Pass 35 | Missouri, Montana and Nebraska Audit

All 50 state notices remain on publication hold.
This is independent public-interest research, not legal advice, an official agency form, attorney-reviewed material or certified legal guidance. A notice does not initiate an appeal, pause a deadline, prevent an investigation or override court authority. Follow the actual agency or court notice, verify the current rule and case posture, and preserve proof of receipt and filing.

Missouri — 60 days for administrative review; 30 days for direct judicial review

Preponderance-of-evidence (POE) finding and Central Registry

Missouri Children's Division investigative conclusions include unsubstantiated, unsubstantiated with preventive services indicated, preponderance of evidence (POE), child abuse/neglect present with perpetrator unidentified, court adjudicated, and other specified outcomes. A preliminary POE finding is not yet a final registry placement. The Division's current Child Welfare Manual (revision date August 28, 2026) explains that a POE finding becomes final for registry purposes if the alleged perpetrator does not timely appeal, elects direct judicial review, or the Child Abuse and Neglect Review Board (CANRB) upholds the finding.
Only the alleged perpetrator named in the investigation who is aggrieved by the POE determination has the statutory review right described in RSMo §210.152. The child or the child's parent, guardian or legal representative is notified that a review has been requested, but the statute does not give all family members the same appeal standing.
The person must choose one of two paths: administrative review by CANRB or direct judicial review in circuit court. The two paths cannot be pursued together for the same preliminary finding.
Administrative route: a written request must be made within 60 days after receipt of the notice/CS-21. Missouri DSS directs the request to DSS.CD.ADMINREVIEW@DSS.MO.GOV. The manual also gives the central office Administrative Review Team process. A timely request keeps the POE finding preliminary and prevents Central Registry placement for that finding unless and until CANRB sustains it.
Direct judicial route: the petition for direct judicial review must be filed in circuit court within 30 days after receipt of the preliminary finding notice. This election waives the administrative route. The agency manual says the person's name may be placed on the Central Registry upon filing the court petition; DSS must be served with the petition and summons under the applicable service rules.
Pending criminal charges: if charges arising from the same facts are pending, the person may request administrative review within the ordinary 60 days, or waive that review within the 60-day period and instead request administrative review within 60 days after the criminal case's final disposition or dismissal. Waiting does not keep the preliminary finding off the Registry: the current manual says it becomes final and the person is placed on the Registry after the initial 60 days unless later reversed.
After a CANRB decision upholding the finding, the alleged perpetrator may seek de novo judicial review within 60 days after notification of the Board's decision. De novo means the circuit court hears and judges the facts anew; the person may appear, present testimony and subpoena witnesses except the alleged victim or reporter. The Director of DSS must be personally served as specified by the manual and court rules.
CANRB review is independent. The Board sustains the Division's POE determination if supported by a preponderance of the evidence and not against the weight of the evidence. Hearings are closed except for the parties, their attorneys and persons providing testimony. A person is generally entitled to no more than one administrative review; findings already substantiated through specified court adjudications are not eligible for CANRB administrative review.
For a person who discovers a Central Registry placement but says the CS-21 notice was never received, the 2026 manual instructs staff to examine the record for proof of proper notice and refer the dispute to the central office Administrative Review Team. It describes case-by-case delayed notice and appeal rights where proper notice was not provided. This is not an automatic extension; the record and agency response matter.
Retention is not the same as the appeal deadline. RSMo §210.152 distinguishes investigation information retained in the Central Registry, insufficient-evidence records retained for five or ten years depending on the reporter, and other report categories. Family-assessment information is handled separately. Do not describe every report as a Registry listing.

Important Missouri source reconciliation

The current DSS Child Welfare Manual was revised August 28, 2026 and gives the practical CS-21 receipt trigger and current administrative email. The official statute also states the 60-day administrative-review right and 60-day post-CANRB judicial-review period. The current Missouri Code of State Regulations index reports revision date October 30, 2026; the available official Chapter 31 PDF has an April 30, 2023 footer. Confirm the actual CS-21 and any newer rule filing before relying on a deadline or address.

Missouri Revised Statutes §210.152 · Missouri Revised Statutes §210.153 · Missouri DSS Child Welfare Manual, §5.3 Investigations (Rev. 08/28/2026) · Missouri DSS — Child Abuse and Neglect Review Board · Missouri Secretary of State — 13 CSR 35-31 · Current Code of State Regulations index

Montana — 30 days after mailing; substantiated findings only

Fair-hearing right and exceptions

Montana's child-protection system uses multiple disposition terms, including substantiated, unsubstantiated and founded. The fair-hearing rule is specifically for a person who is the subject of a report determined to be substantiated. The rule expressly says there is no fair hearing under this route for reports determined unfounded, unsubstantiated or founded. These categories must not be treated as synonyms.
ARM 37.47.610(2) requires a written fair-hearing request to be sent within 30 days after the date the Department mailed its initial notice of substantiation. The trigger is the mailing date, not the date the recipient opens or receives the letter. The rule identifies the Department of Public Health and Human Services, Office of Legal Affairs, P.O. Box 4210, Helena, MT 59604 as the destination. Use the actual notice for any updated submission method or address.
After receiving the request, the Department first conducts an informal review limited to relevant case records/documentation and written material submitted by the subject. If the Department determines the substantiation is in error, it amends the finding to unfounded, unsubstantiated or founded and notifies the person. If it does not reverse, it refers the matter to the Office of Fair Hearings for scheduling.
The formal hearing follows the general Montana fair-hearing procedures in ARM 37.5.304, .307, .313, .322, .325, .328, .331, .334 and .337, subject to limits in ARM 37.47.615. A hearing officer evaluates the record and issues a proposed decision subject to the specified review process. Child-victim hearsay is admissible; the administrative law judge determines its weight using the child's attributes, the person relaying the statement, the statement itself and other reliability factors. Other hearsay follows Montana evidence rules and relevant case law.
The right is not available where the same facts and same child are the subject of a qualifying criminal conviction; where a district court has adjudicated the child a youth in need of care, or the parents stipulated to that status, based on the same facts and same alleged perpetrator; or where a court or administrative hearing officer has already adjudicated the factual findings at issue.
Montana's 2015 CFSD Policy Manual section 202-4 describes an internal substantiation review panel after the fair-hearing request. The panel includes the assigned specialist and supervisor, regional administrator, Office of Legal Affairs attorney/paralegal and, where necessary, a neutral CFSD staff member. It may reverse the substantiation before referral to the hearing officer. The same manual says pending related criminal charges or a district-court adjudication can hold the request pending, and a related conviction/adjudication may lead legal staff to deny the hearing request under the rule's exceptions.
ARM 37.47.613 states that the determination is initially shown as pending for 30 days from the initial notice. If no fair hearing is requested within that period, the system lists it as substantiated; if a timely request is made, it remains pending until administrative and judicial appeals are decided. The rule states substantiated reports are retained in the protective-services information system in perpetuity, subject to confidentiality rules; unsubstantiated reports are generally kept three years unless linked to another substantiated report.

Currentness warning

The rule text located for ARM 37.47.610 and .613 shows last amendments in 2015 and 2020 respectively. The Department's online CFSD manual section 202-4 is visibly a November 2015 document, despite being hosted on the current manual site. The 2025 Montana Code Annotated §41-3-202 was reviewed for investigation and record provisions, but it does not replace the specific 30-day appeal trigger in ARM 37.47.610. A current official replacement for the detailed 2015 procedure was not located in this pass. Treat the notice and any newer department direction as essential; the manual's panel description is version-qualified, not asserted as a newly revised 2026 policy.

ARM 37.47.610 — Right to Fair Hearing · ARM 37.47.613 — Listing of Determination · ARM 37.47.615 — Exceptions · Montana CFSD Policy Manual §202-4 (Rev. 11/2015) · Montana Code Annotated §41-3-202 (2025)

Nebraska — 14 calendar days from notice being sent; registry placement paused if timely appealed

2026 LB 668 changes and child-registry procedure

Nebraska was already included in the project's Pass 25 audit. This Pass 35 entry is a targeted 2026 update to account for LB 668, which became effective July 18, 2026, and to reconcile the earlier registry findings with the new pre-placement appeal law. This is not a claim that Nebraska is being researched for the first time.
The child Central Registry of Child Protection Cases contains records of reports opened for investigation and classified as court substantiated or agency substantiated under §28-720. The 2026 amendments require notice before a subject's name is entered, and expressly prohibit entry until the subject has been notified of the right to contest the determination.
Under §28-713.01, the notice for a person proposed for registry placement must state the nature and classification of the report and the right to appeal under the Administrative Procedure Act. The notice may be sent by certified mail with return receipt requested or first-class mail to the last-known address.
The appeal must be requested within 14 calendar days after the date the Department's determination notice is sent. This is a send-date trigger, not 14 days after receipt. The statute separately requires that the notice be sent at least 14 days before the proposed registry-entry date. The actual notice should be retained, including its date and mailing evidence.
If a proper, timely appeal is requested, the subject is not entered on the child Central Registry until the Department issues a final order. If no timely appeal is requested, the agency may proceed with entry after the statutory notice period. Nebraska DHHS's public Central Registry guidance confirms the 14-calendar-day deadline and says the Hearing Office conducts the appeal hearing and issues a final decision.
Section 28-720 distinguishes three registry classifications: court substantiated (qualifying criminal judgment or juvenile-court adjudication), court pending (a qualifying criminal or juvenile petition is pending), and agency substantiated (the Department's investigation supports the determination by a preponderance of the evidence). These categories have different legal predicates; a court-pending classification is not the same as a final agency-substantiated finding.
For a person already entered, §28-723 allows a request at any time after completion of the investigation to amend, expunge identifying information, or remove the record from the child Central Registry. If DHHS refuses or fails to act within 30 days, the person has a right to an internal fair hearing to determine whether the record is inaccurate or maintained inconsistently with the Child Protection and Family Safety Act. The Department bears the burden of proving accuracy and consistency. A written decision is due at the hearing or within 30 days after it; the decision may be appealed under the Administrative Procedure Act.
There is a special protection for minors aged 12 to under 19 who are placed on the registry. Under §28-721, DHHS must conduct a mandatory expungement hearing within 60 days after the minor receives the registry notice, unless the minor and the specified parent/guardian/attorney representative return a waiver within 30 days after receipt. If the young person remains listed, a second mandatory hearing is required within 60 days after the person's 19th birthday unless properly waived. DHHS cannot sign the waiver as guardian for a child in its custody.
Do not confuse the child-registry appeal process with the separate vulnerable-adult registry provisions in §28-374.01. The latter section has similar 14-day language but governs vulnerable-adult abuse/neglect/exploitation. This audit's child-welfare findings rely on §§28-713.01, 28-718, 28-720, 28-721 and 28-723.

Relationship to the earlier Pass 25 audit

Pass 25 correctly identified a 14-calendar-day notice-based registry challenge and the special expungement hearing for minors. LB 668 is now in force and adds the express pre-entry notice and stay-pending-final-order framework. The prior summary should be read together with this update; do not rely on older policy wording that describes registry placement without the 2026 notice-and-appeal step.

Nebraska Revised Statutes §28-713.01 (as amended by LB 668) · §28-718 — Child Protection Central Registry · §28-720 — Registry classifications · §28-721 — Mandatory expungement hearing · §28-723 — Amend, expunge or remove; fair hearing · Nebraska DHHS — Central Registry and Placement Appeals · LB 668, 2026 Session Laws

Cross-state findings

Missouri: 60 days from receipt of CS-21 for administrative review; 30 days from receipt for direct judicial review; 60 days after CANRB decision for de novo judicial review. The administrative and direct judicial routes are mutually exclusive. Pending criminal charges create a separate waiver-and-later-review option, but registry placement may occur while waiting.
Montana: 30 days from the date of mailing the initial substantiation notice. A timely request triggers informal review and, if not reversed, a formal fair hearing. Exact same-fact court/conviction exceptions apply. Current detailed agency manual located is dated 2015.
Nebraska: 14 calendar days from the date the notice is sent to appeal before child-registry placement. Timely appeal keeps the name off the Registry until final order. Separate amendment/expungement review and mandatory minor expungement hearings continue after placement.
Trigger dates are not interchangeable: Missouri uses receipt, Montana uses mailing date, and Nebraska uses date notice is sent. Each notice must be read for the exact applicable action and trigger.

Scope and release decision

This pass focused on finding categories, Central Registry consequences, eligibility, appeal paths, deadlines and triggers, court/criminal-case interaction, and Nebraska's 2026 statutory changes. It did not complete a full audit of investigation start/completion, interviews, home entry, emergency removal, every records-access right, retention/expungement across all categories or every local practice. Montana's currentness gap and Missouri's regulation/manual alignment remain flagged for further source verification.

Release decision: HOLD. No state is cleared by this pass. All 50 state notices remain research drafts. No attorney review, legal certification or case-specific legal suitability is claimed. Do not change the PDFs based solely on this targeted research pass.

← Pass 34 audit · Pass 33 audit · Pass 25 — Nebraska original audit · Project homepage