The Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974 requires all States to appoint an individual to represent the interests of children involved in judicial proceedings regarding child abuse and neglect. The individual appointed for this purpose is usually called a guardian ad litem (GAL). The States employ various models for providing the services of a GAL. In some States the GAL must be an attorney, while in others a trained volunteer (most often a court-appointed special advocate) may serve as the GAL or may work in conjunction with an attorney. The model used by individual jurisdictions within States also may vary from one another. In addition, the roles and responsibilities of GALs vary across the States, and many State statutes offer little guidance on the GAL’s specific duties. In most States, however, the GAL is expected at a minimum to act as an independent investigator of the facts related to the abuse or neglect, an advocate of the child’s interests, and a case monitor.¹⁴ Proponents of the rights of children and guidelines on GAL representation recommend that the GAL perform other duties as well.¹⁵

This measure determines the effectiveness of legal representation of the child in child abuse and neglect proceedings. An evaluator (or court staff) reviews the state statutes and court rules relevant to the appointment and responsibilities of GALs in child abuse and neglect proceedings, compares the statutes or rules to recommended practices for GALs, and obtains data from court records and surveys or interviews with GALs, judges, and child protective services caseworkers.

Planning/Preparation. Planning and preparation for conducting this measure includes four steps. First, court staff review the relevant statutes, court rules and policies, and case law on the appointment of guardians ad litem and their roles and responsibilities. Second, court staff modify the sample case data collection form (see Form 1.3.1a, Evaluation of Legal Representation of Child Abuse and Neglect Proceedings: Case Data Collection Form) and the survey forms (see Forms 1.3.1b, Judge Survey, 1.3.1c, Guardian ad litem Survey, and 1.3.1d, Caseworker Survey) to conform to the court’s procedures, practice, and terminology. Forms 1.3.1a through 1.3.1d include items related to practices recommended in the literature on GAL representation and in guidelines developed in a few States.¹⁶ Unless these items bear no relationship to local practice or are contrary to State law or court rule, they should not be eliminated because they are an important gauge of the effectiveness of legal representation.

The third step is the selection of the case sample, which should include 20 current child abuse and neglect cases that have reached a disposition hearing and 20 current review cases that have had a review hearing. The measure requires current cases to ensure that the judges, GALs, and caseworkers have fresh memories of their experiences in the sample cases. The sample should include a broad representation of the pool of individuals who serve as GALs in the jurisdiction. Staff also should determine if they must have approval to access the case files and obtain any approval that is required.

Fourth, as staff select the case sample, they create a list of judges, GALs, and child protective service caseworkers involved in the sample cases. The list should match the judges, GALs, and caseworkers to the specific case in which they were involved. These individuals will be surveyed to obtain information about GAL performance that is not available from the case record. In some instances, court staff may also need to interview the judges, GALs, and caseworkers to clarify their responses to the survey. If interviews become necessary, staff may need to request assistance in scheduling interviews with GALs and caseworkers.

Data Collection. Data collection from the case records and from the judges, GALs, and caseworkers may proceed simultaneously to reduce the time required to complete this measure. The surveys should be distributed with a cover letter from the chief or presiding judge of the division of the court that has jurisdiction over child abuse and neglect cases. The letter explains the purpose of the survey and that all responses are and will remain confidential. Provide the name of the specific case on each of the survey forms distributed to the judge, GAL, and caseworker. In some jurisdictions, one GAL, judge, or caseworker may have been involved in several cases and therefore will receive multiple surveys. In those cases, only one of the surveys should include Part III, which calls for the respondent’s general opinions about training and practice issues related to GAL representation rather than his or her views about GAL representation in a specific case. As the surveys are being prepared and distributed, court staff complete Form 1.3.1 for each of the sampled cases. As the surveys are returned, court staff should review them to determine if calls to the respondents will be needed to clarify responses.

Data Analysis and Report Preparation. Data Analysis and Report Preparation. Data Analysis and Report Preparation.

Case records: The analysis of case record data provides information on the timeliness of GAL appointments, the level of participation of GALs in court proceedings, and the degree to which GALs contribute to case dispositions. For each case, determine whether the appointment of the GAL was made within the time limit set by statute or court rule. Calculate the percentage of cases that fall within the time limit. Also calculate across all cases the average time (mean) in days between the appointment of the GAL and the filing of the petition, the emergency removal order, or other initial court action in the case. The quality of representation is likely to be higher when appointments are made within the time limit and in cases in which appointments are made shortly after the first court action taken because the GAL will have greater opportunity to assess the child’s environment and the need for placement outside the home.

Next, calculate the number and percentage of hearings in which the GAL participated. The higher the rate of GAL participation in hearings, the higher the effectiveness of representation is likely to be. To assess the level of GAL preparation, calculate the average number of required reports submitted by the GAL. To determine the extent to which GAL performance creates delays in child protection proceedings, calculate the number of continuances of hearings because the GAL was not prepared, the percentage of GAL reports filed on time, and the number of days past the deadlines reports were filed. The extent to which reports from involved agencies are in the case record indicates whether adequate information is available for the GAL to review, making preparation for the case more efficient and effective. Finally, calculate the percentage in both new and review cases in which the GAL made recommendations regarding the placement of the child. The higher the percentage of cases in which the GAL offers the court recommendations, the greater the likelihood that GALs are aggressively representing the child’s interests.

Surveys: For each GAL activity, calculate the percentage of judges, GALs, and caseworkers who reported that the activity was undertaken. To calculate these percentages, the number of "x’s" for each activity are summed across all cases and divided by the total number of cases. If an activity was marked with a "0" or an "I", that case is not counted as part of the numerator or the denominator of the percentage. In addition, calculate the mean rating of each group surveyed (judges, GALs, and caseworkers) for all cases for the items in Parts II and III of Forms 1.3.1b through 1.3.1d. The results should be calculated separately for each group so that the perceptions of the different players can be compared.

Court officials should review the average "overall ratings" in Part II first. The higher the average ratings, the better the court is performing on this measure. Is the quality of legal representation generally good (average rating of 4 or 5), or is it considered better in some areas than in others? To determine why the ratings of the quality of representation vary, court officials can examine the responses in Parts I and III. Do GALs undertake certain tasks more frequently than others? Do they demonstrate greater competence in fulfilling particular responsibilities than in completing others? Do review cases receive adequate attention? Are some important activities in representing a case neglected? Do judges, GALs, and caseworkers believe that GALs and judges receive sufficient training? Answers to questions such as these will help court officials determine whether children are being represented properly and, if not, what kinds of improvements are needed. These improvements might include additional GAL or judicial training, clearer definition of the roles and responsibilities of the GAL, implementation of compensation policies that encourage GALs to spend more time on the case, and the development of standards of practice.