While we have previously discussed the extent of publicity in a family court proceeding, it is important to note that registry cases are an entirely different area of law. Consequently, different rules apply to the findings, processes, and disclosure obligations, including the rules governing publication of registry findings and records from the administrative proceedings.

A finding of either child or adult abuse is not immediately entered onto the registry following a report. Rather, there is a multi-step process in the administrative court system which will ultimately determine whether a name is placed on the Adult Protective Services (APS) registry or Department of Child Safety (DCS) registry.

Initial Notification/Investigation: 

The respective agency first sends the individual an “Initial Notification Letter” via first class mail. This letter informs the person of the agency’s proposed finding of child abuse or neglect and their right to appeal the agency’s proposed finding [1]. This initial notification of an APS or DCS investigation will only be disclosed to the individual being investigated, the parent (if the investigation involves a child), and sometimes the reporting source (i.e., the person who called the report into the hotline to initiate the investigation). The investigative records, including the proposed finding, are not generally available to the general public. 

Administrative Appeal Hearing: 

When a person under investigation appeals from a proposed registry finding, they are usually entitled to a hearing. The appeal hearing takes place in administrative court (at the Office of Administrative Hearings or “OAH”). Unlike most legal proceedings, cases involving the APS registry or DCS registry are not open to the public. Because the testimony and evidence concern a child or vulnerable adult, attendance is typically limited only to parties to the case, witnesses who will testify, and staff of the investigating agency. The attendees are instructed not to disclose details about what is discussed in the hearing. 

Appeals from Final Agency Decision:

After the OAH hearing and the agency’s final decision, an appeal may be taken to the Lower Court of Appeals Division of the Superior Court of Arizona. These appeals, which are formally called “Judicial Review of Administrative Decision” actions (or “JRAD”), become part of the court’s record and are accessible to the public. When filing documents in a JRAD action, it is important to remember to caption the filings appropriately: the appellant should only use their first name and last initial to partially protect their identity. References to vulnerable adults or children in these filings should be given using pseudonyms or initials, and sensitive documents that were part of the agency record should be redacted or designated confidential. These practices are not perfect—a sufficiently motivated investigator can probably still determine who the case is about—but they provide some discretion.

Ultimate Finding:

Once a finding is substantiated and the appeal is denied, it will be entered on the applicable registry. The DCS central registry is quasi-confidential—it can only be accessed by DCS and law enforcement or queried for fingerprint clearance and adoptions. The general public cannot search the registry. 

Unlike the DCS registry, the APS registry is publicly searchable and able to be accessed by anyone online. Both registries require that once an individual has a substantiated finding, they must remain on the registry for 25 years [2].

Why Appeal the Finding?

Because the APS registry, and not the DCS, is publicly searchable, there is a lower chance that the general public will know about a DCS registry finding. This difference in the public status of a registry substantiation may be important to the decision whether to pursue an appeal. However, even if there is a lower chance that the public will know about registry status, a registry finding may still show up on background checks or future investigations. This is especially significant in applying to caregiver jobs or jobs requiring fingerprint clearance. For example, nurses, teachers, and other care providers not only have their personal reputation on the line but also their ability to earn a livelihood. Deciding whether—and to what extent—to challenge an agency decision involves weighing numerous complex variables, not the least of which is privacy. Before that decision can be made, it is best to consult with an attorney experienced with these kinds of agency actions to help you understand your options and the potential consequences of the finding.

[1] Arizona Administrative Code § 21-1-501.

[2] Currently, legislation is in place to enact a tiered system. This will likely significantly shorten the time individuals remain on the registry, but regulations will not be in effect until late-2025.

Markus Risinger is an attorney at Woodnick Law, PLLC and MLS faculty associate teaching administrative regulation at the ASU Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law.