ILNews

DCS centralized hotline undergoes changes in advance of legislation

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Prior to the Indiana General Assembly implementing recommendations from an interim study committee, the Indiana Department of Child Services is making changes.

Travis Holdman, R-Markle, co-chair of the Department of Child Services Interim Study Committee, said the state agency has been altering some of its processes to mirror the committee’s proposals. Among those changes are adjustments to how the centralized hotline handles calls.   

Speaking March 13 after a hearing by the House Committee on Family, Children and Human Affairs, the senator also praised DCS director John Ryan’s cooperation.  

“Many of the things we thought we were going to have to pass as original recommendations of the committee and do legislation, DCS has said, ‘Don’t mess with that. We’ll just fix it for you,’ and they have already proceeded to do that,” Holdman said.

The centralized hotline was implemented in January 2010 and since has raised concerns over how the intake specialists handle the calls. Some elected officials advocated that the central line be dismantled and the state revert to the local DCS offices handling the reports.

Holdman and former committee co-chair and state representative Cindy Noe proposed the hotline be altered to a hybrid model. They wanted to give community professionals like police officers, judges, physicians and school officials direct access to the local office.

Their recommendation became the basis for Senate Bill 105, authored by Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford. It passed through the Senate by a unanimous vote and has been referred to the House Committee on Family, Children and Human Affairs.

According to DCS spokeswoman Stephanie McFarland, the department introduced new processes with the hotline on March 5 which gives all decision making to the local offices. Calls are still routed through the centralized hotline, but after the intake specialists gather as much information as possible, the report, with a recommendation, is turned over to the local authorities to determine how to handle the situation.

Previously, the intake specialists were determining whether the information met legal sufficiency for DCS to make an assessment. Reports for assessment as well as the reports for non-assessment were sent to the local offices. Family case managers in the community offices could decide to still follow up on the calls that were not recommended for assessment.

Along with the change to the central call center, Holdman said DCS followed a committee recommendation and gave pay raises to the hotline employees. The department is also adding more family case managers.     

The overall goal with the call center, he said, is to reduce the 50 percent turnover rate among employees and cut the hold time to zero.

 

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT