In In the Interest of J.R.W., 428 Pa. Super. 597, 631 A.2d 1019, 1024 (Pa. Super. 1993), the Superior Court held that the factual findings from a dependency adjudication may serve as the basis for upholding a founded report of abuse. In J.R.W., a minor was adjudicated dependent after the trial court found the minor was unquestionably an abused "shaken baby" and had suffered life-threatening injuries while in the care and custody of her parents. Id. at 1021. On appeal, the parents did not contest the dependency finding; rather, they argued that the trial court erred in finding that they were responsible for the abuse of their child. Initially, the parents argued that the CPSL did not provide a means to adjudicate abuse. Alternatively, the parents argued that, if the Juvenile Act gives the trial court jurisdiction to make a finding of abuse, the identity of the abuser may not be established on a prima facie basis, but must be established by clear and convincing evidence. Id. The parents argued that the finding by the trial court that they abused their child could not establish a basis for a "founded" report of child abuse. Specifically, the parents argued that because Section 6381(d) of the CPSL, 23 Pa. C.S. 6381(d), "establishes that abuse may be proven by a standard of prima facie evidence, it is not applicable to a finding of abuse under the Juvenile Act, which must be proven with clear and convincing evidence." Id. The Superior Court held that it was clear that under the Juvenile Act, which incorporates the later additional legislation relating to child abuse provided under the CPSL, "the Juvenile Court has the jurisdiction and the right to adjudicate child abuse and when such an adjudication is made pursuant to the CPSL, a "founded report" may be lodged with the Department of Welfare determining that the parents are the persons responsible for the abuse." J.R.W., 631 A.2d at 1025.