The decision to screen the child protection report out was made with a screening team at the local agency in accordance with the Intake, Screening, and Response Path Guidelines. Staff reported that their screening team meets daily to review and screen cases. Staff debriefed noted that since anupper level administrator was brought in to assist with the screening decision in this case the team had engaged in a lengthy discussion about the report and had been on the fence about the decision to screen the report in or out. This case was also screened on a day in which the child protection supervisor was either not in the office and/or there were limited staff around.
Staff indicated that when screening this report out, consideration was given to the lack of family's prior history with the agency and that this was the family's first contact with the local agency. Additionally influencing the decision to screen the report out was that the school had not communicated their concerns noted in the child protection report with the family. Since the role of child protection is limited, the agency encourages schools to communicate these concerns with families first. This had not been done when the agency received the report. An additional consideration that occurred in screening this case out was that the school had noted concerns about this during the course of the entire school year, however, was just making the report in March. The agency indicated that they may have viewed this report differently had it been made back in October. The agency reported that they typically see an increase in child protection reports from schools later in the school year.

Staff involved in the screening decision also discussed that they have received previous child protection reports on medical neglect and juvenile diabetes. As a result of this, staff debriefed indicated that juvenile diabetes in general can be very hard to manage. It was not uncommon for kids with juvenile diabetes to “be kidsâ€ and eat sugar, drink pop, etc. Staff reported that they have seen reports in which this has occurred and that when “kids are being kidsâ€ and eating sugar, drinking pop, etc. that this can impact a child's blood sugar and behaviors and make it appear as though the diabetes is not being managed well by their caregivers. This information was also taken into consideration when screening this child protection report.
As a result of juvenile diabetes being generally hard to manage and to ensure consistency with screening these cases, the local agency looks for a physician's statement that indicates adverse effects on the child as a result of the caregivers neglect for their child's medical care or that hospitalization was needed as a result of the medical neglect. Neither of these items were included with this report. According to those debriefed, by obtaining documentation from a physician around this they can better determine the adverse effects on the child as opposed to making the decision from the school's perception of the effects on the child based on the reported blood sugar number(s) and the child's behaviors in school. Generally the agency has found it difficult to conclude that blood sugar levels in a report are causing the noted behaviors based solely upon the perception of school staff making the child protection report.

Previous experiences with responding to juvenile diabetes reports also influenced staff's decision to screen this case out. Staff indicated that they had previously screened in a very similar case that resulted in an unnecessary removal of a child from his caregivers. This experience was very traumatic for the child, the family, and the worker. As a result of this, staff noted extra caution when screening and responding to this case as to not repeat actions and cause any unnecessary harm to the child and his family through a child protection response. Staff also noted that as a team this previous case and its impact on one of the staff involved in this screening decision was openly discussed to try and mitigate any biases when making the decision to screen this case in or out.