11000 SWI Child Protective Investigations (CPI) Intake Screening
11100 Legal Basis for Screening
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
State law and agency rule require DFPS to screen certain Child Protective Investigations (CPI) intakes prior to progressing to alternative response or investigation in order to ensure the correct prioritization.
Prioritizing reports allows DFPS to respond to intakes according to severity and immediacy. An intake is less serious if the circumstances of the intake do not indicate an immediate or imminent threat of substantial bodily harm or death of a child as a result of abuse or neglect.
After contacting the reporter, a collateral, or sometimes a principal, a screener determines whether a child’s safety can be assured without further DFPS involvement, or the appropriate DFPS response.
11200 Screening Purpose and Program Organization
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The purpose of the screening is to determine if the information requires further DFPS involvement by clarifying and researching information related to the intake. Screeners do as follows:
- Use critical thinking skills and professional judgment when progressing, prioritizing, or closing intakes.
- Clearly document the rationale for decisions.
CPI seeks to avoid unwarranted intrusion into a child’s life and the lives of the child’s family or household members. However, ensuring the safety of the child remains the primary concern.
11210 SWI Child Protective Investigations (CPI) Screeners
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
Screeners review certain CPI intakes to assess for progression to alternative response, investigation, or closure. Screeners make decisions about the following:
- Intake prioritization.
- Which stage, if any, to progress the intake for further DFPS involvement.
- Sharing appropriate resource information when indicated.
11220 Screener Supervisors
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
Each screener supervisor does as follows:
- Manages a unit of screeners.
- Reviews cases of screener activity.
- Provides feedback to a screener regarding the screener’s performance for each case reviewed.
- Consults (staffs) with screeners about specific intakes to ensure correct assessment and approves the next actions while considering child safety factors, child vulnerability, and parental or caregiver protective capacities.
- Conducts routine unit meetings and provides ongoing training and policy updates to screeners.
11230 Screener Program Administrator
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener program administrator provides leadership and support to screening units and their supervisors in the performance of screening operations. The program administrator may consult on certain CPI intakes. The program administrator may be assigned additional projects related to screening operations.
11240 Workload Distribution
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
When an intake specialist answers No to the CPI screener eligibility question about open cases in specific stages, the intake is auto-assigned in IMPACT to the screening program.
Cases are distributed across all units to help manage caseloads.
See 4430 CPI Screener Eligibility Question.
11250 Sensitive Intakes
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
Sometimes a CPI regional sensitive contact forwards a sensitive intake to the screening program for review. Sensitive intakes received regarding a DFPS employee as an alleged perpetrator may be screened by a screener supervisor.
11300 Screening Process
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener reviews the intake to determine the accuracy of the initial priority. The screener assesses:
- Information about the severity of the allegation.
- Safety to all children involved.
- History of all persons involved.
The screener then uses the following to assess an intake:
- Statutory definitions of abuse or neglect.
- CPI jurisdiction, CPI and SWI policy, procedures, and job aids.
The screener reviews the intake narrative to obtain an initial sense of the situation. The focus of this review is to determine if the intake meets the jurisdictional and legal definitions for DFPS involvement.
11310 Searching
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener performs a cursory history search for open cases and reviews the Principal Case History list. A thorough examination of each principal’s case history is necessary to determine if the persons involved have prior history with DFPS.
11311 Analyzing History
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
If the screener finds case history, the screener reviews and considers the history and summarizes it in the IMPACT History section of the Formal Screening Contact Narrative.
If the screener finds case history, the screener does as follows:
- Fully documents the case history for the persons involved, regardless of the stage. If there are multiple cases, the screener documents the four most recent cases.
- Fully documents all substitute care (SUB), family substitute care (FSU), and child death cases, even if these cases are not the four most recent cases for the persons involved.
For all other cases with the persons involved, the screener may document abbreviated case history. The screener fully documents all case history when reasonable and appropriate.
Reviewing case history provides the screener a better understanding of:
- Family and interpersonal dynamics.
- Patterns of abuse or neglect.
- Past cooperation with DFPS.
Case history may help the screener formulate questions when contacting the reporter and other collateral contacts.
11312 External Resources
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener may use external resources, such as the internet and other databases, other than IMPACT to assist in locating the persons involved when an intake has incomplete or inaccurate information about the principals.
When the screener finds information about a person through an external resource, the screener documents the information in the Formal Screening Contact Narrative.
The screener performs a TIERS search for all intakes involving physical abuse or when needing locating information.
See 2480 Texas Integrated Eligibility Redesign System (TIERS) Searches
11320 Criteria
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
A screener reviews a subset of Priority 2 (P2) intakes and all Priority None (PN) intakes sent by intake specialists.
See 4430 CPI Screener Eligibility Question
Priority 2
The screener reviews P2 intakes when all victims are children at least six years old, and there is not an open CPI or CPS case in any of the following stages:
- Alternative Response (A-R)
- Investigation (INV)
- Family Preservation (FPR)
- Family Substitute Care (FSU)
- Family Reunification (FRE)
The screener also reviews P2 school intakes when the alleged victim was a child six years or older at the time of the report, and under 18 years old when the abuse or neglect occurred.
See 4320 Priority 2 (P2).
Priority None
The screener reviews all Priority None (PN) intakes, regardless of the child’s age. PNs are only used for the three specific reasons described below:
- 4331 Past Abuse or Neglect; No Current Safety Issues
- 4332 Additional Information from Specific Collateral or Principal (COL/PRN) Is Needed
- 4333 Child Death/Incident Addressed in Previous Case
See 4330 Priority None.
If an intake does not meet criteria, the screener answers the screening questions and documents in the Comments section of the Priority/Closure page why. If there is an open case, the screener documents the case number for at least one open case.
An intake no longer meets criteria for screening when any of the following is true:
- The initial priority of the intake is a P1.
- A child is in immediate or imminent threat of severe harm or death due to abuse or neglect.
- Any alleged victim in a P2 intake is five years old or younger.
- There is an open CPI or CPS case in any of the following stages (see 4430 CPI Screener Eligibility Question):
- Alternative Response (A-R)
- Investigation (INV)
- Family Preservation (FPR)
- Family Substitute Care (FSU)
- Family Reunification (FRE)
- An intake with a red sunburst was investigated within the last 12 months and dispositioned as Unable to Complete (UTC).
Multiple different reporters may make a report to SWI at or around the same time about the same people. An intake that initially meets criteria for screening may no longer meet criteria if an open intake with a common principal is progressed to the Investigation stage.
Once the intake no longer meets the criteria for screening either initially or while screening, the screener assigns the intake to the routing coordinator.
11330 Time Frames
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener completes the screening of intakes within 72 hours of the date and time the intake specialist began the report. The screener attempts to contact the reporter or collaterals for additional information or clarification, when necessary.
When a screener determines an intake needs to be upgraded to a Priority 1, the screener completes all screening activities immediately and consults with a screener supervisor.
11340 Contacts and Interviewing
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener gathers and documents as much additional information as possible from the reporter as well as any collaterals with direct knowledge of the family and children. Child safety is essential in making decisions about the intake.
11341 Contacting Reporters
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener contacts the reporter to:
- Confirm and clarify information in the intake, including severity indicators, safety concerns, and risk factors.
- Request any additional information since the time of the intake.
- Gather any needed collateral information.
- Clarify the location of the child and alleged perpetrator, if needed.
The screener documents any attempts made to contact the reporter, even when the contact was unsuccessful. If the reporter is an alleged victim or perpetrator, the screener consults with a screener supervisor for guidance before making contact. See 11430 Other Situations with Mandatory Consultations.
11342 Contacting Collaterals
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener contacts collateral sources to obtain pertinent information related to the intake allegations and current safety of the children involved. The screener documents any attempts to contact a collateral, even when the contact is unsuccessful.
If a collateral source is not listed in the current intake or does not respond to an attempt by the screener to gather more information, then the screener completes the following:
- Reviews all IMPACT records for the family and searches other external resources to determine if another collateral can provide information relevant to the case.
- Documents the attempts to contact or locate a collateral in the Collateral Contact section of the Formal Screening Narrativetemplate.
- Documents the reason contacting the collateral is not necessary to determine if an investigation is needed or documents if there are no other available collaterals.
The screener may obtain supporting documents (like photos or medical paperwork) from the reporter or collateral. These documents are not used as a primary source for making a prioritization decision.
11343 Contacting Principals
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener may contact a principal source, the parent, managing conservator, or legal guardian of an alleged victim, if the screener confirms that the principal source, parent, managing conservator, or legal guardian is not an alleged perpetrator (AP). The screener consults with a screener supervisor prior to such contact.
See Contacting Parents During CPI Screening on the DFPS intranet.
11350 When a Screening is Not Conducted
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
If an intake meets criteria for screening, but a screening is not conducted, the screener supervisor or screener takes the following actions before progressing the intake to the next stage:
- Selects No to the question “Was the Intake Formally Screened?” in the Formal Screening section of the Priority/Closure page in the intake stage.
- Documents the reason the screening was not conducted in the Contact Detail page of the intake stage.
11400 Consulting (Staffing)
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener consults with a screener supervisor about an intake to ensure correct assessment and receive approval for the next actions while considering child safety factors. The screener may consult (staff) with a screener supervisor any time the screener thinks it may be beneficial. In certain circumstances, approval to close an intake requires a consultation.
See Screener Staffing Guidance for CPI Intakes on the DFPS intranet.
11410 Children in DFPS Conservatorship
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener must consult with and receive approval from the screener supervisor to close an intake when a principal child is in DFPS conservatorship.
Intakes involving children in DFPS conservatorship may only be closed as a PN when the incident:
- Involves allegations addressed entirely by a previous investigation. The closure code is Incident addressed in previous case.
- Is within the jurisdiction of another DFPS program. The closure code is Incident jurisdiction of other DFPS program.
- Falls under the jurisdiction of another Texas state agency or another state. The closure code is Incident responsibility of Other Agency/Out of State.
No other PN closure codes are used for intakes involving children in DFPS conservatorship.
11420 Child Death
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener consults with a supervisor on any intake involving a child death, either in the current intake or in case history.
PN Code: Child Death/Incident Addressed in Previous Case
The screener may review a child death intake with this PN code, which should meet all the following criteria:
- Abuse or neglect is alleged or suspected as a contributing factor in the child’s death.
- The death was investigated, and the investigation stage is closed.
- There are no current allegations to other living children.
See 4631.5 Priority None (PN).
Does Not Meet Criteria for Review
If the child death intake does notmeet the criteria above, the screener does as follows:
- Immediately consults with a screener supervisor and follows the supervisor’s direction.
- Does not stage progress the intake. This type of intake must be sent to CPI field staff in the intake stage.
A P2 or PN intake, with either of the other two PN codes, may include information in the narrative related to a child death, but it is not considered a child death intake as the child’s death is not the primary allegation, and the deceased child may not be on the Person List. Usually, the intake is for current or past concerns of abuse or neglect for living children, and the child death information is vague, unclear, or unknown. See 4631.7 Child Death Assessment Table, rows 4, 5 and 6, for intakes that may meet criteria for screening and have child death information in the narrative.
11430 Other Situations with Mandatory Consultation
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener consults with and receives approval from the screener supervisor to do any of the following:
- Upgrade the priority of an intake. The screener communicates the urgency of the new priority to the field staff only if it is a P1.
- Close an intake with an initial priority of PN when an alleged victim is five years old or younger.
- Downgrade an intake with an initial priority of P2 to a PN for closure without investigation when contact with the reporter and at least one collateral was unsuccessful, and one of the following is true:
- The intake clearly does not meet Texas Family Code definitions of abuse or neglect.
- The allegations were addressed in a previous case.
- SWI made an initial assessment error.
- There does not appear to be safety issues or risk of abuse or neglect.
- There is insufficient identifying or locating information.
- Allegations are not within CPI jurisdiction.
- History on the family involves a child death.
11500 Decisions (Assessments)
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
There are three possible decisions for an intake:
- Alternative response
- Investigation
- Closure with or without resources
After the screener gathers additional information from the reporter or collaterals, the screener determines if DFPS needs to be further involved. The screener keeps child safety a priority when making this determination.
If it is determined that continued DFPS involvement supports child safety, then the screener decides if the intake is most appropriate for alternative response or investigation.
See Screener Assessment Guidelines for CPI Intakes on the DFPS intranet.
Progressing a Screened Intake to Alternative Response or Investigation
The screener documents the actions taken during screening which determined the screener’s decision for alternative response or investigation. If the original priority of the intake is a PN, the screener upgrades the priority of the intake before progressing it to alternative response or investigation.
The screener progresses the intake to the alternative response stage or investigation stage before assigning it to the routing coordinator.
See 11430 Other Situations with Mandatory Consultations.
11510 Changing the Priority of an Intake
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
A screener supervisor or screener can change the priority of an intake.
Upgrading the Priority Assigned to an Intake
When the screener upgrades an intake to a P1, the screener notifies the routing coordinator (RC) about the intake by phone or email. The screener considers the amount of time left for the field staff to meet investigation time frames when sending an email.
When a screener discovers a safety threat during screening of a PN intake, the screener upgrades the intake before progressing the intake to another stage.
Downgrading the Priority Assigned to an Intake
The following table describes how to downgrade the priority in IMPACT.
| IMPACT Code |
Reason for Change |
|---|---|
| Due to Additional Calls Made |
Calls made to collaterals after initial intake provided additional information to support a priority change. |
| Due to Local Records | Information in local records revealed information to support a priority change. |
| Inconsistent with Documented Risk | The level of risk documented in the intake does not support the initial priority assigned. |
| P1 Response Increases Vulnerability |
Responding within 24 hours may increase a child’s vulnerability. Example: To avoid escalating a situation, the caseworker delays the response until an unprotected child is in a more protective environment, such as at school or day care. |
| Closed and Reclassified |
The allegations warrant follow-up by a different DFPS program area. The intake must be reentered as a report for another DFPS division. When Closed and Reclassified is selected changing an intake’s priority, Closed and Reclassified is selected for closing the intake. Example: A CPI intake alleges that the victim is a 16-year-old with an intellectual disability, but records indicate that the victim is actually a 19-year-old adult. The CPI intake is closed and reclassified as APS. |
| Other Agency/Out of State |
The intake is outside CPI’s jurisdiction and must be handled by law enforcement, another Texas agency such as HHSC, or another state’s child protection agency staff. When Other Agency/Out of State is selected for changing the priority, Other Agency/Out of State must be selected for closing the intake. |
11520 An Intake That Clearly Meets Guidelines
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
When an intake clearly meets the guidelines for alternative response or investigation and the screener needs no clarification, the screener does as follows:
- Documents the DFPS history and actions taken to determine the decision.
- Changes the priority of the intake, if needed.
- Progresses the intake to the next stage (A-R or INV).
- Assigns the intake to the routing coordinator.
If an intake for screening contains information that needs clarification or does not clearly meet the guidelines for alternative response or investigation, the screener attempts contact with the reporter and any collaterals as needed.
See:
11340 Contacts and Interviewing
11530 Alternative Response (A-R)
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
All screened intakes are progressed to the A-R stage unless the intake meets any of the following criteria:
- Requires an investigation.
- Is appropriate for closure.
If the screener discovers a safety threat during screening of a PN intake, the screener upgrades the intake before progressing the intake to another stage. The severity of the safety threat determines the priority and path of the intake.
If after reviewing the intake, and screening field staff think an intake should be progressed to the investigation stage instead of A-R, field staff reach out to the screener’s supervisor for review within 24 hours of the time the intake was progressed to A-R.
If there was a screener error in progressing the intake to the correct stage, the screener supervisor may opt to take the intake back, change the stage, and reassign the case to the appropriate routing coordinator.
See:
Change Case from A-R to INV Stage on the DFPS intranet.
2600 Alternative Response in the Child Protective Services Handbook
11540 Investigation (INV)
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
Certain situations require the screener to send an intake for an investigation such as any situation:
- Requiring a P1 response.
- Not meeting guidelines for alternative response.
If the screener discovers a safety threat during screening of a PN or P2 intake, the screener upgrades the intake before progressing the intake to another stage. The severity of the safety threat determines the priority and path of the intake.
See:
2611.1 Intakes Ineligible for Alternative Response in the Child Protective Services Handbook
11550 Closing an Intake
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener may close the intake without making contact when the allegation was previously investigated or the reporter on a CPI intake is anonymous.
Before closing an intake, the screener attempts contact with the reporter and a collateral to obtain meaningful information. The screener may close an intake without progressing to alternative response or investigation for any of the following reasons:
- There is not a reasonable likelihood that a child will be abused or neglected in the foreseeable future.
- The allegations are outside of CPI jurisdiction and are the responsibility of another DFPS, Child Care Regulation (CCR), or Provider Investigations (PI) program.
- Reported concerns are not abuse or neglect related.
- Concern occurred in another state or is in another agency’s jurisdiction.
11551 Closing a Child Death Intake without an Investigation
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
Intakes involving the PN code Child Death/Incident Addressed in Previous Case may be closed without investigation once staffed.
See:
11552 Closing Intakes for Children in DFPS Conservatorship
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener may close an intake for a child in DFPS conservatorship if one of the following is true:
- All the allegations in the current intake were investigated.
- The allegations do not fall within CPI’s jurisdiction.
See 11410 Children in DFPS Conservatorship.
11553 Closing Intakes for Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC)
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener is not required to consult with a supervisor before closing an intake that meets the following criteria:
- The intake involves abuse or neglect of an unaccompanied alien child that occurred in the child’s home country.
- The priority is a PN.
- The screener is unable to reach the reporter and collateral.
The screener may close the intake without approval from a supervisor when the following apply:
- The initial intake priority is a P2.
- The screener is unable to contact the reporter or a collateral.
- It is clear that the abuse or neglect occurred in the victim’s home country.
- There is no indication of ongoing contact with the alleged perpetrator.
11554 Case Closure with Differential Response
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
Differential Response (DR) is for situations that meet the following criteria:
- A family is experiencing an identifiable challenge or could benefit from a community service to help with a challenge.
- The situation does not meet the criteria for investigation or A-R.
DR strengthens DFPS's referral process by helping families find resources and encouraging their use.
The screener may decide, when closing a case, to provide DR. The screener contacts the parent, regardless of the parent’s identified role in the intake, to provide the parent with resources that do as follows:
- Assist the family with challenges it may be experiencing.
- Reduce the risk of future abuse or neglect.
The screener may contact a parent who is an alleged perpetrator during DR. Contacting a parent during DR does not initiate an investigation. The screener contacts the parent to provide the parent with specific resources to assist the family. The screener may consult with a supervisor for guidance before contacting a parent.
The screener documents the contact with the parent separate from the Formal Screening Contact Narrative. It is a best practice to document contact with the parent prior to closing the intake. If the intake is closed, the screener documents the contact as a Closed Stage Addendum in IMPACT.
If a parent offers information that changes the screener’s assessment, the screener consults with a screener supervisor for guidance. The screener can progress the current intake to alternative response or investigation if the intake was not closed in IMPACT. If the intake was closed in IMPACT, the screener may request a reentry for the current intake or request a new intake.
See 2850 Reentering Reports (Reentry).
11600 Documenting the Screening
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screening clearly and specifically articulates all of the following:
- Threats, or lack of threats, to child safety.
- Factors affecting child vulnerability.
- Caregiver protective actions or factors affecting parent-caregiver protective capacity.
The screener thoroughly documents the rationale for the assessment in the Formal Screening narrative in IMPACT. The screening assessment is incomplete without support. Using the required terminology without clear and specific explanation is not enough for an assessment. The screener documents any concerns or observed trends from reviewing case history and how those influence the screener’s assessment. The legal definition of abuse or neglect cannot be the only justification for case closure.
See Write Screener Assessments on the DFPS intranet.
11610 Formal Questions in IMPACT
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
Before progressing or closing an intake that meets criteria for screening, the screener takes the following actions in IMPACT:
- Documents the following in the intake stage and Contact Detail narrative, using Formal Screening as the purpose code:
- The results of the person search, including a summary of any prior DFPS history.
- The contacts made and attempted.
- The rationale for the decision to close the intake or progress it to the next stage.
- Documents in the Priority/Closure page whether the intake was screened.
11620 Document within 24 Hours
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
The screener documents all actions taken and contacts made within 24 hours. If an intake is progressed for alternative response or investigation, the screener quickly documents actions and contacts and progresses the case in a timely manner.
11700 Reporter Notification of Closure
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
When the screener closes an intake without alternative response or investigation after the review, the screener notifies the reporter about the decision by generating a letter in IMPACT before closing the intake. The screener then mails or emails the letter to the reporter.
See Generate the Closure Letter on the DFPS intranet.
11800 Special Topics
11810 Intake Call Recordings
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
SWI uses a call recording application for all hotline phone activity, including consultations between intake specialists and supervisors.
The screener may listen to the recorded call audio when information in the intake seems:
- Incorrect
- Vague or incomplete
- Confusing
Comparing the intake documentation to the call recording helps the screener determine whether the intake specialist accurately documented all information in the intake.
See 1520 Call Recordings.
11820 Concerns about Intakes
SWI Policy and Procedures June 2024
Screeners notify the Policy and Performance Management (PPM) division when a case involves any of the following:
- Routing error.
- Incorrect program assessment.
- Incorrect, missing, or unclear information.
- An anonymous reporter for a CPI intake.
- A priority assessment error.
- Concern about the intake specialist’s conduct.
- A quality issue that does not need immediate action or resolution.
Depending on the urgency of the matter, screeners may need to call the reentry queue directly to complete a reentry request. For non-urgent matters, an email to PPM may be appropriate. It is never appropriate to contact a specific intake specialist or intake supervisor directly by phone or email.
See 2850 Reentering Reports (Reentry).