Impact and Effectiveness

Impact begins the moment we’re empowered to advocate for the most vulnerable children across our community. It can last for a lifetime. The level of personal attention we give our young people often makes our volunteers the first or only adults they can trust and gives us a unique window into their context. As a result, we are respected by the court. Our reporting is recognized as thorough and contextually most accurate. That’s why our recommendations are so routinely adopted by the court. 

In 2019 we had one of our most successful years and served all children, eliminating our waiting list!

The CASA Difference

AM15469.jpg
 

Last year, 7 year old Paul* was legally placed with his maternal grandpa due to his mom’s substance abuse issues. Paul had previously lived with his grandpa, whom he considered his parents, the majority of his life due to his parents’ instability.

After six months of involvement by the Court, DCS, and his Staff GAL, Paul’s mom continued to refrain from addressing her substance abuse. Then, Paul’s biological father and stepmother appeared after having no contact with him for over a year and a half, admitting he had never been consistently involved in his life.

His father did, however, engage in services, which prompted the case to intensify and move forward at an alarming rate. Paul’s Advocate was also the only constant in the case for the child throughout these difficult experiences, and was the one to recognize Paul’s emotional well being was not being considered. Paul cried every time he had to leave his grandpa for a visit with his family whom he barely knew. He had a fear of being yanked from the home he knew at his grandpa and not being able to return.

The GAL fought for Paul’s best interest by communicating to the Court that rushing the process of reunification was potentially traumatizing, and the Court agreed. Because of the GAL’s attentive and committed work, Paul was given a therapist to set the pace and help work him through the transition.

Without his GAL, Paul would have experienced further trauma, simply because of the system’s process. Paul’s GAL ensured that all of his needs were accounted for and that his feelings were valued through a difficult transition in his life. A Child Advocate can truly be the difference between trauma and a child’s well-being.

*name changed to maintain client privacy

20140301_Trade-151_0124-copy.jpg

“

Children know the world is deep and dark and bright and beautiful. We don’t have to teach them that. Instead, we have to equip them to slay the monsters and hold fast to what is true and good

.”

— Lyz Lenz

Proven Impact

A child with a CASA/GAL volunteer is more likely to find a safe, permanent home:

  • More likely to be adopted (8, 9, 10, 11, 14)

  • Half as likely to re-enter foster care (8, 11, 14)

  • Substantially less likely to spend time in long-term foster care (14)

  • More likely to have a plan for permanency, especially children of color (17)

Children with CASA volunteers get more help while in the system...

  • More services are ordered for the children (1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14)

... and are more likely to have a consistent, responsible adult presence. (1, 2, 12)

  • Volunteers spend significantly more time with the child than a paid guardian ad litem. (2)

Children with CASA volunteers spend less time in foster care... (15, 16)

  • “It is quite remarkable that children without CASA involvement are spending an average of
    over eight months longer in care, compared to children having CASA involvement.” (15)

... and are less likely to be bounced home to home. (13, 15, 16)

  • CASA volunteers improve representation of children. (18)

  • Reduce the time needed by lawyers (12)

  • More likely than paid lawyers to file written reports (3, 4, 5)

  • For each of 9 duties, judges rated CASA/GAL volunteers more highly than attorneys (12)

  • Highly effective in having their recommendations adopted by the court (1)

Children with CASA volunteers do better in school... (13)

  • More likely to pass all courses

  • Less likely to have poor conduct in school

  • Less likely to be expelled

... and score better on nine protective factors (13)

  • Neighborhood resources, interested adults, sense of acceptance, controls against deviant behavior, models of conventional behavior, positive attitude towards the future, valuing achievement, ability to
    work with others and ability to work out conflicts.

Sources:

1. Caliber Associates, National CASA Association Evaluation Project, Caliber Associates; Fairfax, Virginia, 2004.
2. Donald D. Duquette and Sarah H. Ramsey, “Using Lay Volunteers to Represent Children in Child Protection Court Proceedings” (Appendix C). Child Abuse and Neglect 10(3): p. 293-308, 1986.
3. Sherrie S. Aitken, Larry Condelli, and Tom Kelly, Final Report of the Validation and Effectiveness Study of Legal Representation Through Guardian Ad Litem. Report submitted to the Administration on Children Youth and Families, Department of Health and Human Services by CSR, Inc.: Washington, DC, 1993.
4. Karen C. Snyder, John D. Downing, and Jill A. Jacobson, A Report to the Ohio Children’s Foundation on the Effectiveness of the CASA Program of Franklin County. The Strategy Team: Columbus, OH, 1996.
5. Victoria Weisz and Nghi Thai, “The Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) Program: Bringing information to Child Abuse and Neglect Cases,” Child Maltreatment 8(X), 2003.
6. Larry Condelli, National Evaluation of the Impact of Guardian Ad Litem in Child Abuse and Neglect Judicial Proceedings. Report submitted to the National Center of Child Abuse and Neglect for the Administration of Children, Youth and Families by CSR, Inc.: Washington, DC, 1988.
7. Litzelfelner, “The Effectiveness of CASAs in Achieving Positive Outcomes for Children,” Child Welfare 79(2): p. 179-193, 2000.
8. John Poertner and Allan Press, “Who Best Represents the Interests of the Child in Court?” Child Welfare 69(6): p. 537-549,
1990.
9. Gene C. Siegel, et al., Arizona CASA effectiveness study. Report to the Arizona Supreme Courts, Administrative Office of the Courts, Dependent Children’s Services Division by the National Center for Juvenile Justice, 2001.
10. Susan M. Profilet, et al., Guardian ad Litem Project. Child Advocates Inc., 1999.
Shareen Abramson, “Use of Court-Appointed Advocates to Assist in Permanency Planning for Minority Children,” Child Welfare 70(4): p. 477-487, 1991.
11. Michael Powell and Vernon Speshock, Arizona Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) Program, Internal Assessment, 1996.
12. Ohio CASA/GAL Study Committee Report
13. University of Houston and Child Advocates, Inc., Making a Difference in the Lives of Abused and Neglected Children: Research on the Effectiveness of a Court Appointed Special Advocate Program
14. Office of the Inspector General, Audit Report 07-04, December, 2006
15. Cynthia A. Calkins, M.S., and Murray Millar, Ph.D., “The Effectiveness of Court Appointed Special Advocates to Assist in Permanency Planning,” Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, volume 16, number 1, February 1999.
16. Leung, P. (1996). Is the Court-Appointed Special Advocate Program Effective? A Longitudinal Analysis of Time Involvement and Case Outcomes. Child Welfare League of America, 75, 269-284.
17. Abramson, S. (1991). Use of court-appointed advocates to assist in permanency planning for minority children. Child Welfare, 70, 477-487
18. Davin Younclarke, Kathleen Dyer Ramos, and Lorraine Granger-Merkle,” A Systematic Review of the Impact of Court Appointed Special Advocates” Journal of the Center for Families, Children and the Courts, 2004