The Effects of Judicial Personnel on Hearing and Outcome Timeliness in Juvenile Dependency Cases

Abstract

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

Child Protection Law as an Independent Variable

“…23 These federal requirements impose minimum standards for state child protection systems; some states go beyond those minimums and have codified more stringent requirements. 28 However, the impact of more frequent hearings on actual outcomes is less clear; the higher resourced counties had shorter timelines to adoptions, but no significant difference in the number of cases with a permanent placement of any kind (including reunification) within 15 months. 25 Some states require permanency hearings after twelve months of foster care and every twelve months thereafter, 26 while others require review hearings within the first year of foster care and more frequent permanency hearings after that first year.…”

“…One study confirms, unsurprisingly, that counties with more judicial personnel per case are able to meet statutory hearing timelines better than less well-resourced counties in the same state. 28 However, the impact of more frequent hearings on actual outcomes is less clear; the higher resourced counties had shorter timelines to adoptions, but no significant difference in the number of cases with a permanent placement of any kind (including reunification) within 15 months. 29 It is unclear whether the faster adoptions resulted from more frequent hearings or some other difference between the higher and lower-resourced counties.…”