Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Strategic Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Coalition flags data gaps, screening differences and receiving-center needs in strategic-plan review
Summary
During a March 17 meeting the CSEC Coalition reviewed its 57-page strategic plan and linked model protocol, discussed screening tools (INRIT as the quick screener and Clark County's SEE IT for detailed assessment), data-sharing shortfalls with UNLV, rural referral gaps and next steps to form subcommittees and pursue receiving centers and funding.
The CSEC Coalition spent the second half of its March 17 meeting reviewing the coalition’s strategic plan and the longer model coordinated response protocol, identifying implementation gaps and proposing next steps including subcommittees and greater coordination on data and receiving centers.
Why it matters: the plan and its associated protocol guide statewide efforts to identify and serve commercially sexually exploited children (CSEC). Coalition members said key components—screening consistency, data collection for reporting, training and funded receiving centers—remain incomplete and uneven across jurisdictions.
Members described current practice: jurisdictions use the INRIT (a quick screening tool mandated by the Division of Child and Family Services’ rules after 2023 legislation) for initial identification, then refer positive cases to specialized units. Stacy Scott of Clark County Family Services explained Clark County’s ARIS unit began using the SEE IT assessment tool in September 2025 for a deeper, category-based assessment that guides housing and care referrals. "We're not moving away from the INRIT," Stacy said; "it's the quick screener. Once it triggers, ARIS uses the SEE IT tool for a full assessment."
Panelists raised gaps in rural capacity: juvenile-justice speakers said some rural detention centers lack nearby placements (one cited the closest program two-and-a-half hours away), and reported inconsistent DCFS response times to referrals. Members urged tightening referral processes and better clinical backup for rural jurisdictions.
Data collection and reporting also drew concern. Speakers said UNLV’s Center for Crime Analysis team (Dr. Alexis Kennedy) has not received the expected jurisdictional data, and that current reporting duplicates information across agencies. Members recommended a data subcommittee to define core variables and to consider statutory or policy changes to make reporting practicable for agencies already managing multiple reporting obligations.
On prevention and training, participants reported piecemeal but valuable NGO-led work—school curricula and survivor-informed programs—while noting the need for statewide coordination and identified funding to scale evidence-based interventions.
Next steps: committee members agreed to circulate the full strategic plan and model protocol ahead of the May meeting and to propose subcommittees (data, strategic-plan review/implementation, receiving centers) so smaller teams can develop actionable recommendations before the full coalition reconvenes.
