Methods

·       The study uses qualitative data to describe the events, attitudes, successes, and challenges of the MDT and to evaluate the approach's strengths and weaknesses.

·       The study is also a randomize control trial, designed to detect evidence of differences in outcomes between the intervention (MDT) and control group.

Findings

Outcome differences

·       The MDT resulted in quicker resolution of more cases.

o   MDT cases were more likely to be resolved and therefore dismissed at or prior to adjudication.  This result means the court avoided adjudications of jurisdiction, and all the subsequent hearings and procedure that follows, for more cases in the MDT group compared to the control group.

·       The MDT was better at preserving family connections.

o   Children represented by the MDT were more likely to be ever placed with relatives and less likely to be ever placed in non-relative foster care.

o   Both mothers and fathers of children served by the MDT had fewer petitions for termination of parental rights filed.

Reasons for the MDT's impact

·       Attorneys' respect for the social work skillset – the LGALs learned how to trust the social workers to do what was needed on their cases. 

·       Collaboration with the child welfare agency - The social workers collaborated with the child welfare agency to build alliances and tear down barriers.

·       Early access to assessments and services - the social workers provided intensive advocacy early in the case, which often changed the case trajectory.

Remaining challenges

·       Improve inter-professional relationships – Differences in professional values and ethics are well-known sources of tension inherent when attorneys and social workers collaborate. The experience in this study was no different.

·       Better protection of due process rights - Individual client confidentiality needs better protecting while parties attempt to collaborate to support the whole family.