LP 1: When the new report came in, the worker had seen the child just 3 days prior. The child was identified as safe at the time and additionally, the child was not with the alleged perpetrator and thus in no imminent harm. Also, the child's location was a significant distance from the staff's office, further supporting the decision to not go back out to the child's home to make timelines

LP 1: As a consequence of heightened media coverage, there was additional oversight by DHS on high profile cases and thus, more oversight by the local agency administration (managers, supervisors, County Attorney's, etc.). This additional oversight then resulted in more consult time needed as there were more people involved in high profile cases. The additional time needed for this further exacerbated the worker's ability to complete case duties. As a result, staff needed to prioritize their time to best meet the needs of the families they were working with, and since the worker had seen the child just 3 days earlier, and identified the child as safe, the worker prioritized other more pressing caseload demands rather than going out again to make timelines.

LP 2: Agency staff primarily identified that the amount of work to close assessment cases was a contributing factor in this assessment not closing on time. Furthermore, the worker was prioritizing the FI work in order to meet the more pressing issues that arose within the FI workgroup. In addition recent high profiles cases had also increased the amount of work needed to close out cases. The increased media coverage due to high profile cases (including subsequent lawsuits) had resulted in defensive practices. This has an adverse effect on closing cases timely as there had been additional oversight protocols, including the need for supervisor consult/review needed to close a case put in place, to ensure consistency in work practices. Finally, the agency culture supports working to serve families what they need, regardless of timelines. This trade-off between family-centered work and meeting administrative deadlines (45 day assessment closing deadlines) creates conflicts for workers when trying to balance quality vs. quantity.

LP 2: Also, the Federal PIP (Program Improvement Plan) requirements and State CFSR reviews resulted in the local agency having additional requirements needing to be completed to close out cases, including those contained within the PIP that resulted from the state CFSR's agency review.