Understanding Judicial Decision-Making and Hearing Quality in Child Welfare

2018 - 2022

Juvenile and family court judges are responsible for deciding when children enter and exit out-of-home care and for ensuring children in the child welfare system achieve safety, permanency, and well-being. The quality of child welfare court hearings is important because each of the hearings provides judges with an opportunity to learn about the child and parent as well as the family’s strengths, needs, and progress. While some research has explored child welfare hearing quality, questions remain about how to support effective judicial decision-making and improve outcomes for children and families. As part of this project, the project team:

  • Assessed the knowledge base related to judicial decision-making and hearing quality in child welfare cases.
  • Surveyed and did follow-up interviews of Court Improvement Project (CIP) Administrators to understand current CIP projects and court practices in child welfare courts to inform a future study.
  • Developed a Conceptual Model of Judicial Decision-Making and Hearing Quality in Child Welfare.
  • Put together a Compendium of Measures and Data Sources that can be used by child welfare legal professionals to gather data and do research that can inform their court hearing practices.
  • Completed the Reasonable Efforts Findings Study (REFS)
  • Developed short snapshots and infographics for legal professionals with information learned from the project, such as a short overview of the research on child welfare hearing quality, examples of how the compendium can be used, and findings from the Reasonable Efforts Findings Study. 

The Reasonable Efforts Findings Study (REFS) examined two types of reasonable efforts findings that judges must make during a child welfare case: 

  • Within 60 days of a child being removed from their home the judge must decide if the child welfare agency made reasonable efforts to prevent removal.

  • Within 12 months of the child entering foster care the judge must decide if the child welfare agency made reasonable efforts to achieve permanency.

The goals of the REFS study were to:

  • Understand factors that influence judges’ reasonable efforts findings, such as information provided to the court before hearings, hearing quality characteristics, the child welfare case characteristics, and case processing practices.

  • Explore what reasonable efforts decisions are made and how are they documented in the court record.

  • Explore how judges’ reasonable efforts decisions are related to case outcomes, such as how likely it is that children will reunify with their families and the amount of time it takes for a child welfare court case to achieve permanency.

The pre-registration for the REFS study was at the Research Registry.

The contract was awarded to James Bell Associates (Anne Fromknecht as Project Director) in collaboration with Sophia Gatwoski, Alicia Summers, and the American Bar Association.

Points of contact: Alysia Blandon and Sarah Blankenship

Information collections related to this project have been reviewed and approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs under ACF’s Generic Clearance for Formative Data Collections for ACF Research (OMB #0970-0356). Related materials are available at the Understanding Judicial Decision-Making and Hearing Quality in Child Welfare: Descriptive Study of Child Welfare Courts page on RegInfo.gov .

Related Resources

Explore this infographic that describes key findings and takeaways from the REFS Study relating to judges’ findings whether the child welfare agency made reasonable efforts to prevent removal and reasonable efforts to achieve permanency.

Explore this infographic that describes the information available to judges as they make findings whether the child welfare agency made reasonable efforts to prevent removal of children from their homes and reasonable efforts to achieve permanency.

This infographic that examines what factors are related to judges’ findings on reasonable efforts to prevent removal and reasonable efforts to achieve permanency.

Understand the Reasonable Efforts Finding Study, what it seeks to learn about factors that affect a judge’s reasonable efforts decision, data the study will collect, the study sample, and why it is important to the legal community.

Learn about research on child welfare court hearing quality and how it affects case processing and outcomes.

This document highlights research on court practices and court system resources that relate to judicial decision-making and hearing quality in child welfare court cases.

This document describes how the Compendium of Measures and Data Sources: Understanding Judicial Decision-Making and Hearing Quality in Child Welfare can be a valuable resource for child welfare legal professionals.

Explore a conceptual model that describes how components of judicial decision-making and child welfare hearing quality relate to the case process and outcomes for children and families.

Explore this slide deck with information about the REFS Study, highlighting results from this multi-site, multimethod study exploring judges’ reasonable efforts findings.

Explore the Reasonable Efforts Findings Study (REFS) that looks at what factors are associated with judges’ reasonable efforts decisions and how those decisions relate to case outcomes for children, such as whether they are reunified with their parents or how fast they find another permanent home.

Understand the Reasonable Efforts Finding Study design, what it seeks to learn about factors that affect a judge’s reasonable efforts decision, data the study will collect through case file reviews and court observation, the study sample, and its importance to the legal community.

The purpose of the Compendium is to summarize information about the types and range of measures and data sources used to study judicial decision-making and hearing quality in child welfare cases.

This webinar discusses research examining judicial decision-making and hearing quality in child welfare court cases and why court and legal professionals should be aware of research findings.