Interviewing in Child and Adult Protective Services

Written By Nathan Meehan Ph.D.

Child Protective Service (CPS) and Adult Protective Services (APS) caseworkers operate in a uniquely difficult practice environment, and that reality carries over into the interviewing situations they face. CPS & APS caseworkers and investigators make decisions that can have long-term impacts for children and families. While these investigations are not driven solely by criminal elements, each conversation is still an investigative task carrying its own legal, ethical, and safety implications.  When interviewing alleged perpetrators, CPS & APS caseworkers must ensure they are gathering reliable information and accurately assessing safety and risk.

Investigative interviewing for CPS & APS caseworkers requires a nuanced blend of relationship-building, evidence-gathering, and structured communication. They may also have repeated contact with the same individual over a long period of time. 

The right approach depends on who you’re speaking with and what the goal of the interview is. For example, a CPS caseworker may need to comfort a frightened child, challenge an adult’s shifting account, or coordinate with partners who are using a more traditional law enforcement model. Each of these interviews has a different purpose, and often requires different tools to be successful. 

We use the term caseworkers to describe individuals with a variety of titles ranging from child protective services (CPS) investigators, social services assessment workers, family services specialists, adult protective services (APS), community-based case investigators, and any professional responsible for conducting investigative interviews in child or adult protective settings.

In this post, we will discuss the most common interview approaches used by CPS & APS workers, discuss some of the challenges with these types of interviews, and provide you with resources to learn more. 

Investigative Interviewing for CPS & APS Caseworkers 

Interview styles can be lumped into two broad categories: adversarial methods and information-gathering methods. Adversarial approaches primarily focus on obtaining confessions and are typically used by law enforcement when there is strong forensic evidence indicating a subject’s guilt. Information-gathering methods focus on gaining a comprehensive understanding of someone’s situation and involve open-ended questions to encourage the interviewee to explain the situation in their own words. 

CPS & APS interviews typically use information-gathering methods rather than adversarial methods, though the approach differs slightly depending on the situation. For example, interviews with children need developmentally appropriate non-leading forensic protocols, while adult-focused interviews emphasize structured questioning, evaluating explanations, and understanding timelines. In more serious abuse or neglect cases such as significant physical injury, sexual abuse, or imminent danger, CPS & APS staff often collaborate with law enforcement investigators or special victims units to conduct interviews.

For more information about the wide variety of interview techniques, check out our companion post: “12 Key Interview Techniques for Investigators.”

Rapport and Relationship Building

Rapport- and trust-based techniques are key information-gathering techniques used by CPS & APS caseworkers. Strong rapport increases the likelihood that individuals will feel comfortable sharing information, particularly when conversations involve fear, anger, or high levels of stress. The goal is to create an environment where people feel safe enough to talk while still understanding that the interview serves an investigative function. Rapport can also heighten a sense of responsibility or accountability, which may increase cooperation over the course of the interview.

Rapport-based techniques emphasize active listening, with a focus on understanding rather than confronting. Two well-established approaches that support rapport building in CPS & APS interviews are Motivational Interviewing and the “OARS” principles (Open-ended questions, Affirmations, Reflections, and Summaries).

Motivational Interviewing

Motivational Interviewing (MI) is designed to help people resolve internal contradictions in their own thinking. MI was first developed by substance abuse therapists and has since been deployed by experts in a variety of fields to facilitate behavioral change. 

There are five core principles of MI:

  • Acceptance: Treat the subject with unconditional respect, without judgment.

  • Autonomy: Create space for the subject to recognize for themselves why change might be important, rather than pressuring them.

  • Adaptation: Be flexible in your approach; move with the conversation instead of sticking to a rigid script.

  • Empathy: Genuinely try to understand the subject’s point of view.

  • Evocation: Draw out the subject’s own motivations and thoughts in their own words.

Open-Ended Questions, Affirmations, Reflections, and Summaries (OARS)

The four key communication skills used to demonstrate active and reflective listening in the MI approach are represented by the acronym "OARS”:

  • Open-ended questions invite the interviewee to share their story in their own words, which helps foster acceptance and trust.

  • Affirmations highlight the interviewee’s strengths, efforts, and past successes, helping to build hope and confidence in their ability to change.

  • Reflections involve repeating or rephrasing the interviewee’s statements to clarify meaning and show understanding.

  • Summaries tie together key themes from the conversation, including insights from past discussions, and help reinforce key points.

The OARS communication skills have been shown to be effective in building rapport and encouraging meaningful dialogue. For example, research shows that use of affirmations can help people open up about personal or sensitive topics. 

For caseworkers interviewing alleged adult perpetrators of child abuse or neglect, the goal is to glean a comprehensive understanding of the situation by exploring timelines, narratives, and explanations. These rapport-based techniques are essential for doing so effectively. 

For more information about communication skills, check out our companion post: “Enhancing Communication: The Power of Active Listening Skills.” 

Building Skills Beyond Rapport

Sometimes, interviewers will require additional tools beyond rapport-based techniques. For example, CPS workers often face challenges in obtaining complete and accurate accounts due to interviewees minimizing, deflecting, or withholding information. They may also be in a situation where they are collecting more information than they need on topics that are beyond the scope of their case. In these situations, interviewers benefit from structured frameworks that help them challenge lies, recognize when explanations fall apart, and press for clarity without escalating conflict.

Organizations across the country have been strengthening interview skills for CPS staff.  Motivational Interviewing (MI) and OARS (Open questions, Affirmations, Reflective listening, and Summaries) are essential and serve many of the day-to-day conversations that happen during assessments and when providing therapeutic support. However, there are other important considerations not covered by these techniques – specifically, using evidence to challenge potential deception and gain more information relevant to decision making.

Second Sight’s Interview Planning and Credibility Assessment in Child and Adult Protective Service Investigations program teaches a science-based approach to collecting more relevant information, assessing credibility, and enhancing investigative decision-making. Many interviewers reveal their evidence too early or too aggressively, which can lead clients to shut down or anchor themselves in a false narrative. In contrast, strategic disclosure techniques can help interviewers prompt more accurate accounts without confrontation. It is one of the most impactful skills for challenging deceptive or incomplete statements. 

This program is intended for use when interviewing alleged adult perpetrators. It is important to note that talking with children in abuse and neglect cases requires a different set of specialized skills that are not covered in this course. We always encourage agencies to ensure their staff are trained separately in these established child-focused models. Relatedly, in severe abuse and neglect cases involving physical injury, sexual abuse, or imminent harm, CPS workers frequently collaborate with police detectives or special victims units and follow protocols that are not covered in this program.

Safety Considerations

Interviewing alleged perpetrators frequently happens in homes, not offices. This puts CPS & APS caseworkers at an increased risk for experiencing threats, aggression, and physical violence.

Second Sight’s Situational Awareness for Safety, combined with Best Practices for Field Work Safety courses help workers be more aware of their environment and plan safe approaches, assess home environments, and maintain situational awareness during interviews. In addition to protecting workers, these skills can also improve the quality of the interview. A worker who feels safe and in control communicates more clearly, listens more effectively, and manages conflict with greater confidence.

You can learn more about these programs on our instructor-led courses page.

Next Steps 

CPS & APS work is demanding, emotionally complex, and deeply consequential. Evidence-based interviewing helps workers meet that challenge with clarity, confidence, and a stronger foundation for protecting and supporting families.

By blending the rapport-building strengths workers already have with structured investigative techniques, CPS & APS staff gain a wider range of tools to assess credibility, analyze explanations, and conduct interviews that stand up under scrutiny. Get in touch to learn more about our interview and comprehensive safety training. 

Get in Touch ▸
Nathan Meehan Ph.D.
Next

Empowering Prevention: Lessons Learned from Brown University Shooting