{"id":302,"form_id":"22","user_id":"84","question_id":null,"organization_id":"13","tab_id":null,"question_type":null,"text_answer":"{\"Multiple_Choice__291\":\"Kelly Knutson\",\"Short_Answer__292\":\"Collette Roseller\",\"Date__293\":\"11\\\/17\\\/2016\",\"Multiple_Choice__294\":\"Fatality\",\"Yes_or_No__295\":\"No\",\"Multiple_Choice__300\":\"8\",\"Multiple_Choice__301\":\"Hennepin\",\"Short_Answer__303\":\"Jude\",\"Short_Answer__304\":\"Summers-Sandberg\",\"Date__305\":\"08\\\/01\\\/2012\",\"Date__306\":\"09\\\/05\\\/2017\",\"Multiple_Choice__308\":\"5 Years\",\"Multiple_Choice__309\":\"1\",\"Short_Answer__310\":\"Biological Mother\",\"Multiple_Choice__316\":\"3\",\"Short_Answer__317\":\"Contact did not occur with the father.\",\"Free_Text__318\":\"During the debrief, staff indicated that she was a new CP investigator when this case came in and this this was the first child fatality that she had experienced as a new worker.  She noted that this was a very difficult case given the circumstance and upon receiving the case, she was instructed to not make contact with anyone.  This included contact with the family and law enforcement.  The worker believed that this came from her supervisor who was directed by the program manager that staff should not make contact with anyone.  The staff was unclear as to why this was since she was new and still learning, however, thought that this was influenced by the fact that this case had received a lot of media attention.  The worker also noted that given the circumstances of the case, going to the father's home to talk with him about child protection's investigation would have been very difficult based on what occurred.  While the worker felt relieved to not have to speak with the father she also wondered if he had the necessary supports and resources available to him during this time.   \\r\\nThe supervisor that was debriefed indicated that during child protection investigations involving fatalities they rely on law enforcement's investigation, including the utilization of their interviews. As a result the supervisor assumed that an interview had been done with the father through law enforcements investigation.  She also noted that if contact was not made with a parent that this would need to be approved by the program manager.  Additionally, any cases that involve the media such as this case, it is common practice that supervisors and staff are instructed by program managers to \\u00e2\\u20ac\\u0153just wait\\u00e2\\u20ac\\u009d and to not do anything immediately with the case.  The supervisor also discussed the difficulty of this case especially being that this was the workers' first child fatality.  When this case came into rotation, the supervisor was balancing the assignment of such a difficult case to a new staff given that this would be a very hard case to work while also recognizing that this would also be learning opportunity for her as a new worker.  The supervisor was also balancing being cognizant of not assigning this case to other staff that may have had recent egregious harm\\\/fatal\\\/or near fatal cases assigned to them.\",\"Free_Text__319\":\"Contact not being made with the father during this Child Protection (CP) investigation was influenced by this case being the first child fatality that the investigator had ever worked.  As a result she was still learning what to do when child fatalities occur.  In addition to this, the staff was a new CP worker and supervisors are cautious when assigning cases such as this one to new workers.  However, several competing priorities influenced this case being assigned to a new worker.  This included the increase of number of new cases coming into the unit and ensuring that there was equal case distribution occurring.  Additionally, when this case came into rotation, the supervisor was balancing the assignment of such a difficult case to a new staff given that this would be a very hard case to work while also recognizing that this would also be good learning opportunity as a new worker.  Furthermore, the supervisor was also being cognizant of not assigning this case to other staff that may have had recent egregious harm\\\/fatal\\\/or near fatal cases assigned to them.  \\r\\nFurther impacting contact not being made in this case was that the manager and supervisor on this case also instructed the investigator to not make contact with anyone.  This included both Law Enforcement (LE) and the family.  This instruction was influenced by heighted media coverage during this time and the varied response protocols and processes that have occurred over the years as a result of the changing guidance issued by DHS on the requirements when child fatalities and near fatalities occur.  In high profile cases such as this one that surface in the media it is common practice within the agency that supervisors and staff are instructed by program managers to \\u00e2\\u20ac\\u0153just wait\\u00e2\\u20ac\\u009d and to not do anything immediately with the case.  \\r\\n\\r\\nMinnesota State Statute 626.556 Subd. 10 (b) (5) also allows agencies to defer to LE during the course of child fatality investigations including the use of their interviews and information to supplement their CP investigations when fatalities occur.  As a result agency staff indicated that during child protection investigations involving fatalities they rely heavily on law enforcement's investigation, including the utilization of their interviews. Staff in this case also believed that an interview had been done with the father through the law enforcements investigation.  Lastly, given that this was a murder suicide, staff believed that making contact with dad would not only cause additional trauma for him but there were also no other surviving siblings to interview and the perpetrator (the subject child's mother) was deceased.\",\"Short_Answer__320\":\"Learning Point-Cross report to law enforcement did not occur\",\"Free_Text__321\":\"During the debrief, staff indicated that she was a new CP investigator when this case came in and this this was the first child fatality that she had experienced as a new worker.  She noted that this was a very difficult case given the circumstance and upon receiving the case, she was instructed to not make contact with anyone.  This included contact with the family and law enforcement.  The worker believed that this came from her supervisor who was directed by the program manager that staff should not make contact with anyone.  The staff was unclear as to why this was since she was new and still learning, however, thought that this was influenced by the fact that this case had received a lot of media attention.  The worker also noted that given the circumstances of the case, going to the father's home to talk with him about child protection's investigation would have been very difficult based on what occurred.  While the worker felt relieved to not have to speak with the father she also wondered if he had the necessary supports and resources available to him during this time.   \\r\\nThe supervisor that was debriefed indicated that during child protection investigations involving fatalities they rely on law enforcement's investigation, including the utilization of their interviews. As a result the supervisor assumed that an interview had been done with the father through law enforcements investigation.  She also noted that if contact was not made with a parent that this would need to be approved by the program manager.  Additionally, any cases that involve the media such as this case, it is common practice that supervisors and staff are instructed by program managers to \\u00e2\\u20ac\\u0153just wait\\u00e2\\u20ac\\u009d and to not do anything immediately with the case.  The supervisor also discussed the difficulty of this case especially being that this was the workers' first child fatality.  When this case came into rotation, the supervisor was balancing the assignment of such a difficult case to a new staff given that this would be a very hard case to work while also recognizing that this would also be learning opportunity for her as a new worker.  The supervisor was also balancing being cognizant of not assigning this case to other staff that may have had recent egregious harm\\\/fatal\\\/or near fatal cases assigned to them.\",\"Free_Text__322\":\"A cross report to Law Enforcement (LE) not occurring in this case was influenced by the fact that LE was already involved with the incident and making a report would have been duplicative since they were already aware of the incident.  Additionally, staff were instructed to not contact LE supporting the decision to not cross report this incident to LE.  Furthermore, there were no other surviving siblings in this case influencing the decision to not cross report this incident to law enforcement.\",\"Short_Answer__323\":\"Learning Point-Cross report to child protection did not occur\",\"Free_Text__324\":\"A human factors debrief did not occur as this learning point surfaced in the mapping process.\",\"Free_Text__325\":\"Law Enforcement (LE) not cross reporting the critical incident was influenced by law enforcement's perception of the murder\\\/suicide incident and that child protection did not need to be involved given the suspected perpetrator was deceased.  Further impacting the child protection report not being made was varied cross reporting practices exist by the multiple law enforcement jurisdictions within the county based upon thee populations within each jurisdiction.  For example, if an incident like this occurs in Champlin, it is likely not going to be reported to CP.  However, if the incident occurs in Minneapolis it is likely going to be reported to CP.  \\r\\nCross reporting between the local agency and LE is further impacted by the changes in relationship that occur between CP and LE over the years.\",\"Multiple_Choice__346\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__347\":\"LP 1-Staff in this case also believed that an interview had been done with the father through the law enforcements investigation. Lastly, given that this was a murder suicide, staff believed that making contact with dad would not only cause additional trauma for him but there were also no other surviving siblings to interview and the perpetrator (the subject child's mother) was deceased.\\r\\n\\r\\nLP 3-\\r\\nLaw Enforcement (LE) not cross reporting the critical incident was influenced by law enforcement's perception of the murder\\\/suicide incident and that child protection did not need to be involved given the suspected perpetrator was deceased. Further impacting the child protection report not being made was that varied cross-reporting practices exist by the multiple law enforcement jurisdictions within the county based upon the populations within each jurisdiction. For example, if an incident like this occurs in Champlin, it is likely not going to be reported to CP. However, if the incident occurs in Minneapolis it is likely going to be reported to CP.\",\"Multiple_Choice__348\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__350\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__352\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__354\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__355\":\"LP 3-Cross reporting between the local agency and LE is further impacted by the changes in relationship that occur between CP and LE over the years.\",\"Multiple_Choice__356\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__357\":\"LP 1-Contact not being made with the father during this Child Protection (CP) investigation was influenced by this case being the first child fatality that the investigator had ever worked. As a result she was still learning what to do when child fatalities occur. In\",\"Multiple_Choice__368\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__358\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__359\":\"LP 1-In high profile cases such as this one that surface in the media it is common practice within the agency that supervisors and staff are instructed by program managers to \\u00e2\\u20ac\\u0153just wait\\u00e2\\u20ac\\u009d and to not do anything immediately with the case.\\r\\n\\r\\nMinnesota State Statute 626.556 Subd. 10 (b) (5) also allows agencies to defer to LE during the course of child fatality investigations and also allows the use of their interviews and information to supplement their CP investigations when fatalities occur. As a result, agency staff indicated that during child protection investigations involving fatalities, they rely heavily on law enforcement's investigation, including the utilization of their interviews.\",\"Multiple_Choice__360\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__361\":\"LP 1- However, several competing priorities influenced this case being assigned to a new worker. This included an increase in the number of new cases coming into the unit and ensuring that there was equal case distribution occurring. Additionally, when this case came into rotation, the supervisor was balancing the assignment of such a difficult case to a new staff given that this would be a very hard case to work, while also recognizing that this would also be a good learning opportunity as a new worker. Furthermore, the supervisor was also being cognizant of not assigning this case to other staff that may have had recent egregious harm\\\/fatal\\\/or near fatal cases assigned to them.\",\"Multiple_Choice__362\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__364\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__366\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__367\":\"LP 1-In high profile cases such as this one that surface in the media it is common practice within the agency that supervisors and staff are instructed by program managers to \\u00e2\\u20ac\\u0153just wait\\u00e2\\u20ac\\u009d and to not do anything immediately with the case.\\r\\n\\r\\nLP2-\\r\\nAdditionally, staff were instructed to not contact LE supporting the decision to not cross report this incident to LE.\",\"Yes_or_No__370\":\"Yes\"}","mcq_answer":null,"other_answer":"0","status":"1","created_by":"84","updated_by":81,"created_at":"5\/26\/2021 2:33:23 pm","updated_at":"5\/26\/2021 11:44:07 am","deleted_at":null,"report_name":"Jude Summers-Sandberg"}