Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Protection Communications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
UK‑based team demonstrates CARE/Vimes platform to Louisiana committee, cites Georgia pilot reductions in investigations
Summary
Vimes representatives showed a CARE (Child at Risk Evaluation) platform that standardizes law‑enforcement risk assessments and speeds secure notifications to MDT partners. Presenters cited Georgia pilot data (reduced law‑enforcement child‑fatality investigations, faster forensic interviews) and answered questions about integration, procurement and data sources.
Saul Glick and Kevin, representing the Vimes/CARE initiative, briefed the Senate Health & Welfare Committee on April 21 on a web‑based platform intended to speed secure communication among law enforcement, child advocacy centers (CACs), schools and child welfare agencies.
Glick, a former police investigator who said he later worked at Harvard, described CARE (Child at Risk Evaluation) as a standardized digital risk assessment that sends immediate notifications to local multi‑disciplinary team (MDT) partners and generates enriched referrals to the state clearinghouse. Kevin, a technologist who said he worked at Stanford and Amazon, described integrations with record‑management systems and features such as read receipts, message threads, de‑identified genograms and automated referral generation.
The presenters cited data from a Georgia rollout and local pilot sites: reduced law‑enforcement child fatality investigations (presenters reported a 70% decrease in one pilot), faster initiation of forensic interviews (from roughly 48 days to as few as 3), and increases in social‑work referrals and forensic interviews in pilot counties. They said the Georgia rollout was supported by line items in state budgets and interagency MOUs.
Committee members probed sources and definitions. Glick said the figures derive from CDC WONDER, Georgia child‑maltreatment reports and law‑enforcement record‑management system analyses; he cautioned that some results use proxy measures (law‑enforcement fatality investigations) because access to child‑welfare databases can be limited. Senators asked about procurement, DCFS integration, accountability features and whether Louisiana's DCFS/MDT partners would participate. Presenters said Vimes works with associations (chiefs of police, CACs) to pilot and integrate systems and offered to provide documentation and demonstrations to LDH and DCFS staff.
Several senators and advocates praised the concept but sought clarity on data, safeguards and procurement rules. The committee did not take immediate procurement action; members asked for follow‑up and technical briefings to determine whether and how the technology could be piloted in Louisiana.
