Kansas committee hears DCF data on mandatory reporting; officials describe 70,940 reports and training program

A Kansas House committee held an informational briefing on mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect, hearing that the Department for Children and Families (DCF) received 70,940 reports in the most recent year and that roughly two-thirds of those reports were received through DCF’s online portal.

Deputy Secretary Tonya Keyes of the Department for Children and Families told the committee that about two-thirds of the nearly 71,000 reports were submitted online, roughly one-third by telephone, and about 5% by fax. “We received last year about 70,000 reports,” Keyes said, later specifying the figure as 70,940. She said about 68% of reports came from mandated reporters and that education-related reporters represented the largest share within that group.

The committee’s overview placed several numbers and explanations up front: Keyes said DCF assigns roughly half of incoming reports for follow-up in the field (the committee was given an assigned-report count of about 35,253). Of assigned reports, DCF staff told members about the casework outcomes and processes: roughly three-quarters of assigned reports were forwarded for an investigation or assessment, and about 2,500 children entered foster care in the year covered by the presentation.

Why it matters: Committee members and witnesses framed the volume, assignment rates and the low proportion of substantiated findings as central to policy questions. Deputy Secretary Keyes described how reports move from intake to local offices, how the Kansas Protection Report Center operates 24/7, and how the agency uses a verification number to confirm to mandated reporters that a submission was received.

Officials described who the law lists as mandated reporters and how the state supports them. Keyes summarized the groups the statute names: "persons providing medical care or treatment, those licensed to provide mental health services, teachers, school administrators, other educators as specified in the law, persons licensed by KDHE who are working in childcare centers ... emergency personnel, firefighters" and others. She said DCF categorizes reporters when an online form or a follow-up call identifies their role; in the DCF data presented, 42% of mandated-reporter notifications came from education-related reporters, about 13% from law enforcement and legal professionals, and roughly 16% from an "other" category (including pastors, landlords and business owners).

The committee heard how DCF and a nonprofit partner provide training. Keyes said DCF contracts with Kansas Children’s Service League (KCSL) for training and information; she said the contract is "a little over $200,000 a year" and that the funds come from federal adoption incentive funds. KCSL’s Gail Cozad told the committee that, in state fiscal year 2024, KCSL provided roughly 98 trainings attended by more than 3,000 people and that the core topics include risk and protective factors, definitions and how and when to report.

Officials and witnesses addressed confidentiality, anonymity and statutory protections. Natalie, a committee research staffer, summarized national comparisons from a Child Welfare Information Gateway report, noting that in some jurisdictions mandatory reporters must provide their name and contact information at the time of report while reporter identities are protected from disclosure to alleged perpetrators in many states. Keyes pointed committee members to the state code that governs confidentiality of reporter information and said Kansas’s relevant provisions are found in state child-care code (she cited the statutory section at the hearing).

Committee members pressed DCF on how many calls lead to field work and why so many reports result in unsubstantiated findings. Keyes said about 35,253 reports were assigned for local follow-up; staff explained that a report may not be assigned because it is a duplicate, because the matter was already assessed, or because it does not meet statutory definitions. Of reports assigned for assessment or investigation, the department said 94% of findings were unsubstantiated and about 6% substantiated; DCF staff emphasized that “unsubstantiated” does not always mean no family needs — they said families may be connected to services even when an allegation is unsubstantiated.

The committee also discussed a statutory requirement for visual observation during investigations. A staff speaker who reviewed the statute read language from KSA 38-22-26 and noted: “as part of any investigation conducted pursuant to this section, investigation shall visually observe the child who is the alleged victim of abuse or neglect.” The staff explanation pointed to questions about how quickly a visual observation must occur; law enforcement representatives and members said in practice agencies generally aim for a prompt response, often within 24 hours, depending on circumstances.

Mandated reporters’ concerns and penalties were raised. Gail Cozad of Kansas Children’s Service League reminded members that the current statute establishes criminal penalties for failure to report; she said the statute describes failure to report as a class B misdemeanor, “which could result in a thousand dollar fine or up to 6 months in jail,” and she said that the penalty informs reporters’ decisions to file. Several committee members described the tension mandated reporters feel between the duty to report and worry about professional consequences or about causing unnecessary trauma to families.

A parent who testified, Sarah Wasilewski, described her experience with child welfare systems and urged lawmakers to consider more services and supports that could keep families intact before removal occurs. Her remarks emphasized the personal and logistical burdens that families face when children are placed into care and the time demands of treatment, court and required services.

What the committee did not do: the session was informational; there were no formal votes or motions recorded in the hearing. Members and witnesses discussed existing statutes and an existing bill referenced in committee conversation about clergy reporting, but the committee took no legislative action during the hearing.

Looking ahead: committee members asked DCF for more disaggregated data — for example, incident-level counts that would identify duplicate reports — and asked for lists of states with different anonymity or reporter-identity rules. DCF staff said they could provide more data on request and that KCSL’s training materials are available for districts and agencies that request sessions.

Ending note: the department reiterated that intake begins every protection pathway and that the Protection Report Center and local child protection specialists handle triage and field responses under existing statute and policy.