No abstract

No abstract

The current study examines the relationship between three hearing quality indicators-depth of discussion, judicial inquiry, and judicial engagement of parents-and placement outcomes for maltreated children and youth at early case hearings (i.e., preliminary protective and adjudication hearings). We find that higher levels of judicial engagement of parents during preliminary protective hearings was significantly related to increased placements with relatives and decreased placements in nonrelative foster care. Levels of judicial inquiry and hearing discussion had no apparent effect on where children were placed during preliminary protective hearings. The implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are discussed.Key Point for the Family Court Community:• This study deepens current understanding of the ways in which three juvenile dependency hearing quality indicators relate to foster care placement outcomes.

This article examines how the amount of judicial personnel work hours available for each juvenile dependency case in a county may be related to the percentage of cases reaching key decision hearings in a timely manner. Panel analyses of data from Washington State indicate that, when controlling for community risk factors, counties with more judicial personnel per case held timely fact-finding and permanency planning hearings more often and more often achieved timely adoptions. Judicial personnel per case, however, was not a significant predictor of the percentage of permanent placements completed within timeliness goals. Keypoints• Many states are not achieving the requirements of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), leading to children languishing in care • The juvenile dependency system needs to examine ways in which it can increase the timeliness of safe and permanent placements for children • Courts are being overburdened with an increase in juvenile dependency petition filings without a corresponding increase in judicial personnel • Courts should increase their number of judicial staff, so they can process cases faster and meet outcome goals more easily

This article describes a new method for calculating judicial workload in dependency or child abuse and neglect cases. In contrast to traditional judicial workload methods, the method described herein produces estimates of judicial workload that take into account the complex role of the juvenile dependency court judge-a role that includes both on-and off-the-bench activities. The method provides workload estimates that give guidance to courts not only about the minimally sufficient judicial resources needed to accommodate current caseload needs, but also what level of judicial resources would be required to hold substantive dependency court hearings that comport with nationally recognized practice recommendations. The article reviews commonly used judicial workload methods, outlines the new method, and uses a pilot of the method as an example of how the method works in practice. Broader implications of this workload method are also discussed.