Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS–4)

8.5.3 Sentinels’ Expectations About Their Reporting to CPSThe SDS questioned sentinels about their expected reactions to the kinds ofmaltreatment covered in the NIS, presenting vignettes that represented Harm Standardmaltreatment situations and asking whether the sentinels would report these situations toCPS. The last column in Table 8–6 presents the average percentages of SDS respondentswho said they would not report the category vignettes to CPS. 114 For comparison, thecenter column provides the percentages of uninvestigated children with Harm Standardmaltreatment in the NIS–4 who were recognized by sentinels. (These exclude childrenwho entered the NIS–4 through CPS-only sources, as discussed earlier in relation toFigure 8–6.)The two columns derive from independent studies and reflect very differentunits and measures; therefore, they are not directly comparable. 115 However, oneimportant contrast is of interest, as are some notable similarities.The percentages in the two columns are starkly different. Whereas the NIS–4found that majorities of countable children were not investigated, only minorities ofsentinels say they would not report the countable situations in the vignettes to CPS. Thecontrast is strong across all maltreatment categories. The sheer magnitude of thesedifferences suggests that sentinels’ failures to report to CPS (as they describe in theirSDS responses) are not sufficient to explain the large percentages of uninvestigatedchildren in the NIS–4.Despite the important difference in overall percentages, the two columnsshare some similar patterns. In both columns, the percentages for neglect are higher thanthose for abuse. Thus, more neglected children are uninvestigated (85% versus 57% ofabused children) and more sentinels say they would not report neglect situations to CPS(an average of 28% versus 15% who would not report the abuse situations). Also, in both114 The SDS questionnaire asked sentinels to select all applicable responses from a list of alternatives,which included reporting the situation to CPS. Table 8–6 provides the percentages of sentinels who didnot choose the “report to CPS” option.115 The “Limitations” discussion in Chapter 7 (§7.2) is relevant here as well.8–41