• Age 0–5 years. Any child in the household is under the age of 5. Younger children are considered more vulnerable, as they are less verbal and less able to protect themselves from harm. Younger children also have less capacity to retain memory of events. Infants are particularly vulnerable, as they are nonverbal and completely dependent on others for care and protection.
• Significant diagnosed medical or mental disorder. Any child in the household has a diagnosed medical or mental disorder that significantly impairs ability to protect him/herself from harm, OR diagnosis may not yet be confirmed but preliminary indications are present and testing/evaluation is in process. Examples may include but are not limited to: severe asthma, severe depression, medically fragile (e.g., requires assistive devices to sustain life), etc.
• Not readily accessible to community oversight. The child is isolated or less visible within the community (e.g., the family lives in an isolated community, the child may not attend a public or private school or be routinely involved in other activities within the community, etc.).
• Diminished developmental/cognitive capacity. Any child in the household has diminished developmental/cognitive capacity, which impacts ability to communicate verbally or to care for and protect self from harm.
• Diminished physical capacity (e.g., non-ambulatory, limited use of limbs). Any child in the household has a physical condition/disability that impacts ability to protect self from harm (e.g., cannot run away or defend self, cannot get out of the house in an emergency situation if left unattended).

• Serious injury or abuse to the child other than accidental. The caregiver caused or could have caused a serious injury, defined as brain damage, skull or bone fracture, subdural hemorrhage or hematoma, dislocations, sprains, internal injuries, poisoning, burns, scalds, or severe cuts, and the child requires medical treatment or would have required medical treatment had a serious injury occurred.
• Caregiver fears they will maltreat the child. The caregiver has reported credible fears that they will hurt the child in a way that would cause serious injury and/or requests placement.
• Threat to cause harm or retaliate against the child. Threat of action that would result in serious harm, or household member plans to retaliate against child for child protective services (CPS) investigation.
• Excessive discipline. The caregiver used physical discipline with a child that resulted or could easily result in serious injury. For example, the caregiver uses an object to strike the child hard enough to cause serious injury, or the caregiver is enraged or out of control during physical discipline.
• Substance-affected infant. An infant is born affected by substances AND factors exist that create imminent danger to the infant.
  • California defines an “infant born and identified as affected by substance abuse” as an infant where substance exposure is indicated at birth AND subsequent assessment identifies indicators of risk that may affect the infant’s health and safety.
  • When assessing imminent danger, consider factors such as type of substance present, level of toxicity or harm to the child, severity of withdrawal symptoms, or medical complications AND the caregiver’s capacity to meet the infant’s needs. Efforts to develop plans of safe care to prevent removal should be explored and documented per ACL 20-122 as a part of assessment of caregiver capacity.

Child sexual abuse or sexual exploitation is suspected AND circumstances suggest that the child’s safety may be of immediate concern. The child’s safety may be of immediate concern if:

• There is not a non-offending caregiver, or the non-offending caregiver is not protective (blaming the child for the sexual abuse or the investigation or denying that the sexual abuse occurred) or is otherwise influencing or coercing the child victim regarding disclosure; or
• Continued access to a child by a confirmed sexual abuse perpetrator or trafficker, especially with known restrictions regarding any child under age 18, exists.

PRACTICE GUIDANCE

Sexual Abuse

Suspicion of sexual abuse may be based on indicators such as:

• The child discloses sexual abuse verbally.
• The child displays behaviors that strongly indicate sexual abuse (e.g., excessive, age-inappropriate sexualized behavior toward self or others).
• Medical findings consistent with sexual abuse or molestation.
• The caregiver or others in the household have been convicted, investigated, or accused of rape or sodomy, or have had other sexual contact with the child.

Commercial sexual exploitation

The caregiver or others in the household have forced or encouraged the child to engage in sexual performances or activities (including forcing the child to observe sexual performances or activities, or commercial sexual exploitation, including sex trafficking).

Children and youth aged 17 years old and younger are sexually exploited when they have engaged in, solicited for, or been forced to engage in sexual conduct or performance of sexual acts in return for a benefit, such as money, food, drugs, shelter, clothing, gifts, or other goods, or for financial or some other gain for a third party. The sexual conduct may include any direct sexual contact or performing any acts, sexual or nonsexual, for the sexual gratification of others. These acts constitute the sexual exploitation of a child regardless of whether they happened using force, fraud, or coercion and whether they are live, filmed, or photographed.

One of the following conditions exists and cannot be mitigated via provision of resources to the family AND the child has been seriously harmed or is in imminent danger of being seriously harmed as a result.

Note: This item should not be selected based on a parent’s economic disadvantage alone, and must reach the threshold of immediate and serious danger (physical harm or illness) to the child. See WIC 300(b)(1)(A-D)

Attempts to mitigate a lack of basic resources must be documented when selecting this safety threat as a part of reasonable efforts to maintain the child safely in the home.

Supervision

At least one of the following applies.

• The caregiver leaves the child alone (time period varies with age and developmental stage) in circumstances that create opportunities for serious harm (e.g., infant or toddler left alone).
• The caregiver is present but does not supervise the child to the extent that need for care goes unnoticed or is unmet in a situation that creates imminent danger (e.g., child can wander outdoors alone in unsafe areas, play with dangerous objects, or be exposed to other serious hazards).
• The caregiver knowingly makes childcare arrangements that do not provide minimal safety for the child (e.g., temporary caregiver is routinely intoxicated or has limited capacity suggesting they would be unable to meet the child’s needs).
• The caregiver is unavailable (e.g., incarceration, hospitalization, abandonment, whereabouts unknown), and there are no arrangements for the child that would ensure their safety.

Note: This item should not be applied based solely on a caregiver’s inability to provide childcare due to financial difficulty.

Food, clothing, or hygiene

The caregiver does not meet the child’s basic needs for food, clothing, or hygiene to the extent that the child is in imminent danger. Examples include the following.

• The child’s nutritional needs are not met, resulting in immediate concerns about the child’s health or safety. This may include severe malnutrition, morbid obesity, or similar nutritional concerns that put the child in imminent danger, as verified by a medical professional.
• The child is without adequate clothing/hygiene, resulting in danger to the child’s health or safety. Consider impact, such resulting sores, infection, or severe diaper rash that is left untreated; the age of the child; and whether clothing is the choice of the child or has been willfully and consistently not provided by the caregiver.

Medical or dental care

At least one of the following applies.

• The caregiver does not meet the child's exceptional needs, such as being medically fragile, resulting in declining health status likely to result in serious physical harm or death.
• The caregiver does not seek treatment for the child’s immediate, chronic, and/or dangerous medical condition(s), or does not follow prescribed treatment for such conditions, likely to result in declining health status leading to serious physical harm or death (e.g. not providing follow-up care for a wound that is severely infected).

Note: The pursuit of traditional or alternative practices rather than prescribed treatment is included here IF there is evidence that the child’s health status is gravely declining AND there is evidence that prescribed treatment would likely be effective.

Mental health care

The child is suicidal and/or is seriously self-harming AND the caregiver will not take protective actions.

Based on the child’s age and developmental status, the child’s physical living conditions are hazardous and immediately threatening. Examples include the following.

• Leaking gas from stove or heating unit.
• Lack of water or utilities (heat, plumbing, electricity), and no alternative or safe provisions have been made.
• Open/broken/missing windows.
• Exposed electrical wires.
• Excessive garbage or rotted or spoiled food that threatens health.
• Serious illness or significant injury has occurred due to living conditions, and these conditions still exist (e.g., lead poisoning, rat bites).
• Evidence of human or animal waste throughout living quarters.
• Guns and other weapons are not locked and not properly secured.
• Drug production in the home that threatens child safety.
• Substances (including drugs, drug paraphernalia or cleaning supplies) or objects within reach of child that may endanger their health and/or safety.

Severe emotional harm causing concern for imminent danger may include circumstances in which the child is a danger to self or others or has untoward aggressive behavior, debilitating depression or anxiety, or eating disorders that threaten severe injury or illness.

Examples of caregiver actions may include the following, if the impact on child reaches threshold above.

• The caregiver describes the child in a demeaning or degrading manner.
• The caregiver scapegoats a particular child in the family or blames the child for a particular incident or for family problems.
• The caregiver places the child in the middle of a custody battle.

The caregiver does not act protectively in the face of serious harm or threatened harm as a result of physical abuse, neglect, or sexual abuse by other family members, other household members, or others having regular access to the child.

Note: Concerns related to domestic violence should be assessed under Safety threat 9.

Examples may include the following.

• The caregiver does not provide supervision necessary to protect the child from potentially serious harm by others based on the child’s age or developmental stage.
• An individual with known history of sexual abuse resides in the home, or the caregiver allows access to the child. Consider whether the caregiver (1) knew of the history and allowed access; or (2) upon learning of the history, has not prevented further access.
• The caregiver regularly takes the child to dangerous locations where drugs are manufactured or regularly administered (e.g., meth labs or drug houses), or locations used for sexual exploitation or pornography.

Factors to consider include the child's age, location of injury, exceptional needs of the child, or chronicity of injuries.

• The injury requires medical attention AND medical assessment indicates the injury is likely to be the result of abuse or is inconsistent with the explanation provided by the caregiver; OR
• There was a suspicious injury that did not require medical treatment but covered multiple parts of the body, appeared to be caused by an object, or is in different stages of healing, AND/OR was located on an infant, or for older children, on the torso, face, or head.

AND one of the following is true:

• The caregiver denies abuse or attributes the injury to accidental causes; OR
• The caregiver's explanation, or lack of explanation, for the observed injury is inconsistent with the type of injury; OR
• The caregiver's description of the injury or cause of the injury minimizes the extent of harm to the child.

This safety threat should only be identified when other threats are near, but do not reach the threshold in the definitions; the worker has made attempts to contact the child and been refused access by the caregiver; OR there is reason to believe the family is about to flee during an ongoing investigation after an initial safety assessment has been completed.

• The family currently refuses access to the child or cannot/will not provide the child's location.
• The family has removed the child from a hospital against medical advice to avoid investigation.
• The family has previously fled in response to a CPS investigation or there is credible information that the family is about to flee.
• The family has a history of keeping the child at home, away from peers, school, and other outsiders, for extended periods of time for the purpose of avoiding investigation.

There is evidence of domestic violence in the household AND the alleged perpetrator’s behavior creates a safety concern for the child.

Physical harm. Domestic violence may occur on more than one occasion OR on a single occasion that involved weapons or resulted in any injury to an adult or child as a result of the domestic violence incident.

Examples of physical abuse incidents may include the following.

• Increased potential for serious harm or death (e.g., strangulation, use of guns, knives, or other weapons used during the domestic violence incident).
• The child is at risk of physical injury based on their vulnerability and/or proximity to the incident. Examples include:
• Caregiver holding child while alleged perpetrator attacks the caregiver;
• Incident occurs in a moving vehicle while a child is present; and
• Attempting to intervene during a violent dispute.
• The child was previously injured in a domestic violence incident.

Emotional harm. The caregiver engages in behaviors associated with domestic violence in the presence of the child, resulting in serious emotional harm to the child.

Examples of emotional abuse incidents may include the following.

• The child exhibits trauma symptoms (e.g., severe anxiety, nightmares, insomnia) related to situations associated with domestic violence, and these could result in social, behavioral, emotional, or educational deficits.

PRACTICE GUIDANCE

Domestic violence perpetrators, in the context of the child welfare system, are parents and/or caregivers who can engage in a pattern of violence and/or coercive control (e.g., stealing phones, abusing pets, financial control) against one or more intimate partners.

This pattern of behavior may occur when the partners do not live together and after the end of a relationship. The alleged perpetrator’s actions often directly involve, target, and impact children in the family.

Incidents of domestic violence may be identified by self-report, credible report by a family or other household member, police reports, or other sources.

Do not include arguments that do not escalate beyond verbal encounters and are not otherwise characterized by threatening or controlling behaviors.

Caregiver uses substances or alcoholic beverages to the extent that their caregiving abilities are significantly impaired.

Other caregiver complicating behaviors that make it more difficult or complicated to create safety for a child that must be considered when assessing for and planning to mitigate safety threats with a safety plan.

There are indications of a recent history of one or more physical assaults between intimate members of the household, or threats/intimidation or harassment that are known as a result of self-report or other credible report by a family or other household member, friend, other collateral contacts, and/or police reports.

One or both caregivers appear to be mentally ill at the time of this incident or have known mental health concerns that impact care of children.

One or both caregivers may have diminished capacity as a result of developmental delays or cognitive issues that impact their ability to provide care and supervision of children.

One or both caregivers has a physical condition that impacts care and protection of the child in the household.

The caregiver demonstrates an understanding of the issues that led to the current safety threats and participates in planning to mitigate the situation by suggesting possible solutions for mitigating the safety threat.

The caregiver has a supportive relationship with at least one other family member, neighbor, or friend who may be able to assist in safety planning. This support network member is someone who cares about the child or family but may not, at this time, know what the safety threat is, or has not yet been asked to take action to ensure that the child is protected from those threats now and into the future.

There is at least one caregiver who has done nothing to contribute to the existence of the safety threat. This non-offending caregiver understands that continued exposure between the child and the offending caregiver poses a threat to the safety of the child, and the non-offending caregiver may be willing to become part of a support network and protect the child going forward.

In the current investigation or assessment, the caregiver allows CPS to have contact with the child for the purpose of assessing child safety. This includes interviews and observation of children in the household. The caregiver accepts the involvement and initial service recommendations of the worker or other individuals working through referred community agencies, including tribal or Indian community service agencies, and/or the use of ICWA program resources. The caregiver cooperates with the continuing investigation/assessment, allows the worker and intervening agency to have contact with the child, and supports the child in all aspects of the investigation or ongoing intervention.

At least one child has the intellectual or emotional capacity to ask for help. They understand their family environment in relation to any real or perceived threats to safety and is able to communicate at least two options for obtaining immediate assistance if needed (e.g., calling 911, running to neighbor, telling teacher).

When faced with a potentially dangerous situation, at least one child can currently name adults who care about them and who would be able to help them in the future. Child also has strategies for how to reach the adults.

Other qualitative actions, resources, and coping demonstrated by the caregiver or family that could be built upon in a safety plan but do not, by themselves, fully address the safety threat.

At least one caregiver in the household has been able to protect the child from similar threats in the past through their own actions or by using resources. The caregiver is able to describe both the current threats and the strategies they are using to mitigate them currently.

A caregiver regularly interacts, communicates and makes plans with an extended network of family; friends; neighbors; and/or cultural, religious, or other communities that provide support and meet a wide range of needs for the caregiver and/or the child (including tribal ICWA programs, Indian organizations, and/or family members, which can include non-related tribal members). The caregiver has informed these network members of the threats and they have assisted in the situation by providing protection to the child (e.g., members of the support network have provided food when needed, assistance to prevent utility shut-off, or a planned safe place for the child to stay in the event of violence in the household; not allowing an offending caregiver to have unplanned forms of contact, etc.).

Prior to the current threat, in response to similar circumstances where a threat has been present or circumstances leading to a threat were escalating, the child has been able to protect themself. For example, the child was able to remove themself from the situation, called 911 to seek assistance, or was able to find another way to mitigate the safety threat.

When faced with one of the safety threats, the child was able to seek help from and receive the necessary assistance from someone in the identified support network (e.g., family members, friends, professionals) AND can currently name adults who care about them and would be able to help if a similar situation arose in the future.

Other actions of protection taken by the caregiver, a household member, safety network member, and/or the child, which mitigate one or more of the safety threats.

Actions taken or planned by the investigating worker or other CPS staff that specifically address one or more safety threats. Examples include the following: creating a plan of safe care for substance-affected infants addressing immediate danger, providing information about nonviolent disciplinary methods, child development needs, or parenting practices; providing emergency material aid such as food; planning return visits to the home to check on progress; providing information on obtaining restraining orders; and providing definitions of child abuse laws and informing involved parties of the consequences of violating these laws. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE the investigation itself or services provided to respond to family needs that do not directly affect safety.

This includes applying the family’s own strengths as resources to mitigate safety concerns or using extended family members, neighbors, or other individuals to mitigate safety concerns. Examples include: family’s agreement to use nonviolent means of discipline; engaging a grandparent to assist with child care; agreement by a neighbor to serve as a safety net for an older child; agreement by a network member or 12-step sponsor to meet with the caregiver daily and call the worker if the caregiver’s behavior is placing or has placed the child imminent danger;

OR

The caregiver’s decision, as part of a safety plan, to have the child cared for by a friend or relative for a limited period of time, such as overnight or for a few days.

Involving a community-based or faith-related organization or other agency in activities to address immediate safety threats (e.g., using a local food pantry). DOES NOT INCLUDE long-term therapy or treatment, or being put on a waiting list for services.

This includes but is not limited to participation of the following people in the safety plan.

• Tribal family services from the child’s/caregiver’s tribe or a tribal consortium
• Indian resource center staff
• Indian health clinic staff
• Tribal TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families)
• Title VII Indian education programs, which may not be affiliated with a tribe
• A county-based dedicated Indian specialist or service unit staff

A non-offending caregiver has acknowledged the safety threats and is able and willing to protect the child from the alleged perpetrator. A non-offending caregiver who had prior knowledge of the alleged perpetrator's actions but took no action prior to the safety assessment should not be the only safety resource or intervention. Examples include agreement that the child will not be alone with the alleged perpetrator or agreement that the caregiver will restrain the alleged perpetrator from physical discipline of the child.

Temporary or permanent removal of the alleged perpetrator. Examples include: arrest of alleged perpetrator, non-perpetrating caregiver “kicking out” alleged perpetrator who has no legal right to the residence, or the alleged perpetrator agrees to leave.

A caregiver not suspected of harming the child has taken or plans to take the child to an alternative location where the alleged perpetrator will not have access to the child. Examples include a domestic violence shelter, home of a friend or relative, or hotel.

Legal action has already commenced, or will be commenced, that will immediately and effectively mitigate identified safety threats and is identified in the safety plan. This includes family-initiated actions (e.g., restraining orders, mental health commitments, change in custody/visitation/guardianship) and CPS-initiated actions (file petition and child remains in the home with the intention of initiating Family Maintenance services). This includes actions taken by the child's tribe and tribal court to intervene or take jurisdiction of the Indian child's case.

The family or worker identifies a unique intervention for an identified safety concern that does not fit within items 1-8.

A voluntary agreement is signed between the caregiver and the CPS agency to place the child in an approved resource family placement, tribally approved home, or tribally specified home, and the caregiver is cooperating with the agency to provide needed consents and information to fund this voluntary placement. This voluntary agreement is consistent with Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) § 11400 (o) and (p). The caregiver understands that if they withdraw consent for voluntary placement and identified safety threats are still present, other interventions to ensure the child’s safety will need to be considered.

Local policy and guidance indicate that application for a removal order is needed.

Note: if a warrant is not granted, an updated safety assessment should be completed to reassess in-home protective interventions.

One or more children are protectively placed pursuant to WIC § 309 and are entitled to notice and a hearing within 72 judicial hours.

Note: If the only safety threat selected was safety threat 3 (caregiver not meeting immediate needs), CWS should not select “unsafe” unless they have made and documented attempts to mitigate any concerns due solely to lack of basic resources, as part of reasonable efforts to maintain the child safely in the home.