The paper "Significance of Assessment in Achieving the Goals and Purpose of Child Safety Services in Australia" is an excellent example of a case study on social science. Child safety services are located in Brisbane and it offers child services including protection to the child from abuse and maltreatment. This is in line with the provisions of the Department of Communities, Child Safety, and Disability Services. It also provides protection for children and young people from harm, those that are at risk of harm, and also those parents who cannot effectively provide adequate care and protection for their children (Brittain & Esquibel, 2004).
The information provided in this assessment was majorly from Ms. Karina a child safety officer and also from the Child Safety Services website http: //www. communities. qld. gov. au/childsafety/about-us The service is administered through the following legislations, Adoption Act and Adoption Regulation 2009, Child Protection Act 1999, Child Protection Regulation 2000, Children’ s Court Act 1992, Family Services Act 1987, and Child Protection (International Measures) Act 2003. The child safety service uses the strengths model of assessment in order to ensure that it provides various advantages to the care providers (Munro, 1996).
This is based on the fact that it involves children and families in a way that it underscores that a child is being brought up well in life. Secondly, a good way of documenting a child’ s progress and competencies plays a key role in establishing the child’ s expectations (Holzer & Bromfiled, 2008). There is also an additional advantage based on the fact that the family takes responsibility for what affects the child based on the decisions that are made. The Protection System The main pathways that are followed by a child or a young person while in the protection system can be broken down into four phases; that is the intake phase, investigations and assessment phase, ongoing intervention phase and permanency planning. Intake phase: this is the initial stage where an officer determines the most appropriate response to concerns received about harm to the child.
The main areas of receipt of information are the community, through notification or a referral. It can be stated that at this stage the child is not protected and no interim measures are effectively taken concerning the child. Investigations and assessment phase: this phase establishes whether a child is in need of protection through visitation of the family and an assessment of the risk of harm is made (Higgins & Katz, 2008).
This is the main area where a risk assessment is carried out to determine the kind of risk that faces the child to warrant the provision of child safety services. Based on the outcome, a child can be returned back to his family or placed under another form of care. Ongoing intervention phase: The child safety service in this phase seeks to reduce the instance of the child being exposed to harm in the future.
In this stage, a case plan is also created to meet the child care needs. An on-going intervention will take into consideration to meet the child’ s protective and care needs and also to reduce the likelihood of future harm. An assessment is important in this stage to ensure that interim measures are undertaken to ensure a child is protected from any kind of particular harm. Permanency planning: this stage is created to ensure that the child continues to experience care and transition into adulthood and it involves; reunifying a child with the parents or family, long-term out of home care until one attains the age of majority or adoption.
A proper assessment enables the service provider to make a permanent decision on the well-being of the child (Broadhurst, et al. , 2010). Investigation and assessment
Brittain, C., & Esquibel, H. D. (2004). Helping in Child Protective Services (2nd ed.). London: Oxford University Press.
Broadhurst, K., Wastell, D., White, S., Hall, C., Peckover, S., Thompson, K., et al. (2010). Performing ‘Initial Assessment. British Journal of Social Work, 352-370.
Bromfield, L. M., & Higgins, D. J. (2004). The limitations of using statutory child protection data for research into child maltreatment. Australian Social Work, 57(1), 19-30.
Dixon, L., Browne, K., & Hamilton-Giachritsis, C. (2005). Risk Factors of Parents abused as children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(1), 47-57.
Dorsey, S., Mustillo, S. A., Farmer, E. M., & Elbogen, E. (2008, March 3). Caseworker assessments of risk for recurrent maltreatment. Child Abuse and Neglect, 32(3), 377-391.
Fish, S., Munro, E., & Bairstow, S. (2008). Learning Together to Safeguard Children. London: SCIE.
Higgins, D. J., & Katz, I. (2008). Enhancing Service Systems for Protecting Children. Family Matters, 80, 43-50.
Holzer, P. J., & Bromfiled, L. M. (2008). A national approach for child protection. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Munro, E. (1996). Avoidable and Unavoidable mistakes in child protection work. British Journal of Social Work, 26, 793-808.
Murphy-Berman, V. (1994). Conceptual Framework For Thinking About Risk Assessment and Case Management in Child Protective Service. Child Abuse and Neglect, 18(2), 193-201.
Platt, D. (2006). Investigation or initial assessment of child concerns? The impact of the refocusing initiative on social work practice. British Journal of Social Work, 267-281.
Rustin, M. (2004). Learning from the Victoria Climbie Inquiry. Journal of Social Work and Practice, 18(1), 9-18.
Thomas, S., & Naughton, M. (2005). Developing innovative partnership approaches to support vulnerable children and their families. Families Matter, 9th Australian Institute of Family Studies Conference (p. 23). Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Tilbury, C., Osmond, J., & Clark, J. (2007). Good Practice in Child Protection. New South Wales: Pearson.
Whitaker, D. J. (2008, May). Risk factors for the perpetration of child sexual abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 32(5).