{"report_id":245,"form_id":"22","user_id":81,"organization_id":13,"question_id":"322","question_type":"Free_Text","text_answer":"The decision to not complete a safety plan was impacted by the staff's workload and need to prioritize the multiple tasks required as a CMH worker as defined by CMH policies and timelines.  Additionally, CMH workloads are affected by the number of tasks required by the agency's responsibility to fulfill both Title IV-E requirements and Child and Family Service Review outcomes.  Due to the multiple tasks required during this case, the worker had discretion to prioritize competing caseload tasks.  As a result, the decision to complete a safety plan was a lower priority task in this case because there was no indication the child was suicidal and that a safety plan was needed. This decision was also influenced by the child being involved with several service providers and none indicating that the child was actively suicidal, including a therapist who likely completed a safety plan with the child and his family.  The staff's mental model was such that the child's needs were being met by the service providers he was engaged with; therefore, justifying the decision to not complete a safety plan.  This decision was further reinforced by safety precautions being implemented in the home following the child's previous suicide attempt.","created_by":81,"updated_by":81,"updated_at":"5\/26\/2021 10:02:03 am","created_at":"5\/26\/2021 10:02:03 am","id":27205}