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

2.  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. 3 Major Areas of Child Abuse PreventionInvestigations / AssessmentsTreatment

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

5. Child Advocacy Centers DHS Law Enforcement DA Medical & Mental Health CAC

6. Investigations Services by Protocol Medical Forensic Interviews Facility CAC Services MDT Victim Advocacy Case Reviews 3 PP

7. Calendar Year 2010: 5881Children Served 72% Sexual Abuse

8. January to June 2011 2917 Children Served 73% Sexual Abuse

9. National Children's Alliance  Non Profit – Washington DC  Established 1985  DOJ Recognizes NCA National Organization in this Field

10.  NCA Accreditation  Well Established  High Standards  Essential and Rated Criteria  5 Year Cycle  2010 New Standards Across the State Updated Services

11. 2010 New Standards  Initial Trainings  Peer Reviews  Ongoing Training  Evidence Based – Research Documentation Library National Children’s Advocacy Center Huntsville Alabama

12. 10 Component Accreditation Model  Organization Capacity  MDT  Cultural Competency / Diversity  Medical  Mental Health  Forensic Interviewing  Case Review  Case Tracking  Facility  Victim Advocacy

13. 3 rd Year State Review  Essential NCA Accreditation Components  NCA Site Reviewer  Guidance on Rated Criteria –  Re- Accreditation Review – Year 5

14. Our Great State!!  20 Accredited CAC  12 First Contract - 2001  Per Capita Oklahoma has the Highest Number of CAC in the Nation  9th Overall  8 CAC Growth

15. Private / Public Partnerships  50% CAMA to 50% Private Funding  Not all CAC – Seek out Private Funds  For Those That Do  Good Investment !!!

16. Washington County  2011 – Great Job Re-Acredication  Technical Assistance Center

17. Accreditation Components

18. Facility – Jay, Oklahoma

20. Organizational Capacity  Board of Director’s  District Attorney's Office  Policy / Procedures  Annual Audits of Each Center  Meeting Routine

21. Victim Advocacy  New Standards 2010  Very Detailed on Supporting the Child And Non – Offending Care Givers Through the Process – System – Child Feelings / Actions

22. 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

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

24. Switch Gears

25. WHY – CAMA Funding PAST PRESENT FUTURE

26. Protecting Oklahoma’s Children-- Who is Responsible Study 1988 - 1989  Past  Ryan Luke to Kelsey Briggs  Ten Years Between

27. Present Joint Outcome Decision Process CAC/MDT Child

28. *

29. Future  Build Upon the Current CAC and FSMDT  Create a Check and Balance System Securing a System Where Joint Investigative Services are Routinely Conducted

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