The CHIPS petition not indicating any knowledge of the father's sexual abuse maltreatment determination was influenced by the increased workload and the needs to more efficiently draft petitions as a result of a significant backlog of cases during this time.  This was impacted by staff leaving that unit (went from 16 to 5) as the positions were transferring from the agency to the county attorney's office.  This led to more work than could be managed.  Normative practice is to look up each adult associated with a case in SSIS and MGA; however, varying practices existed across units within this agency, impacting how and when this information is discovered.  Additionally, the newer legal writers need time to familiarize themselves with SSIS and how to locate specific information, which can impede the process of finding this information.  This coupled with managing multiple responsibilities within a large workload can also contribute to information being not being found within SSIS.  The legal writing tool was changed in 2016-2017, which meant that the legal writers had to learn a new tool during this time, adding to the already increased workload.  Also impacting the CHIPS petition not indicating any knowledge of the father's sexual abuse maltreatment determination was the existence of local agency pressure for legal writers to get through a backlog of cases.

Further supporting the father's sexual abuse maltreatment determination not being included in the CHIPS petition was the fact that multiple levels of the system worked on this case and there was no documentation in SSIS or the case file noting the father's sexual abuse maltreatment determination.  Supporting the other workers on the case not looking into the father's history was the fact that there was no history documented by the other areas of the system that had worked on this case, influencing the assumption that the father did not have any previous history. 

