SECTION 340:75-3-440. Multidisciplinary child abuse team (MDT)

(a)   Multidisciplinary child abuse team MDT purpose. It is the primary responsibility of the district attorney (DA) to develop an MDT in the DA's county or contiguous group of counties, per Section 1-9-102 of Title 10A of the Oklahoma Statutes (10A O.S. § 1-9-102). The MDT approach is:

(1)   used whenever feasible for investigations and service planning involving cases of child sexual abuse, serious physical abuse, and serious neglect;

(2)   used to enhance the investigative process and maximize services provided to the affected children and families; and

(3)   not required when there is reasonable cause to believe a delay in investigation or interview of a child victim could place the child at risk of harm or threatened harm.

(b)   MDT members. The MDT members include, but are not limited to:

(1)   mental health professionals;

(2)   law enforcement;

(3)   medical personnel;

(4)   Oklahoma Department of Human Services (DHS) Child Welfare Services (CWS) personnel;

(5)   MDT coordinators or child advocacy centers personnel; and

(6)   the county DA or assistant DA.

(c)   MDT functions. The MDT function is dependent upon available resources and includes, but is not limited to:

(1)   joint investigations of child abuse reports by law enforcement and CWS personnel whenever possible;

(2)   development of written protocol for investigations and for interviewing children;

(3)   identification, improvement, and delivery of services to the child victim and the child's family;

(4)   training in the multidisciplinary team approach; and

(5)   formalized case reviews.

(d)   Child abuse multidisciplinary team account (CAMA). Monies appropriated and funds collected from criminal cases filed in Oklahoma district courts are deposited with DHS and designated as CAMA monies, per 10A O.S. §§ 1-9-103 and 1-9-104.

(1)   DHS distributes CAMA monies to functioning freestanding MDTs approved by the Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth (OCCY) and to child advocacy centers (CACs) accredited by the National Children's Alliance (NCA).

(2)   CAMA monies are:

(A)   provided for the maintenance of eligible MDTs and CACs;

(B)   distributed each calendar year to MDTs and CACs by a weighted formula;

(C)   made available to:

(i)   one functioning MDT per county;

(ii)   one hospital team; and

(iii)   one accredited CAC per DA's district.

(3)   After the NCA's five-year accreditation, the CAC must secure a third-year interim review to continue eligibility for CAMA monies.

(A)   The Children's Advocacy Centers of Oklahoma, Inc. (CACO) administers the review by procuring an NCA site reviewer who resides outside of Oklahoma and has no conflict of interest. The CAC submits to the reviewer, 60 calendar days prior to the on-site review:

(i)   the current interagency agreement;

(ii)   the current MDT Protocol;

(iii)   the current financial audit;

(iv)   the current program budget;

(v)   proof of general and professional liability coverage for the CAC board of directors and officers;

(vi)   the Internal Revenue Service letter of 501(c)(3) status or government affiliation statement letter;

(vii)   the demographic information for the community;

(viii)   statistical data; and

(ix)   NCA accreditation standards certifying documents.

(B)   The site reviewer makes one half-day on-site visit to the CAC and administers the review in accordance with the NCA accreditation process.

(C)   The CAC demonstrates performance of the essential components of the NCA accreditation process with full cooperation and availability of requested personnel.

(4)   Failure of the third-year review requires a fourth-year review, but does not make the CAC ineligible for CAMA monies. If the CAC fails the fourth-year review:

(A)   the CAC may submit, within 10 business days from the site reviewer's written notice of failure:

(i)   a written request for further review by the CACO board of directors; and

(ii)   documents pertaining only to the CAC's understanding of the compliance issues. Information for the purposes of improvement or change of practice is not considered; and

(B)   the CACO board of directors secures three additional NCA site reviewers from outside of Oklahoma to review the written findings.

(5)   When the review failure is upheld or when the CAC does not request further review of a failure notice, the CAC is no longer eligible for CAMA monies until reaccredited by the NCA.

[Source: Amended and renumbered from 340:75-3-8.4 at 30 Ok Reg 389, eff 7-1-13; Amended at 32 Ok Reg 1904, eff 9-15-15]