/frame.htm. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

119 
 

 

• 	 Sharpen communication skills. Network by talking with other grant seekers (who do not need to be in 

the same field) to share information, brainstorm, and collect models of successful programs and proposals. 

• 	 Ensure financial accountability, document everything, and collaborate with banks, fi nancial planners, 

community development corporations, and foundations for sound financial planning. Social services 

should be a separate operation of the FBO. Consider setting up a separate 501(c) (3) organization for 

providing those services. 

• 	 Identify funding resources, including private and community foundations, government funding, and 

corporations. Get to know the regional associations of grant makers. 

• 	 Develop short- and long-term strategic plans and funding goals. Hold regular meetings with program staff 

to discuss goals and needs and to involve program staff in the grant application process. 

• 	 Market the FBO’s successes to government agencies and the public. Have a thorough knowledge of the 

FBO’s program in order to explain its goals and objectives, how it is operated, why the services are provided, 

and how effective the program is at meeting its goals.9 

Additional Resources 

There are many resources available to FBOs, including: 

• 	 The Center for Religion and Civic Culture (CRCC) studies the civic role of religion and collaborates 

with congregations, academics, funders, and faith-based organizations in creative ways. CRCC is a broker 

for new partnerships, an intermediary for the media and faith-based groups, and a catalyst for innovative 

programs. For more information, visit http://crcc.usc.edu/index.html. 

• 	 The Compassion Capital Fund helps faith-based and community organizations increase their eff ectiveness 

and enhance their ability to provide social services to serve those most in need. For more information, visit 

www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ccf/. 

• 	 The Faith and Service Technical Education Network’s (FASTEN) mission is to strengthen and to 

support faith-based social services by assisting FBOs in exploring whether to launch or to expand eff orts to 

provide social services, especially in distressed urban communities throughout the United States. For more 

information, visit www.fastennetwork.org. 

• 	 The Faith-based and Community Initiative helps grassroots organizations compete equally for Federal 

dollars and face fewer bureaucratic barriers. For more information, visit www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fbci/. 

9 Capitani, J., & Hercik, J. M. (1999). Welfare reform and the faith community: Building new partnerships. National conference fi nal 

report. Available: http://peerta.acf.hhs.gov/pdf/faithcom.pdf; Archambault, C., Kakuska, C., Munford, R., White, D., & Hercik, J. M. 

(2001). Charitable choice workshop: State TANF offi ces and the faith community working together. Available: www.calib.com/peerta/pdf/ 

charitablechoices.pdf; Austensen, B. (2001). A look at faith-based programs. Available: http://peerta.acf.hhs.gov/pdf/faithprog.pdf. 

120 Appendix N—Faith-Based Organizations and Community Involvement 
• 	 Th e Outcome-Based Evaluation: A Training Toolkit for Programs of Faith helps FBO leaders understand 

the basics of outcome-based evaluation, its uses, and its benefits. The step-by-step tutorial guides program 

directors through identifying program goals, establishing measurement indicators, and collecting data to 

determine the program’s success in achieving its targets. To view this document, visit www.urbanministry. 

org/outcome-based-evaluation-training-toolkit-programs-faith. 

• 	 Public/Private Ventures is a national nonprofit organization whose mission is to improve the eff ectiveness 

of social policies, programs, and community initiatives, especially as they affect youth and young adults. 

For more information, visit www.ppv.org. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

121 

APPENDIX O 

Child Welfare Practice 

Comparison: Conventional, 

Family-centered, and 

Community-centered1 

Conventional Child Welfare Family-centered Child Welfare Community-centered Child 

Welfare 

Engagement 

Focuses on obtaining the facts Engages families in ways that Views family strengths (e.g., 

and information rather than on are relevant to the situation and resources, culture) as building 

building relationships blocks for services 

cultures 

sensitive to the values of their 

Assessment 

Focuses on the facts related Reviews and discusses the Includes an evaluation of service 

to the reported maltreatment; families’ capabilities, strengths, needs based on information 

the primary goal is to identify and resources throughout the life obtained from other agencies 

psychopathology in the of the case and explores community support 

perpetrator systems 

Safety plans 

Developed by child protective Involves the family in the design Incorporates the participation of 

services staff and the court system and is based on information and extended family and community 

with little input from the family support from the caseworker and members (e.g., neighbors, 

or those who know the child well other team members community groups) 

Service plans 

Prepared by the worker and Involves the family and is based Incorporates the participation 

presented to the family for on information and support of extended family, the family’s 

signature from the caseworker and other social network (e.g., friends, 

team members school personnel), and potential 

service providers 

1 National Resource Center for Family-Centered Practice, State of Maryland Department of Human Resources, & Baltimore City 

Department of Social Services. (2002). Community partnerships & linkages: Reaching out to work together. Available: http://muskie.usm. 

maine.edu/helpkids/pubstext/partnercurr/partnerships.htm. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

123 
 124

Out-of-home placement 

Includes little contact between Focuses on building partnerships Completed with the support of 

biological, adoptive, and foster between biological families and staff in the community from all 

families and the agencies that foster/adoptive families (or other phases (planning, provision of 

serve them placement providers); encourages supports, and placement) and 

respectful, non-judgmental, and attempts to have children be 

nonblaming approaches placed close enough to allow for 

parent/child visitation (especially 

for younger children) 

Implementation of service plan 

Usually consists of a Ensures that families have Includes a range of services in the 

determination of whether the reasonable access to a fl exible, community that responds to all 

family has complied with the affordable, and individualized domains needed by the family 

case plan rather than providing array of services and resources so (e.g., health, transportation, 

services and supports or they can maintain themselves as income maintenance) 

coordinating with informal or a family 

formal resources 

Permanency planning 

Introduces alternative permanency Includes the development of Includes the provision of 

plans only after efforts at parental alternative permanency plans by coordinated and high-quality 

rehabilitation are unsuccessful families, child welfare workers, services in the community so 

community members, and parents can make changes within 

service providers the available times 

Reevaluation of the service plan 

Incorporates little eff ort in Includes the sharing of Requires that all the people 

determining the family’s progress information from the family, involved in the service planning 

in reach the plan’s outcomes; and implementation process meet 

reevaluation results are not shared 

children, support teams, and 

service providers with the regularly to assess how the plan 

with the family service system to ensure that is proceeding and if and how the 

intervention strategies can be plan should be modified, as well 

modified as needed to support as who will be responsible for 

positive outcomes tasks 

124 Appendix O—Child Welfare Practice Comparison: 

Conventional, Family-centered, and Community-centered 
APPENDIX P 

Sample Consent Form 

The following sample consent form is based on a form from the Santa Cruz Integrated Children’s Services 

Program.1

 Before providing any consent forms to clients, community partnerships and agencies 

should consult with legal personnel to ensure the forms comply with agency, local, State, and Federal 

regulations and meet the requirements of the community partnership and agency. 

The inclusion of this sample consent form does not indicate the approval or sanction of its legal nature by the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services. 

1 Santa Cruz County Integrated Children’s Services Program. (n.d.). Santa Cruz County Integrated Children’s Services Program: 

Authorization to release and exchange confi dential information and records. Available: www.fi rst5scc.org/pdf/ICSP%20Release%20 

Form%20Dec06-v3.doc. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

125 
 126

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

County Children’s Services Program
 Authorization to Release and Exchange Confidential Information and Records 

I, _____________________________, as the parent, guardian, or legally authorized representative of 

_________________________ (print minor child’s first and last names), authorize the following agencies in the 

County Children’s Services Program to release and exchange information and/or records about the above-named 

child and/or myself for the purpose of planning and providing services together. 

[Directions: Check all below that apply. Write your initials and the date on the appropriate line if you are revising the initial 

release.] 

Agency/Program Name Worker’s Name and Phone # (if 

known) 

Initials and Date (for 

revisions only) 

ܽ County Resource Service Center 

ܽ Familia Center 

ܽ Families in Transition 

ܽ Health Services Agency (HSA): Select specific HSA programs that are or will be working with you and/or the abovenamed minor child. Programs that are not selected may receive a copy of this release and/or communicate with other 

programs in HSA without additional consent. 

ܽ Alcohol and Drug 

ܽ State Children’s Services 

ܽ Clinics 

ܽ Children’s Mental Health 

ܽ Homeless Persons Health Project 

ܽ Human Resources Agency (HRA): Select specific HRA divisions that are or will be working with you and/or the 

above-named minor child. Divisions that are not selected may receive a copy of this release and/or communicate with other 

divisions in HRA without additional consent. 

ܽ Adult and Long-Term Care 

ܽ Benefit Services 

ܽ CareerWorks 

ܽ Family and Children’s Services 

ܽ Parents’ Center 

ܽ Probation Department (PD): Select specific PD divisions that are or will be working with you and/or the above-named 

minor child. Divisions that are not selected may receive a copy of this release and/or communicate with other divisions in PD 

without additional consent. 

ܽ Adult Probation 

ܽ Juvenile Probation 

ܽ Juvenile Hall 

ܽ Women’s Center 

ܽ Temporary Members (Worker: Write in name of individual/agency and send Confidentiality Agreement.) 

ܽ Other 

ܽ Other 

126 Appendix P—Sample Consent Form 
127

___________________________________________ 

___________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

The selected agencies may release and exchange the following information and/or records about me and/or the 

above-named child. (Write your initials and the date next to any changes to the Initial Release.) 

ܽ Intake information 

ܽ Assessment(s) of my family’s situation 

ܽ Recommended services or treatment plan 

ܽ Service plan/case plan 

ܽ Status and progress of services or treatment 

ܽ Summary of substance abuse history, treatment, 

ܽ Summary of medical history, diagnosis, 

treatment, and/or progress for the period of: 

____________________ (fill in date range) 

ܽ Summary of mental health history, diagnosis, 

treatment, and/or progress for the period of: 

____________________ (fill in date range) and/or progress for the period of: 

ܽ Restrictions on sharing information: ____________________ (fill in date range) 

I understand that: 

•	 Each agency will only release or exchange the selected confidential information or records to other selected 

agencies when it is determined to be relevant to the services provided by those other agencies. 

•	 If the above-named child is under or goes under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, the social worker 

judicial officer must complete the appropriate consent form in order for Child Welfare Services to be able to 

release and exchange my information and records with other agencies I have selected. 

•	 The selected agencies will keep information and records confidential and not share them with anyone outside 

of the selected agencies, unless I have provided additional written release(s) or someone is qualified or allowed 

by law to receive this information. Specifically, certain staff are required by law to report (1) if they hear and 

believe that I or a family member are in danger of hurting myself or someone else; (2) if there is reasonable 

suspicion that a child, dependent adult, and/or elderly adult has been abused; or (3) if I have made a threat to 

harm an identified victim. 

•	 Alcohol and/or drug treatment records are protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality 

of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records (42 C.F.R. Part 2) and cannot be disclosed without my written 

consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. 

•	 Every member of the multidisciplinary service team who receives information or records on the client serviced 

is under the same privacy and confidentiality penalties as the person disclosing or providing the information 

or records. All information or records obtained shall be maintained in a manner that ensures the maximum 

protection of privacy and confidentiality rights. 

•	 I will not be denied services if I decide that I do not want my information or records shared with other 

agencies, or if I wish to limit the scope of this release, as noted above. 

•	 I may cancel this authorization at any time by written request, except to the extent that action has been taken 

in reliance on it. 

•	 This release form covers all methods of communication between the selected agencies. 

•	 Partner agencies may establish and maintain a unified program record and/or a common database for the 

purpose of planning and providing services together. Non-identifying information from this record and/or 

database may be used to help evaluate the effectiveness of the services offered by the agencies. 

•	 I have the right to receive a copy of any information or records shared between the agencies concerning 

myself and my child, as long as I am a parent or legal guardian who is authorized to and am not prohibited 

from receiving such information. 

•	 I have the right to receive, and have received or declined, a copy of this signed release form. 

Copy provided __________ (date) Received by __________ (initials) Copy declined __________ (initials) 

X______________________________________________________ ___________________________ 

Signature of: ܽ Minor child with legal power to give authorization and/or 

ܽ Parent ܽ Guardian ܽ Legally authorized representative 

Minor child̉s birth date

 Date signed: _____________________ Signer’s birth date:_________________________ 

This release automatically expires on ____________ (1 year from date of signature), or when I and/or the abovenamed child cease to be a client of all of the agencies selected, whichever occurs sooner. 

______________________________X___________________________________________________________ 

Printed name of staff Signature of staff Agency Date 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response artnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment to Child Maltreatment 

127 

APPENDIX Q 

Systems of Care Values 

and Principles1 

Systems of care is a framework used to support children and families with complex needs through a 

multidisciplinary approach. The following core values and principles for systems of care are adapted from the 

children’s mental health field, which also utilizes a systems of care framework. 

Core Values 

The system of care should be: 

1. 	 Child-centered and family-focused, with the needs of the child and family dictating the types and the mix 

of services provided. 

2. 	 Community-based, with the services, as well as management and decision-making responsibility, at the 

community level. 

3. 	 Culturally and linguistically competent, with agencies, programs, and services that are responsive to the 

cultural, racial, and ethnic differences of the populations they serve. 

Guiding Principles 

1. 	 Children and families should have access to a comprehensive array of services that address their physical, 

emotional, social, and educational needs. 

2. 	 Children and families should receive individualized services in accordance with the unique needs and 

potentials of each child or parent and guided by an individualized service plan. 

3. 	 Children and families should receive services within the least restrictive, most normative environment that 

is clinically appropriate and safe. 

4. 	The families and surrogate families of children should be full participants in all aspects of the planning and 

delivery of services. 

1 Stroul, B., & Friedman, R. (1986). A system of care for children and youth with severe emotional disturbances (Rev. ed., p. 17). 

Washington, DC: Georgetown University Child Development Center, National Technical Assistance Center for Children’s Mental 

Health. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

129 
 130

5. 	 Children and families should receive services that are integrated, with linkages between child-serving 

agencies and programs and with mechanisms for planning, developing, and coordinating services. 

6. 	 Children and families should be provided with case management or similar mechanisms to ensure that 

multiple services are delivered in a coordinated and therapeutic manner and that they can move through 

the system of services in accordance with their changing needs. 

7. 	Early identification and intervention should be promoted by the system of care in order to enhance the 

likelihood of positive outcomes. 

8. 	 Children and youth should be ensured smooth transitions to the adult service system as they reach maturity. 

9. 	The rights of children should be protected, and effective advocacy efforts should be promoted. 

10. Children and families should receive services without regard to race, religion, national origin, sex, physical 

disability, or other characteristics, and services should be sensitive and responsive to cultural diff erences and 

special needs. 

For more information on systems of care, visit www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/service/soc/. 

130 Appendix Q—Systems of Care Values and Principles 
APPENDIX R 

Sample Evaluation 

Implementation Plan 

Activity Steps Responsible 

Party 

Target 

Date(s) 

Build Logic Model

• Write the program vision. 

• Describe the population served, including the needs to be addressed. 

• Describe the services and the resources needed. What assumptions 

are you making that lead you to believe that your service strategies will 

“work?” Are your services evidence-based? 

• Write the program outcomes and indicators. 

• Determine how you can measure these outcomes. 

Select or 

Develop Tool 

• Select or construct the appropriate measurement tools. 

• Develop or obtain a method for data entry and management. 

• Administer the tools and review the administration procedures with a 

participant focus group. 

• Revise the program-developed tools as needed, and select diff erent 

standardized tools according to the focus group fi ndings. 

Administer 

• Select the time, place, and participants for the evaluation. 

• Train staff in how to administer the evaluation. 

• Make copies of all the tools to be used. 

• Administer the evaluation tool. 

Analyze and 

Report 

• Enter the data into a database (or spreadsheet), and make the 

necessary tabulations. 

• Analyze the data and meet with the staff team to review the results. 

• Make program decisions based on the fi ndings. 

• Report on the results of the evaluation and disseminate the report as 

needed. 

1 FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-based Child Abuse Prevention. (n.d.). Implementation plan. Available: www.friendsnrc. 

org/download/outcomeresources/toolkit/implementation_work.pdf. 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

131 

APPENDIX S 

Community Partnership 

Resources 

There are many resources available regarding community partnerships. In addition to the resources specifi cally 

regarding child maltreatment in Appendix B, Resource Listing, the following are selected websites that address 

areas of interest to community partnerships. The resources are organized in the following fi ve categories: 

• Community partnerships in child welfare 

• Building and sustaining partnerships 

• Improving child protection 

• Collaboration among overlapping systems 

• Child abuse and neglect/child welfare background. 

The following websites provide community partnerships and others with links to available information that may 

be of interest. Inclusion on this list does not connote an endorsement by the U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services 

I. Community Partnerships in Child Welfare 

Annie E. Casey Foundation 

Family to Family Initiative 

www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/Family%20to%20Family.aspx 

Center for the Study of Social Policy, Center for Community Partnerships in Child Welfare (homepage) 

www.cssp.org/center/index.html 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Collaborating with Your Community 

http://childwelfare.gov/preventing/developing/community.cfm 

FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention (homepage) 

www.friendsnrc.org/index.htm 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment 

133 
 134

 

National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement 

Stakeholder Involvement and Interagency Collaboration 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/interagency.htm 

National Resource Center for Permanency and Family Connections 

Family Engagement: A Web-based Practice Toolkit 

www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/fewpt 

II. Building and Sustaining Partnerships 

A. General Coalition Building 

Child Trends 

Building Community Partnerships: Tips for Out-of-School Time Programs 

www.childtrends.org/Files//Child_Trends-2008_03_12_PI_CommunityPartner.pdf 

Find Youth Info 

Form a Partnership and Make it Work 

www.fi ndyouthinfo.gov/cf_pages/partnerships.htm 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration (SAMHSA), & American Institutes for Research 

Sustaining Grassroots Community-Based Programs: A Toolkit for Community- and Faith-Based Service Providers 

http://download.ncadi.samhsa.gov/prevline/pdfs/SMA08-4340.pdf 

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), & Institute for 

Educational Leadership 

Building Eff ective Community Partnerships 

www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org/resources/fi les/toolkit1fi nal.pdf 

University of Kansas, Work Group for Community Health and Development 

Community Tool Box 

http://ctb.ku.edu/en/tablecontents/ 

White House Faith-Based and Community Initiatives 

Innovations in Eff ective Compassion 

http://innovationincompassion.hhs.gov 

B. Strategic Planning 

Community Problem Solving Project @ MIT (homepage) 

www.community-problem-solving.net/ 

National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement 

T/TA Related to the Child and Family Services Review Process 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/cfsrta.htm 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (ACF) 

Capacity Benchmarking Tool for Faith- and Community-Based Organizations 

www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ocs/ccf/about_ccf/benchmarking_tool/cpct_toc.html 

134 Appendix S—Community Partnership Resources 
135

C. Funding 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Funding Information for Programs and Collaborative Funding Strategies 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/funding 

www.childwelfare.gov/preventing/developing/collaborativefunding.cfm 

The Finance Project 

Information Resource Center: Finding Federal Funding 

www.financeproject.org/index.cfm?page=27 

Nonprofit Leadership Institute 

Nonprofit Good Practice Guide: Fundraising 

www.npgoodpractice.org/Topics/Fundraising/Default.aspx 

Promising Practices Network on Children, Families and Communities 

Forming, Funding and Maintaining Partnerships and Collaborations 

www.promisingpractices.net/sd1c.asp 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

www.hhs.gov/grantsnet 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, SAMHSA 

Maximizing Program Services Through Private Sector Partnerships and Relationships: A Guide for Faith- and 

Community-Based Service Providers 

www.samhsa.gov/FBCI/docs/PartnerHandbook_feb2006.pdf 

U.S. Department of Justice, OJJDP, National Training and Technical Assistance Center 

Accessing Resources for Community and Faith-based Organizations Federal Funding Toolkit 

http://arc.nttac.org/toolkit.cfm 

U.S. Federal Government 

www.grants.gov 

University of South Florida, Research and Training Center for Children’s Mental Health 

Effective Financing Strategies for Systems of Care: Examples from the Field—A Resource Compendium for 

Developing a Comprehensive Financing Plan 

http://rtckids.fmhi.usf.edu/rtcpubs/hctrking/pubs/Study03-exp-fr-field.pdf 

D. Evaluating Collaboratives 

Annie E. Casey Foundation 

The Need for Self-Evaluation: Using Data to Guide Policy and Practice 

www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/need%20for%20self%20evaluation.pdf 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Steps in Evaluating Prevention Programs 

http://childwelfare.gov/preventing/developing/steps.cfm 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response artnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment to Child Maltreatment 

135 
 136

 

FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-based Child Abuse Prevention 

Evaluation Toolkit and Logic Model Builder 

www.friendsnrc.org/outcome/toolkit/index.htm 

Kellogg Foundation 

Evaluation Toolkit 

www.wkkf.org/default.aspx?tabid=75&CID=281&NID=61&LanguageID=0 

Planning and Evaluation Resource Center 

Evaluation Tools and Resources 

www.evaluationtools.org/ 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ACF 

The Program Manager’s Guide to Evaluation 

www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/other_resrch/pm_guide_eval/index.htm 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and 

Evaluation (ASPE) 

Evaluating Privatized Child Welfare Programs: A Guide for Program Managers 

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/07/CWPI/guide/index.shtml 

United Way 

Outcome Measurement Resource Network 

www.liveunited.org/outcomes 

University of Kansas, Community Tool Box 

Evaluating Community Programs and Initiatives 

http://ctb.ku.edu/en/tablecontents/chapter_1036.htm 

III. Improving Child Protection 

A. CPS Reform and Differential Response 

American Humane 

Protecting Children, Diff erential Response 

www.americanhumane.org/protecting-children/programs/diff erential-response/ 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Child Welfare Reform 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/service/cwreform/ 

National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement (homepage) 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/ 

National Quality Improvement Center on Differential Response in Child Protective Services (homepage) 

www.diff erentialresponseqic.org/ 

National Resource Center for Child Protective Services (homepage) 

www.nrccps.org 

136 Appendix S—Community Partnership Resources 
137

 

 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ASPE 

Alternative Responses to Child Maltreatment: Findings from NCANDS 

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/05/child-maltreat-resp/index.htm 

B. Systems of Care 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

National Technical Assistance and Evaluation Center for Systems of Care 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/service/soc/communicate/initiative/ntaec.cfm 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Systems of Care 

www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/soc/soc.pdf 

National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement 

Systems of Care Curriculum 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/systemofcare.htm 

National Technical Assistance Center for Children’s Mental Health 

Early Childhood Mental Health in a System of Care. 

http://gucchd.georgetown.edu/programs/ta_center/topics/early_childhood.html 

C. Family and Youth Engagement 

American Humane 

Family Group Decision Making 

www.americanhumane.org/protecting-children/programs/family-group-decision-making/ 

Annie E. Casey Foundation 

Family to Family and Strengthening Families 

www.aecf.org/Home/MajorInitiatives/Family%20to%20Family.aspx 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Family Group Decision-Making Approaches 

www.childwelfare.gov/famcentered/overview/approaches/family_group.cfm
 

Family & Children’s Service
 

Sharing Family Strengths Activity Booklet (in English and Spanish)
 

http://familychildrenservice.nonprofitoffice.com/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={D87F43FF-2EBD-4F73­

A798-6E8729E5010A}
 

National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement & National Child Welfare 


Resource Center for Youth Development
 

CFSR Toolkit for Youth Involvement: Engaging Youth in the Child and Family Services Review 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/rcpdfs/CFSRtoolkit.pdf 

National Family Preservation Network 

Intensive Family Preservation Services Toolkit 

http://nfpn.org/images/stories/files/ifps_toolkit.pds 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response artnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment to Child Maltreatment 

137 
 138

National Resource Center for Permanency and Family Connections (homepage) 

www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/ 

D. Cultural Competency 

American Humane 

Using Family Group Conferencing to Assist Immigrant Children and Families in the Child Welfare System 

www.americanhumane.org/assets/docs/PC-fgdm-immigrant-children-families.pdf 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Cultural Competence 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/cultural 

Child Welfare League of America 

Cultural Competence 

www.cwla.org/programs/culturalcompetence/ 

FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-based Child Abuse Prevention 

Resources and Training on Cultural Competence 

www.friendsnrc.org/resources/culture.htm 

Georgetown University Center for Child and Human Development, National Center for Cultural 

Competence (homepage) 

www11.georgetown.edu/research/gucchd/nccc/index.html 

University of Kansas, Community Tool Box 

Cultural Competence in a Multicultural World 

http://ctb.ku.edu/en/tablecontents/chapter_1027.htm 

E. Evidenced-based Practices 

California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare (homepage) 

www.cachildwelfareclearinghouse.org 

Child Trends 

What Works: Programs That Work—or Don’t—To Enhance Youth Development 

www.childtrends.org/_catdisp_page.cfm?LID=CD56B3D7-2F05-4F8E-BCC99B05A4CAEA04 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Evidenced-Based Practice Resources 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/service/improving_practices/searchebp_resources.cfm 

FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-based Child Abuse Prevention 

Integrating Evidence Based Practices into CBCAP Programs: A Tool for Critical Discussions 

www.friendsnrc.org/resources/evidence.ht 

National Child Welfare Center for Organizational Improvement (homepage) 

http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/helpkids/ 

 138 Appendix S—Community Partnership Resources 
139

 

National Resource Center for Family-Centered Practice and Permanency Planning 

Evidence-based Practice 

www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/info_services/evidence-based-practice.html 

Promising Practices Network on Children, Families and Communities (homepage) 

www.promisingpractices.net/default.asp 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, SAMHSA 

National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices 

www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/ 

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Children and Family Research Center 

Best Practices Bibliographies 

http://cfrcwww.social.uiuc.edu/practiceresources_bibs.htm 

University of Minnesota, School of Social Work 

Evidence-based Practice in Child Welfare in the Context of Cultural Competence: Meeting Proceedings and 

Findings. Conference Proceedings 

http://cehd.umn.edu/SSW/g-s/media/SummaryOfProceedings.pdf 

IV. Collaboration Among Overlapping Systems 

A. Child Welfare and Domestic Violence Services 

Family Violence Prevention Fund 

Community Collaborations on Behalf of Children Exposed to Domestic Violence 

http://endabuse.org./content/features/detail/781/ 

The Greenbook Initiative (homepage) 

http://thegreenbook.info 

Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse, MINCAVA Electronic Clearinghouse (homepage) 

www.mincava.umn.edu/ 

National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women (homepage) 

www.vawnet.org/ 

National Resource Center for Child Protective Services 

Domestic Violence 

www.nrccps.org/resources/domestic_violence.php 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office on Child Abuse and Neglect (OCAN) 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/domesticviolence 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response artnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment to Child Maltreatment 

139 
 140

B. Child Welfare and Substance Abuse 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Substance Abuse and Cross-System Collaboration 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/service_array/substance/cross_sys/ 

National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare 

Online Tutorials for Knowledge-building and Cross-Systems Work 

www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/tutorials/index.asp 

National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare 

Regional Partnership Grant Program 

www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/technical/ta-rpg.aspx 

National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare 

Screening and Assessment for Family Engagement, Retention, and Recovery 

www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/fi les/SAFERR.pdf 

National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information (homepage) 

http://ncadi.samhsa.gov 

National Technical Assistance Center for Children’s Mental Health (homepage) 

http://gucchd.georgetown.edu/programs/ta_center/ 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, OCAN 

Protecting Children in Families Aff ected by Substance Use Disorders 

www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/substanceuse/ 

C. Child Welfare and the Courts 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Collaboration with the Courts 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/service/collaboration/courts.cfm 

National Center for State Courts 

How Judges Can Build Multidisciplinary Collaborations to Benefi t Children and Families 

www.ncsconline.org/WC/Publications/Trends/2007/FamJusTrends2007.pdf 

National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues (homepage) 

www.abanet.org/child/rclji/home.html 

National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges 

Building a Better Collaboration: Facilitating Change in the Court and Child Welfare System 

www.ncjfcj.org/
 

National Quality Improvement Center on the Representation of Children in the Child Welfare 


System (homepage)
 

www.improvechildrep.org/ 


140 Appendix S—Community Partnership Resources 
141

SANCA Project, Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act (homepage) 

http://sancaproject.org 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, OCAN 

Working with the Courts in Child Protection 

www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/courts/courts.pdf 

V. Child Abuse and Neglect/Child Welfare Background 

A. Child Abuse and Neglect and the Child Welfare System (General Background) 

Children’s Bureau (homepage) 

www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/ 

Child Welfare Information Gateway (homepage)
 

www.childwelfare.gov/
 

Resources in Spanish: www.childwelfare.gov/spanish
 

Child Welfare League of America (homepage) 

www.cwla.org/ 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ACF 

Child Abuse and Neglect Research 

www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/index.htm#can 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, OCAN 

Child Abuse and Neglect User Manual Series 

www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/umnew.cfm 

B. Family Support and Prevention of Child Maltreatment 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Preventing Child Abuse and Neglect 

www.childwelfare.gov/preventing/ 

Child Welfare League of America (homepage) 

www.cwla.org 

The Finance Project 

Developing a Comprehensive Approach to Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention: Strategies for State 

and Social Policymakers 

www.financeproject.org/publications/childabuseSB.pdf 

FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention (homepage) 

www.friendsnrc.org/ 

National Center for Housing and Child Welfare (homepage) 

www.nchcw.org/ 

Community Partnerships: Improving the Response artnerships: Improving the Response 

to Child Maltreatment to Child Maltreatment 

141 
 142

Pathways Mapping Initiative (homepage) 

www.pathwaystooutcomes.org/ 

Prevent Child Abuse America (homepage) 

www.preventchildabuse.org/ 

C. Child Welfare Laws 

Child Welfare Information Gateway 

Laws, State Statutes, and Policies 

www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/ 

Tribal Law and Policy Institute 

Tribal Court Clearinghouse 

www.tribal-institute.org/index.htm 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ACF 

Laws and Policies 

www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/laws_policies/index.htm#laws 

142 Appendix S—Community Partnership Resources