| Abstract: | In an effort to improve decision-making in child protective services (CPS), most states have, over the last two decades, implemented risk assessment systems to guide staff faced with making critical decisions in limited time frames. Generally, these systems are characterized as consensus-based or actuarial models. This study is the first to directly compare the relative validity of these two approaches. Three risk assessment instruments, two consensus-based and one actuarial, were completed on cohorts of cases from four different jurisdictions and outcome information was collected over an 18-month follow-up period. Rates of subsequent investigations, substantiations, and placements were computed for cases classified at low, moderate, and high risk levels in each model. Results clearly demonstrate that the actuarial approach more accurately classifies cases to different risk levels. These actuarial models, therefore, have the greatest potential to improve CPS decision making and better protect America's at risk children. |
