{"report_id":366,"form_id":"22","user_id":71,"organization_id":13,"question_id":"318","question_type":"Free_Text","text_answer":"\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tToo many unknowns at the time the report was made \r\no\tLimited knowledge at first, go off information had at the time, it was difficult to know because the mother used a false identity, and claimed to live in Wisconsin.\r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tMother and Father were not honest about identity and home address at time the report was made, and attempted to mislead and confuse the CP Systems in WI and MN. \r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tPrevious report was made on 2\/1 that was screened out and referred to the jurisdiction the parents alleged as their home address in Wisconsin. \r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tGetting the information back on 2\/3 in a new CP Intake increased the suspicion of suspected child abuse and neglect; report was screened in. Worker believed it was timely screened, but also stated she gave to her supervisor who she had been consulting with about the intake information. \r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tThe worker reported she would not have authority to make changes to information documented in the CP intake.\r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tWisconsin do things differently than MN, no police holds. Ramsey County Intake requested to place infant on a hold, but WI Law enforcement does not place holds on children. \r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tOnce the Child Maltreatment Report was screened in the investigator learned the mother's real identity and that information was used to make changes to the Child Maltreatment report; Mother's identity and previous TLC's\/TPR was not known until after the CP investigation was opened\r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tTPR look up in SSIS is not reliable\r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tIdentifying people is not reliable in SSIS\r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tIn Feb. 2017, there was pressure to complete screening within the allotted 24 hour timeframe, which the team of screeners prioritized. \r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tWorker was not certain why SSIS shows 3 days in between the open and close date on the intake. It is not uncommon to gather information to see if the information meets criteria before closing the intake; but if the timeline is near the 24 hour mark, the report is screened with what information could be gathered.\r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tMeeting the 24 hour screening timeline is priority, however it is one the worker does not believe increases safety, and can sometimes feel like it is in place to hold staff accountable versus trust the professionals doing the work; understandable to have checks and balances enmeshed in guidance though.  \r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tThe worker did not know how the technical change of the mother's name was corrected in the SSIS system  \r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tIt was presumed that the SSIS Helpdesk would have likely had to be involved because the SSIS CP Intakes would not be merged for an circumstance like this\r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tPossible a new CP intake would have been created?\r\n\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\tThe worker is one of 6 screeners who document all the intakes coming into Ramsey County and screen them as a team or with supervisor; they are also responsible for all calls that come in not related to child protection; The screeners do not have a support staff or receptionist to field calls.","created_by":71,"updated_by":71,"updated_at":"6\/1\/2021 2:08:23 pm","created_at":"6\/1\/2021 2:08:23 pm","id":43387}