This is a response to the document by Hughes et al. in this issue that offers a critique of the status of differential response (DR). We find the document to be helpful in intent, but do not find that it reflects scientifically sound methods, and contains many mischaracterizations of the status, impetus, research, and evaluation of DR to date. We…

This article is an invited commentary and analysis of the authors' completed systematic evaluation of Child Protective Services (CPS) differential response (DR) models. I write this commentary based on 25 years of public child welfare experience followed by 13 years as a social work professor and researcher. In their review of DR, the…

This reaction article highlights areas of agreement and disagreement with the study conducted by Hughes, Rycus, Saunders-Adams, Hughes, and Hughes on the current state of research and practice in differential response (DR). Overall, we agree with several of the arguments put forth by Hughes et al. regarding the limitations of DR research and the…

In this article, the authors responded to nine commentaries by 17 contributors to their article, "Issues in Differential Response." The authors found that a majority of the respondents agreed with the major conclusions of "Issues in Differential Response." However, there were varying degrees of disagreement regarding the…

Differential response (DR), also referred to as alternative response (AR), family assessment response (FAR), or multiple track response, was developed to incorporate family-centered, strengths-based practices into child protective services (CPS), primarily by diverting lower risk families into an assessment track rather than requiring the…