SurveyTeamMultidisciplinaryArkansasResourceReportCHILDREN’SADVOCACYCENTERSOFARKANSAS|124WestCapitolAve,Ste1630, Little Rock, AR 72201 2022
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
(PAGE
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
FOREWORD
Early Mallow, Benton County MDT Facilitator/Director of Partner Services, Children’s Advocacy Center of Benton County Matt Caton, Crimes Against Children Division, ASP
Pamela Weeks, Crimes Against Children Division, ASP
Angela Newcomb, Deputy Director, Department of Children and Family Services
Criminal Investigation
Members of the Arkansas MDT Support Workgroup:
The Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas wishes to thank the members of the Arkansas MDT Support Workgroup for the time and dedication to the creation and review of this survey. We recognize that voluntary nature of your participation and appreciate your efforts in guiding the Arkansas MDT Project.
Robin Connell Chair, Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas Markett Humphries MDT Project Director, Children's Advocacy Centers of Arkansas Karen Farst MD, Team for Children at Risk, Arkansas Children’s Hospital/UAMS Sufna John PhD, AR BEST, University of AR for Medical Sciences Lt. Rhonda Thomas, Greene County MDT Facilitator/Paragould Police Department
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS Capitol
Survey Design
Background
Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas is an organization that is a chapter of the National Children’s Alliance operating in Arkansas for the purpose of promoting, assisting, and supporting the development, growth, and continuation of child safety centers in Arkansas. A.C.A. § 9 5 103 (a)(2). In 2021, the Arkansas Legislature shifted operational responsibility for the Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) from the Arkansas Commission on Child Abuse, Rape, and Domestic Violence (ACCRDV) to the Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas (CACar) to align and bolster community level resources between the local child advocacy centers and MDTs across the state through Act 975 of 2021. The Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas established the legislatively created Multidisciplinary Team Oversight Committee (MDT OC), which has the duty to assess the operations of the MDTs statewide in the response to alleged child abuse. A.C.A. § 20 82 210 (a) and (c). The Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas must coordinate the MDTs throughout the state of Arkansas.
The Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas must coordinate and provide training statewide for multidisciplinary teams. A.C.A. § 9 5 104 (b)(7). Additionally, the Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas is required by law to provide support, training, and funding to the multidisciplinary team facilitators. A.C.A. § 20 82 209 (d). To meet these mandates, the Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas created a Steering Committee made up of MDT professionals actively participating on MDTs around the state. The steering committee, through its workgroups, has provided recommendations and assisted with the growth and development of the Arkansas MDT Project.
The workgroup designed the questionnaire to survey each MDT participant on his or her experience with MDTs, as well as training and technology needs or preferences.
Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
| 124 West
The MDT Support workgroup developed a survey to identify what is working well with MDTs (and might benefit other MDTs), the potential gaps in resources, and the need for additional support or training around the state. The survey results will be used to guide CACar’s efforts in provide training and resources to the MDTs and MDT facilitators moving forward.
Purpose
This workgroup designed a questionnaire to survey every MDT (multidisciplinary team) member across the state. MDT membership includes representatives from the Arkansas Department of Human Services Division of Children and Family Services; Department of Public Safety/Arkansas State Police Crimes Against Children Division; Prosecuting Attorneys; Medical and Mental Health Professionals; Law Enforcement (local, county, state and federal); Juvenile Courts and Probation Offices; and Children Advocacy Centers. The workgroup developed questions that were designed to elicit relevant respondent background for each participant (e.g., discipline, length of participation with MDTs, role, and county)
Only 158 MDT members across the state responded during an initial distribution in February 2022. It was redistributed in March 2022. CACar offered incentives to teams
Participant Background
The participants in this survey were identified through the MDT Database, in which the MDT Facilitators maintain a directory of local team members for his or her responsible MDT. This survey was successfully disseminated to more than 1,350 individuals that participate on one or more of the sixty four (64) multidisciplinary teams (MDT) in Arkansas. Participants on an MDT represent various organizations and disciplines that respond, intervene, or provide services to child abuse victims. The workgroup developed questions that were designed to elicit relevant respondent background for each participant (e.g., discipline, length of participation with MDTs, role, and county).
The Arkansas MDT Resource Survey was generated using Google Forms platform. The questionnaire was disseminated to the participants using MailChimp® The responses were extracted from Google Forms into this excel spreadsheet. The participants’ names were removed to provide anonymity. The responses have been summarized for your review.
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
Survey Results
Mental9%Health CAC Leadership4% DCFSCACD12%17% Law Enforcement23% Forensic 6%Interviewer Victim/Family AdvocateDevelopment/Marketing9%0%JuvenileProbation/Courts5%MDTFacilitator4% Medical4% Prevention/Education1% Prosecuting Attorney 3% Victim/Witness Coordinator 3% Figure 1. Respondents by Discipline
Each participant was allowed to complete the support related questions for each county/team for which he or she participated.
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
question surveyed the respondents to determine the years of experience participating on an MDT in Arkansas, see Figure 2. This was important to help the MDT Support Workgroup understand the priorities for training desired, and resources needed by the respondents. Most of the respondents had less than five (5) years of experience participating with MDTs with nearly half of those having less than a year of
Theexperience.resultsofthis
to increase participation and provided recommendations through MDT Facilitators on increasing response rates. An additional 227 responses were recorded. A total of 385 respondents completed the survey. Figure 1 illustrates the disciplinary breakdown of those Severalrespondents.MDTmembers
Less than 1 year 25% 2 539%years 6 10 1114%years15years11%1620years6% 21 or5%more
Perceived MDT Strengths and Weaknesses
survey question were also important for CACar to understand team dynamics and stability. A stable MDT has healthier dynamics and typically exhibits higher executive functioning. Organization turnover leads to less experience and instability on an MDT.
Figure 2. Respondents by Years on MDT
Less than 1 year 2-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years 21 or more
The MDT Support Workgroup designed the next question to subjectively assess what the respondents identified as the top five (5) strengths of his or her experience with the MDT. The respondents ranked the strengths from most important to least
may participate on more than one MDT. For those respondents that serve on more than one MDT, he or she was given the opportunity to provide feedback on the primary county and any additional counties. Eighty of the 385 respondents indicated that he or she serves on a second or more counties. The following survey results are based on the response involving the respondent’s primary Thcounty.enext
Figure 3. Top Five Strengths – Most to Least Important. to five (5) items, if addressed, the work her
● Quality/completeness of my investigations/assessment/evaluations have improved due to my involvement with MDT;
● MDT promotes a strong, collaborative approach to child abuse cases in my community;
● Relationships developed in MDT case reviews makes it easier for me to contact professionals from other disciplines for information/questions between meetings;
● Families are more likely to receive assistance with referrals/services if the case is discussed at MDT compared to other cases that are not discussed at MDT;
● Other Not Listed option to write in response
● Trainings offered by my local MDT have provided information pertinent to my job;
● Interaction with professionals from other disciplines improves my sense of wellbeing related to my job;
● MDT Case discussions make me feel more prepared to present information in court proceedings;
The MDT Support Workgroup designed the next question
would strengthen
● MDT has raised awareness about child abuse prevention in my local community; and
of his or
MDT. The respondents ranked the items from most important to 170 146 144 128 96 52 75 60 62 74 53 45 44 51 59 39 50 48 42 45 45 50 48 48 57400350300250200150100500 Information sharing in the meeting between agencies assists me in my role. casedevelopedRelationshipsinMDTreviewsmakes it easier for me to contact professionals from other information/questionsfordisciplinesbetweenmeetings. MDT promotes a strong,abuseapproachcollaborativetochildcasesinmycommunity. Families are more likely to referrals/servicesassistancereceivewith if the case is discussed at MDT compared to other cases that are not discussed at MDT. Interaction improvesprofessionalswithfromotherdisciplinesmysenseofwell-beingrelatedtomyjob. Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 4 Rank 5
subjectively assess what the respondents identified as the top
● Information sharing in the meeting between agencies assists me in my role;
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
important using a Likert based scale. The following were options available for the respondents to choose as a strength and then each of the top five were ranked:
understandingImprove
The following were closely ranked with the top five items to be addressed: local trainings and improve technology supports. Respondents that chose improve technology supports provided the following recommendations: Unlimited Zoom, laptop devices for facilitators, OWL type device available for all MDT related meetings, Secured, shared, HIPAA compliant platform/database for all MDT members, and hotspot due to unreliable internet in rural Arkansas.
● Improve understanding of the meaning of a “collaborative child abuse response;”
138 126 116 103 100 97 93 60 59 64 54 54 53 59 66 31 44 44 41 57 35 40 53 38 52400350300250200150100500
● Other Not Listed option to write in response
Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 4 Rank 5
● Understanding how the data collected during case reviews are used by the state;
CHILDREN’S
Understanding how the data collected during case reviews is used by the state.
● Decrease the number of cases discussed at MDT by limited certain types of maltreatment to discuss; and
ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
● Educating agency supervisors so he or she values the role in MDT;
● Increase awareness of need for MDT professionals to be active in self care to avoid burnout;
fromprofessionalsbyotheragencies or
Figure 4. Top Five Items to Address - Most to Least Important.
● Offer trainings at the local, community level for MDT [professionals to reduce travel for training purposes];
Increase awareness of need for
Learning more about what is required for the assessment or investigation disciplines. of the meaning of a “collaborative child abuse response.”
activeprofessionalsMDTtobeinself-caretoavoidburnout. Educating willsupervisorsagencysotheyvaluemyroleinMDT.
● Learning more about what is required for the assessment or investigation by professionals from other agencies/disciplines;
least important using a Likert based scale. The following were options available for the respondents to choose as a strength and then each of the top five were ranked:
● Improve technology supports to be able to attend meetings virtually;
MDT Training
● Understanding the roles/rules of other MDT agencies.
● How to be a more effective witness in court.
The MDT Support Workgroup sought to identify potential training topics desired by the MDT members. The survey question provided the respondent an opportunity to choose the top five (5) topics that were of the most interest in his or her role. The following trainings topics were provided, as well as an write in option:
● Understanding the purpose of MDT and the role of the MDT coordinator.
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste Little Rock,
AR 72201
● Diversity, Cultural Responsiveness, Implicit Bias.
1630,
● recantation of disclosures in children).
● Self care for the child abuse professional.
● Problematic Sexual Behaviors in Children/Underaged Juvenile Aggressors.
● Disclosure dynamics in child sexual abuse (factors associated with delay and
229 208 191 176 174 155 146 139 117250200150100500
● Zero to Three intervention services.
● Sex trafficking interview protocol/training.
● Investigation of certain types of maltreatment.
● Services provided by CACs and national standards of accreditation for CACs.
Those topics where more than 100 respondents expressed interest in a training topic have been included in Figure 5 below. The topics are ranked in order of interest from most interested to least interested.
Figure 5. Interest in Training Topics.
The most interest was related to the disciplines represented on an MDT and involved routine and coordinated response to child abuse. Preference for an understanding of DCFS investigations and case services, followed by law enforcement response (as a first responder or criminal investigation, then CACD investigations. Since both DCFS and CACD conduct child maltreatment investigation, this could be collapsed into a single training topic. Other noteworthy partner roles identified for potential training involved Criminal Prosecution and Prosecuting Attorneys, Office of Chief Counsel and Dependency Neglect Proceedings, and Juvenile Probation/Courts.
● Appellate Procedures Criminal
● Victim/Witness Coordinator
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
● DCFS/Juvenile Court Dependency Neglect Proceedings
● Forensic Interviewer/Interviewing
● Medical
● First Responders Law Enforcement
● Prosecuting Attorney/Criminal Prosecution
To increase participation in training by partners, it was important to identify the modes of training that the MDT partners and members would be willing to utilize. Figure 6 represents preference given to the different modes of training that could be offered by CACar. Respondents were able to provide an alternative for training by choosing “other.” Other responses included any online forum and information via USB packet for self reading. 6. Modes of Training
The respondents were provided an opportunity to identify roles and rules of other MDT agencies for which he or she desired additional training or understanding. The following agencies or disciplines were represented:
● DCFS Investigations
● Juvenile Office/Probation/Court Delinquency Proceedings
● Office of Chief Counsel / Administrative Law Judge / Administrative Hearings (Child Maltreatment)
● Attorney Ad Litem
● Criminal Investigations
Yes No
● DCFS Case Services
400200100500150250300350 In-person, < 1 drivehourfrom my home In-person, up to 3 hour drive from my home Online, virtual, in (instructorrealtimeled) Online,prerecordedvirtual,webinar Figure
● CACD Investigations
● Family/Child Advocate
● Appellate Procedures Civil/Child Maltreatment
For onboarding of future MDT members, it was important to understand what current MDT members wished they would have known when he or she first started working with the respective MDT. The following list was provided, and respondents were able to check all that applied:
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
● How to contact MDT members outside the meeting.
What happens to the data that is collected, 37, MDTUnderstanding18%oftherolesofothermembers,34,17%HowtocontactMDTmembersoutsidethemeeting,20,10%RoleorfunctionofaCAC,14,7%
The frequency of which a respondent wished he or she would have known any of the above is represented in Figure 7. This pie chart shows the topic, total number of respondents, and percentage for each.
One respondent acknowledged a willingness to travel to provide training for law enforcement professionals. Another respondent correlated the desire to travel further distance was dependent on the day or frequency, as well as topic presented.
● What is the role/function of a CAC.
Nothing, 10, 5%
Order or expectation of who presents what information at case review, 1, 0%
● Purpose of the MDT Case Review Meetings.
● Definition/vision of collaborative investigation/assessment.
MDT Onboarding
● Understanding of the roles of other MDT members.
● Other Not Listed
● None of the above
Purpose or function of a MDT, 27, Purpose13%of the MDT Case Review Meetings 29 14%
Figure 7. New MDT Member Onboarding Knowledge.
● What is the purpose/function of an MDT.
Definition or vision of assessmentinvestigationcollaborativeor,33,16%
● What happens to the data that is collected.
8. Preferred Mode of CommunicationGroup Email
Respondents were able to provide additional input on how funding could be utilized to support the MDT’s collaborative function or his or her role on the MDT. Of the 385 respondents, only 185 responses that involved several themes: Food, Trainings, Team Building or MDT Member Recognition, Community Outreach, Technology, and SpecificResources.training
In Person at MDT Case Review Web NewsletterPortal
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
The MDT Support Workgroup recognized the importance of information sharing with MDT partners. The next question sought to identify the preferred modes of communication for receiving information on activities and available trainings from the local and state level. Figure 8 represents respondents’ willingness or preference for the various modes of Tocommunication.determinethe
funding requests included additional offerings of ChildFirst® in other locations, expansion of forensic interviewing training to additional partners for a basic understanding, Lunch and Learns between agencies, and Wellness/Secondary Traumatic Stress (STS), and access to Case Study Presenters. Specific funding requests for Community Outreach or Awareness was related to MDTs, and not just CAC, which included involvement in local events through booths and so on, Community Services/Resources (pamphlets, reading materials, etc.), and Prevention Education. Specific technology funding requests included improvements to equipment for use between forensic interviewers and partners during a forensic interview; Software; Increase sharing information; External encrypted hard drives; Advanced Cameras for
Technology and Communication
file sharing services that the MDT members were familiar with or willing to use, the next survey question attempted to identify preference and level of experience/willingness to utilize certain platforms. The following file sharing platform options were offered: Google Doc/Drive, Microsoft Teams, and Box/Drop Box, which the respondents respectively ranked in that order of preference. Most of the respondents had experience and was comfortable using one of the platforms. Almost half did not have any experience with those platforms; however, indicated a willingness to learn and utilize the platforms. A few neither had experience nor desired to learn or use those platforms.
365 323 267 Figure158
Several concerns were noted with using such platforms for file or information sharing. Those concerns included security risk, HIPAA compliance, agency procedures limiting sharing through secured email if involved patient, and willingness of agencies to participate due to poor participation on the MDT.
MDT Funding Feedback
Finally, respondents were given an opportunity to provide feedback to the MDT Oversight Committee regarding MDTs in Arkansas and/or child advocacy centers in Arkansas. There were 147 responses that involved several noteworthy themes: Participation; Accountability; Equal Membership, Wellness, Positive/Negative feedback on individual teams, facilitators, or partners.
physical abuse exams to detect underlying bruising or injury; Database Improvements/Shared Database; Online accessible, constantly updated MDT Directory for all MDT partners; and a forum for Online or Self paced Training
MDT Feedback for MDT Oversight Committee
MDT members noted that there were ongoing participation issues on the teams, specifically within the Case Review context. The primary participation concerns were with DCFS and prosecuting attorneys. There was additional feedback that participation by the DHS Office of Chief Counsel was desired during Case Review. MDT members noted that there were ongoing accountability concerns regarding partner participation and information sharing. MDT members requested regular oversight and contact with team members to monitor the member’s experience on the MDT, and a reporting system for gross/inappropriate behaviors by MDT members or concerns with the integrity of an investigation by the various investigative agencies on the MDT. Some MDT members requested evaluations of the MDT Facilitator and potential contractual term limits for MDT Facilitators.
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
Lona Jeffery
ARBEST
Laura Robertson
MDT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
Dr. Karen Farst
Sheriff Scott Sawyer
Arkansas State Police, CACD Commander
Arkansas Association of Chiefs of Police, Executive Director Chief Jim Kuchenbecker
Major Jeffrey Drew
Child Maltreatment Investigations Oversight Committee Chair Vacant
Sufna John, Ph.D.
Department of Human Services, DCFS Director Director Mischa Martin
Arkansas Sheriff’s Association, Executive Director
ACCARDV Executive Director
Matt Durrett
CHILDREN’S
UAMS TCAR
Juvenile Justice
Arkansas Prosecuting Attorney’s Association Executive Director
Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas, Board President Elizabeth Shackleford
CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF ARKANSAS | 124 West Capitol Ave, Ste 1630, Little Rock, AR 72201
