CAMA Child Abuse Multidisciplinary Account Signed Into Law 2000 DHS Contracts - 10 Years Free Standing Multidisciplinary Teams Child Advocacy.

CAMA

Separate Funding from State Agency - Municipality Budgets

DHS – LE – DA – Medical – Mental Health

Investigative Case Work Done Together

Information Sharing

Outcomes – Open System

Collective Decisions

DA to Judiciary

3 Major Areas of Child Abuse

Child Advocacy Center

Facility Based Multidisciplinary Approach to the Investigation and Prosecution of Child Abuse.

Child Advocacy Centers

Investigations Services by Protocol

Calendar Year 2010:

5881Children Served

72% Sexual Abuse

National Children's Alliance

Non Profit – Washington DCEstablished 1985DOJ Recognizes NCA

National Organization in this Field

NCA Accreditation

Well Established High Standards Essential and Rated Criteria 5 Year Cycle 2010 New Standards

Across the State Updated Services

2010 New Standards

Initial Trainings Peer Reviews Ongoing Training Evidence Based – Research

DocumentationLibrary National Children’s Advocacy Center Huntsville Alabama

10 Component Accreditation Model

Organization Capacity MDT Cultural Competency / Diversity Medical Mental Health Forensic Interviewing Case Review Case Tracking Facility Victim Advocacy

3rd Year State ReviewEssential NCA Accreditation

Components

NCA Site Reviewer

Guidance on Rated Criteria –Re- Accreditation Review – Year 5

Our Great State!!

Private / Public Partnerships 50% CAMA to 50% Private Funding Not all CAC – Seek out Private Funds

For Those That Do Good Investment !!!

Washington County 2011 – Great Job Re-Acredication

Technical Assistance Center

Accreditation Components

Facility – Jay, Oklahoma

Organizational Capacity Board of Director’s

District Attorney's Office

Policy / Procedures

Annual Audits of Each Center

Meeting Routine

Victim Advocacy New Standards 2010

Very Detailed on Supporting the Child And Non – Offending Care Givers Through the Process – System – Child Feelings / Actions

Case Review - Tracking Process by which CAC share and collaborate

on cases and maintain on going records for review until closure of case as determined by MDT

Systemic Information Accountability

Review Process for CAC 2002 – Legislated to NCA Standards for CAC Accreditation Process Neutral Reviewers

Switch Gears

WHY – CAMA Funding

Protecting Oklahoma’s Children--Who is ResponsibleStudy 1988 - 1989

Past

Ryan Luke to Kelsey Briggs

Ten Years Between

Present

*

Future Build Upon the Current CAC and FSMDT Create a Check and Balance System

Securing a System Where

Joint Investigative Services

are Routinely Conducted

County Based Services Strong Practice Implementation Quality Service Delivery Continual Improvement Evidence Based Practices Best Practices