Structured Decision Making

No. SDM is a system of several distinct tools, each tied to a specific decision point in the child-welfare case process — a screening tool, a safety assessment, an actuarial risk assessment, a family needs-and-strengths assessment, and a reassessment tool. Their purpose is to make the recurring decisions across a case consistent and research-informed. Using one tool in isolation misses the point of the system, which is structured support across the whole continuum.

It is designed to structure and support judgment, not eliminate it. The tools standardize what is asked and how information is combined, reducing arbitrary variation, but workers still gather information, exercise discretion within the structure, and can override actuarial classifications with documented reasons. The intent is a disciplined partnership between validated tools and professional reasoning, an idea Shlonsky and Wagner framed as integrating actuarial assessment with clinical judgment in an evidence-based practice framework.

Debate centers on standardization versus discretion and, increasingly, on equity. Because the actuarial risk components draw on factors correlated with poverty and prior system contact — which correlate with race — critics warn that SDM and its predictive-analytics descendants can reproduce or amplify racial disproportionality. Proponents counter that structured, validated tools are more consistent and less biased than unaided judgment. Responsible use therefore pairs the system with local validation and ongoing equity monitoring.