Court Appointed Special Advocates Research Articles

Accessibility of transportation to child‐welfare involved parents and the related impact on court‐ordered service participation

AbstractFamilies involved with Child Protective Services (CPS) face daunting steps to meet their service plan goals in the effort to achieve reunification with their children. Families who lack transportation access face additional barriers. This study explored Court Appointed Special Advocates, or CASA, volunteers' perspectives of the impact of transportation access on child welfare‐involved families' service participation. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with nine CASA volunteers in a large city in a Southeastern state. Questions were asked regarding volunteers' experiences of transportation access for parents and children. Primary emphasis was placed on families' access to services. Three primary themes emerged in the data analysis: (1) challenges are wide‐ranging, exacerbated by transportation issues; (2) transportation linked to court‐ordered services success; and (3) practical recommendations stem from transportation justice. Interviews illuminated transportation challenges faced by families involved with CPS. The observed link between transportation inequity and CPS permanency outcomes warrants serious consideration in future research. Recommendations provide initial guidance to begin addressing disparities faced by these families.

The Role of Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASAs) in the Lives of Transition-Age Youth with Foster Care Experience

The Role of Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASAs) in the Lives of Transition-Age Youth with Foster Care Experience

Child Victim Services in the Time of COVID-19: New Challenges and Innovative Solutions.

The impact of COVID-19 has been felt by all facets of the criminal justice system and victim services agencies. The ability to monitor and report maltreatment has been severely limited for organizations that work with children of abuse and neglect; this is particularly troubling given that abuse and neglect are likely to rise during times of distress and turmoil. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the importance of organizations that work with children exposed to maltreatment, highlight the novel approach of Child Advocacy Services, SEGA, Inc. (CASSEGA), the sponsoring agency for Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) and the Ogeechee Visitation Centers, in rural southeast Georgia and how the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged this work, and develop strategies that can be put into place to alleviate these challenges for other child-serving organizations.

About the Contributors

About the Contributors

Perspectives on Informed Consent Practices for Minimal-Risk Research Involving Foster Youth.

* Abbreviations: GAL — : guardian ad litem IRB — : institutional review board There are >430 000 children in protective custody (ie, foster care) in the United States.1 Despite known health disparities,2–5 there continues to be limited research to develop an evidence base for diagnosing and intervening to improve health conditions for children in foster care.6 One identified obstacle to recruitment is obtaining informed consent, the legal requirement for understanding and voluntary agreement to participate in research. Foster youth do not have a traditional parent or guardian and instead have many adults playing different roles in their lives, including their children’s services caseworker, their foster caregiver, their biological parent, their court-appointed special advocate or guardian ad litem (GAL), and their judge or magistrate. Each plays a role in decision-making for the child and could participate in the informed consent process. Previous work has demonstrated inconsistent approaches for obtaining informed consent for youth in foster care to participate in minimal-risk research; a review of 49 publications revealed 14 different combinations of individuals used for informed consent, ranging from judge, caseworker, and caregiver consent with youth assent to biological parent consent only.7 For pediatric researchers wanting to develop evidence-based health guidelines and interventions for this population, obtaining consent from a legally empowered guardian for foster youth may appear to be an insurmountable barrier. Consensus would be beneficial to promoting research … Address correspondence to Mary V. Greiner, MD, MS, Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave, ML 2011, Cincinnati, OH 45229. E-mail: mary.greiner{at}cchmc.org

Lessons from the field: An evidence-informed resiliency model for child abuse organizations

BackgroundChild abuse organizations are keenly aware of the impact helping abused and neglected children has on the people who do that work. In their efforts to address this issue, they look to their colleagues for recommendations on what works. Of particular value is testimony from those who have used evidence-informed programs to mitigate the impact on staff, so services to children do not suffer. Objective, participants and setting, resultsThe Resiliency Project provided that evidence-informed program, one that was developed for and by the child abuse field in 2009. With funding from the Office for Victims of Crime, The University of Texas at Austin team of researchers, educators and practitioners developed the Organizational Resiliency Model (ORM) specifically for the child abuse field. The model draws from research on strengths individuals who are resilient have, and offers strategies for organizations to use to build resiliency in their staff. The ORM was piloted with 24 leaders from the field, including children's advocacy centers (CACs); court-appointed special advocate (CASA) programs; and government-based child welfare agencies. This article reviews the research basis for the ORM and new research supporting the model, and offers lessons learned through structured interviews with 10 child abuse leaders who piloted the ORM and continue to use it ten years later. ConclusionsUsing the ORM, based on evidence available at the time, supported by new research and attested to by child abuse leaders who have sustained the model in their organizations, can promote a healthy and resilient workforce.

Helping Parents Navigate the Child Welfare System: Partnering with CASA to Create Self-Advocacy Resource Kits

There are 442,995 children in contact with child welfare systems in the U.S. today (HHS, 2018). While some children represented in this statistic were victims of abuse, such as physical (12%) or sexual abuse (4%), many of these children and their families come to the attention of child protection authorities because of neglect (62%), meaning that their parents/caregivers lack adequate resources to properly provide and care for their dependent children (HHS, 2018). For some families, involvement with child protection authorities means being separated–with children placed in foster care and parents working through the court-mandated requirements in order to be reunified with their children. For other families, children are allowed to stay at home while their parents work through these requirements under supervision of authorities. In neither case are parents involved with Indiana’s Department of Child Services (DCS) given a “how to” guide for successfully navigating this process–the amount of guidance given to parents varies drastically based on the caseworker, judge, service providers, and public defenders assigned to their case. The goal of this paper is to describe a pilot effort to provide empirically sound “self-advocacy resource kits” to parents in the child welfare system in one Indiana county, in partnership with the organization that aims to advocate for the best interests of children at the center of these cases–Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA).

The Effect of CASA on Child Welfare Permanency Outcomes.

The present study is the largest and most rigorous study to date on the effects of being appointed a Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) on permanency outcomes of children in foster care. The intent-to-treat study accounts for selection bias by applying inverse probability weighting to logistic and sequential logistic regressions in a large sample of children in foster care in the state of Texas (N = 31,754). Overall, children appointed a CASA have significantly lower odds than children without a CASA of achieving permanency. They have lower odds of being reunified, greater odds of being adopted (if not reunified), and lower odds of being placed in permanent kin guardianship (if not reunified or adopted) than children who are not appointed CASA. This study makes an additional contribution by looking beyond the aggregate effect of CASA on permanency by examining the effect of CASA for different age groups and different types of first placement after removal.

Bill C-59 and CSIS’s “New” Powers to Disrupt Terrorists Threats: Holding the Charter-Limiting Regime to (Constitutional) Account

In 2017, the Liberal government released Bill C-59, which was its update to the national security legislation that was introduced by the previous government via Bill C-51. Bill C-59’s goal was to address the criticisms of its predecessor, including the new “kinetic” powers granted to the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) to actively disrupt threats to the security of Canada. While Bill C-59 made some improvements to ensure that CSIS’s new powers are exercised in accordance with the Charter, there are still deficiencies to be addressed. This article reviews the changes brought in with Bill C-59, examines how those amendments may not avoid constitutional challenge, and outlines what a section 1 Oakes justification may look like. Ultimately, to address the Charter implications of the new legislation, further changes are required, including the use of court-appointed special advocates to ensure an adversarial system and further oversight of CSIS’s new, disruptive authority.

Examining the Role of Court Appointed Special Advocates in Improving Access to Care for Vulnerable Pediatric Populations

Introduction/ Background: Children involved in the child welfare system have been described as being uniquely vulnerable and at risk for adverse outcomes because they do not have their natural or biological advocates, their parents. In order to provide appropriate advocacy and support for these children, Court Appointed Special Advocates, (CASAs), are assigned to children within the foster care system. The role of the CASA is to monitor the fit between the child and his or her environment and to determine whether that environment is …

Examining the Role of Court Appointed Special Advocates in Improving Access to Care for Vulnerable Pediatric Populations

Examining the Role of Court Appointed Special Advocates in Improving Access to Care for Vulnerable Pediatric Populations

A qualitative examination of recruitment and motivation to become a Guardian ad Litem in the child welfare system

There is limited research that examines the experiences of Guardians ad Litems or Court Appointed Special Advocates appointed to cases to represent the best interest of children involved with the child welfare system. The purpose of this paper is to (1) identify and explore the primary mechanisms through which Guardians ad Litem are recruited and/or learn about the program and (2) identify and categorize the motivations that individuals describe for becoming a Guardian ad Litem. Data were collected as part of a larger cross-sectional, qualitative study of the Florida Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office. The perspectives of 553 volunteers and employees comprise the sample. Themes pertaining to how advocates were recruited or became involved included personal contacts; media and advertising; involvement with GAL due to professional/career opportunity; targeted/purposeful recruitment efforts by GAL programs; and employment-related opportunity or involvement. In relation to what motivated advocates to volunteer, themes were life transitions; advocacy for children and families; volunteerism; personal fulfillment; personal/familial experiences; career or professional experiences; time; personal fit or interest; and attitudes/opinion of the GAL program. Implications for recruitment and motivation are discussed, as well as directions for future research.

Who gets a CASA? Selective characteristics of children appointed a CASA advocate

Prior research examining the effectiveness of Court-Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) as an intervention for improving the outcomes of children in state custody has been hindered by selection bias, because children may be selected to receive CASA representation based on non-random characteristics. Selection bias poses a strong threat to internal validity, and researchers have struggled to isolate the effects of CASA services on child and case outcomes. The present study examines the extent of selection bias in the CASA assignment process over a 2-year period for a full population of foster children in regions served by CASA programs in Texas (N = 32,349), thereby increasing the capacity to control for selection characteristics and supporting causal inference in ongoing studies. This analysis of CASA and state child welfare administrative data examines differences in the baseline child-, family-, and case-level characteristics of children who were appointed CASA representation compared to children who received child welfare services without CASA representation. Mixed-effect logistic regression modeling identifies independent predictors of CASA appointment while controlling for a range of factors and accounting for data clustering in the selection process. Findings indicate that CASA cases in this population have indicators of greater complexity and severity compared to their non-CASA counterparts. By empirically identifying the factors that predict assignment to CASA at the population level, this study lays the foundation for an advanced quasi-experimental outcome evaluation to examine CASA's effectiveness at improving child and case outcomes while minimizing the influence of selection bias.

Child welfare system interventions on behalf of children and families: Highlighting the role of court appointed special advocates

Nearly three-quarters of a million children are victims of abuse and neglect in the United States every year. This article describes the scope of the problem and explains how the child welfare system intervenes, including how cases are reported, how Child Protective Services (CPS) assesses the risk, how CPS determines when in-home services are appropriate or if a child should be removed from the home, how ongoing cases are managed, and the options for permanency for children in the system. The article also explains how the Family Court system operates as the decision-maker in child abuse and neglect cases and discusses the various models of legal representation provided to child victims, depending on the jurisdiction in which they live. The authors document how outcomes for child victims of abuse and neglect are greatly improved when their representation includes the appointment of a Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA Volunteer) to advocate for their best interests. The history of the CASA model is outlined, and the structure of the current program, which includes over 76,000 volunteers in nearly 1000 local programs in 49 states, is described. This article explains the CASA methodology and how this intervention improves outcomes for abused and neglected children. The authors argue that greater public and private support would provide more local CASA agencies with the resources to recruit, train, and support more CASA Volunteers to help more child victims of abuse and neglect.

Pediatricians and court appointed special advocates (CASA)

Pediatricians and court appointed special advocates (CASA)

Contextual Factors Influencing Recommendations for Service Provision by Guardian ad litem and Court-Appointed Special Advocates

The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of county-level variables on services offered to children who have guardian ad litem/court-appointed special advocate (GAL/CASA) representation. An email survey was sent to GALs and CASAs inviting them to participate in the study. A total of 473 GALs/CASAs completed the survey, with 437 meeting criteria for the study. Our sample represents 33 of 92 Indiana counties. We found the number and types of services ordered were strongly influenced by county contextual characteristics. Families served by a GAL/CASA in urban counties with more poverty received more services. In contrast, families with a GAL/CASA residing in counties with a greater percentage of minorities generated fewer services. Future research should focus on why environmental conditions influence GAL/CASA recommendations for services. Lastly, the relationship between the GAL/CASA race and the race of the families they serve should be explored.

Meet the First Authors.

Meet the First Authors.

An evaluation of a Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) program in the rural south

Children in the court system who are abused or neglected are mandated by the federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) to have special legal representation in the form of a Guardian ad Litem (GAL). A GAL can be a staff attorney or a volunteer layperson (known as a Court Appointed Special Advocate, or CASA) who has undergone GAL training. In some states, the CASA volunteer can be a substitute for the GAL, while in other states, including Georgia, the CASA is appointed by the judge as a complement to the staff attorney. To date, there has been very little research evaluating the fidelity of CASA programs where they are implemented, nor has there been much research on the CASA program more generally. Therefore, this study evaluates the fidelity of a rural CASA program using the Justice Program Fidelity Scale (JPFS; Miller & Miller, 2015) and interview data from 12 CASA volunteers, along with local CASA program statistics and training materials. The CASA program evaluated for the present study scored an 85.64% on the JPFS using combined scores from two researchers. Implications for practitioners working in the field of child abuse and prevention in rural areas, including implications specifically for a judicial circuit with no dedicated specialty judge for cases involving abused or neglected children, are discussed.

Effects of Court-Appointed Special Advocate Intervention on Permanency Outcomes of Children in Foster Care

ABSTRACTDespite the popularity of court-appointed special advocate (CASA) intervention, little is known about its effects on permanency outcomes of children in foster care. Given that a foster child's permanency is closely associated with outcomes, such as being at greater risk for developing emotional and behavioral problems, homelessness, criminal activity, and early pregnancies, it is crucial to explore foster-care children's permanency outcomes as a proxy for the effects of CASA intervention. This study aimed to examine to what extent CASA intervention was associated with permanency outcomes of children in foster care. A systematic random sample of 304 children was drawn from all closed case files referred for CASA intervention from 1995 to 2012 in a rural community in Tennessee. Two groups of children who received CASA services (n = 129) and children who did not receive CASA services (n = 175) were compared. The results of a multinomial regression model indicated that CASA intervention was significantly associated with permanency outcomes; children who received CASA intervention were more likely to be adopted or reunified with their relatives rather than reunified with their birth parents. Further studies should investigate overall quality of permanency outcomes of foster children

Judges’ Perceptions of the Nebraska CASA Program

This article discusses judges’ perceptions of court appointed special advocates (CASA) programs in the rural state of Nebraska, as reported in two online surveys. The goal of CASA is “to train and support volunteers in advocating for safe and permanent homes for abused and neglected children” (CASA for Children 2013). One survey investigated the opinions of judges presiding in Nebraska counties that did not yet have a local CASA program; another was administered to judges in counties that did have a CASA program. A total of 36 judges completed a survey. Data from both surveys were analyzed separately and then compared to provide information regarding judges’ satisfaction with local programs and general perceptions of the Nebraska CASA Association. Results offer vital information for program growth and contain a hopeful tone for the Nebraska CASA Association and their goal of providing every child a voice by 2020. Both groups of judges expressed support for CASA programs overall, although judges in counties with CASA programs expressed significantly more support than those in counties without CASA programs. Judges presiding in counties with lower county populations and lower numbers of children in foster care also tended to be more supportive of the CASA program. Additional information was collected from judges regarding readiness for the development of CASA programs in counties not yet utilizing a program and perceived strengths and limitations of existing CASA programs. This study has the capacity to inform CASA programs seeking similar information to guide program growth in other states.