Understanding Judges’ Reasonable Efforts Decisions in Child Welfare Cases: Results from the Reasonable Efforts Findings Study

Judges presiding over child welfare cases decide whether child welfare agencies made reasonable efforts to (1) prevent the need to remove children from their parents and (2) ensure that sure children have a safe and permanent home. Such decisions hold child welfare agencies accountable, and they can change the course of children’s lives.

The Reasonable Efforts Findings Study (REFS) provides an exploratory look at what factors are associated with judges’ reasonable efforts decisions—and how those decisions relate to child outcomes such as family reunification and the path to finding another permanent home.

The study team reviewed recorded initial hearings and court cases files for a random sample of 300+ closed child welfare cases from 5 sites in 3 states. Although the sample size was not broad enough to be generalizable, patterns observed can inform avenues of potential further study.

For example—

• All judges in the sample found that the child welfare agency made reasonable efforts to prevent removal (at any point in the case) or to achieve permanency (at the first review hearing).
• Judges were more likely to make a reasonable efforts to achieve permanency finding when reports included a range of reasonable efforts topics (e.g., services the child welfare agency provided, how the agency worked with the family).

Read more about the key takeaways in the full report or PowerPoint presentation. There is also a separate summary overview of key results.