CWDS / Child Welfare Digital Services

Intake BreakoutQuarterly Stakeholder Forum

April 11, 2017

Agenda• Goals: Why we are building this service• Example of agile• Past: Initial research and product plan• Present: Demo of current functionality• Usability Testing• Lessons Learned• Future: Product Roadmap

But first, why are we building this service?

Goals

WeaknessesStrengths

Reduce recurring abuse

More timely response

Increase use of appropriate services

• Reduce meaningless and corrupt data

• Display involvement history

• Efficient referral creation• Flexible workflow• Easier to read referrals

• Record preventative services• Display history of services

• Improved search to reduce dupes

• Simpler data entry for better data capture

• Complete referral on one page

• Simpler person search to reduce time spent

• Ability to save report without creating referral (“screening”)

Service Impact Features to deliver valueChild Welfare Goals

Why a single page screening?

Why record all screenings?

Why a simple person search?

And now, a brief example

And now, a brief example of a government digital service

And now, a brief example of how a government digital service grows over time.

Past

Where we left off…Features delivered• Search for people

Planned next• Screening features• Continuing design work

• New features• Visual layout

Research completed• Discovery phase for Hotline

Planned next• Usability Testing

• History of Involvement• Adding people

• Refining the product roadmap

Present

RECEIVEREPORT

FIND PEOPLE REFINE INFORMATION EVALUATE DETERMINE RESPONSE APPROVAL

USERJOURNEY

FEATURES • Screener Information

• Screener Narrative

• Allegations• Incident

Information

• Person Demographics

• Reporting Party

• Decision and Response Time

• Cross Report

• Submit a Referral

• Sandbox

• Person Search

Hotline: Initial Features

READY INSANDBOX

DELIVERED TOPRODUCTION

STATUS

(COUNTY REPS)

READY INSANDBOX

READY INSANDBOX

READY INSANDBOX

READY INSANDBOX

DEVELOPMENTIN PROGRESS

What the heck is a “Sandbox”

“Sandbox” with mock dataWe produced a set of realistic mock data that users can interact with as they explore functionality in the Sandbox.

Why?• No risk of violating privacy because of PII and PHI in real data• Reproducible code that can be used for similar needs in the future• Get valuable feedback from users on the features in Sandbox

Demo

Design ProgressDemo

We are delivering visual design improvements in small steps to start validating with users early in the process.

Usability TestingProgress & Results

Where we left offProgress:• Discovery done• Design begins• Validation means testing

Usability Testing: What is it?• Provide another way of observing

• Collects data used in shaping design(quantitative + qualitative)

• Validates design

What it is not• A development block

• An interferrance with day-to day lives of participants

• Other types of testing• County Test Workshops• Performance Testing• Acceptance Testing

What it is not

VS.

Demo

Results: History of Involvement• Preferred labeling and familiarity on

this design (10/12 participants - 83%)

• Thought having the office is important (4/12 participants - 33%)

• Liked how allegations are shown with the deposition (6/12 participants - 50%)

Lessons Learned

Communication• Communication with users and stakeholders:

• The fluidity of the project and the product plan• The right methods and the right level of detail

Expand wiki contentDemo

• Easier to navigate for readers from outside the project• Share our process• Single hub for all our work and documentation:

• Design mock-ups and prototypes• Engineering FAQ• Application specs and configuration• Research findings• Data models • Product strategy

Feedback Schedule• Usability Testing

• Scheduling far enough ahead while still allowing flexibility• Channeling feedback Sandbox

Feedback ScheduleWe are scheduling site visits through July, to include training core county representatives in usability testing.

Why?• Expand our reach and data• Increase research skills in the organization• More frequent and regular usability testing

Delivery Speed• Uneven velocity

• Coordinating with other technical teams• Working within and around the limits of the legacy

Enhanced APIsThe Intake Development team is taking on the work to build the new system database and the APIs to connect to it.

Why?• Let TPT.1 focus on the work to connect to legacy and external systems• Cut out redundant work of building and replacing mock APIs• Reduce the effort to coordinate with TPT.1• Deliver working features to users sooner

NewDatabase

CMS/CWSDatabase

APIs

APIs

“DB2”

“Postgres”

Intake CWS/CMS

Intake Dev Team Technical Platform TeamCMS!

NEW!

NewDatabase

CMS/CWSDatabase

APIs

APIs

“DB2”

“Postgres”

Intake CWS/CMS

Intake Dev Team Technical Platform TeamCMS!

NEW!

Future

What’s coming next sprint (or two)?New Features: • History of Involvement• Expand on a person’s

demographics• Worker Safety Alerts

Team progress:• Saving a referral to legacy • Designs for supervisor review

Why history of involvement?

Reduce unnecessary investigations

Working between two systemsThe Intake Development and Technical Platform teams are coordinating how the new and old systems share information.

Why?• Minimize the gaps when not all workers are fully on the new system yet• Start working now for the eventual data conversion • Keep valuable historical data while gathering new data in the most

modern and compliant way possible

NewDatabase

CMS/CWSDatabase

APIs

APIs

CMS!NEW!

“DB2”

“Postgres”

Intake CWS/CMS

RECEIVEREPORT

FIND PEOPLE REFINE INFORMATION EVALUATE DETERMINE RESPONSE APPROVAL

USERJOURNEY

INITIALFEATURES

• Screener Information

• Screener Narrative

• Allegations• Incident

Information

• Person Demographics

• Reporting Party

• Decision and Response Time

• Cross Report

• Submit a Referral

• Person Search

Intake Hotline product roadmap

• Sandbox

READY FORSANDBOX

DELIVERED TOPRODUCTION

STATUS

(COUNTY REPS)

READY FORSANDBOX

READY FORSANDBOX

READY FORSANDBOX

READY FORSANDBOX

DEVELOPMENTIN PROGRESS

RECEIVEREPORT

FIND PEOPLE REFINE INFORMATION EVALUATE DETERMINE RESPONSE APPROVAL

USERJOURNEY

INITIALFEATURES

• Screener Information

• Screener Narrative

• Allegations• Incident

Information

• Person Demographics

• Reporting Party

• Decision and Response Time

• Cross Report

• Submit a Referral

• Person Search

Intake Hotline product roadmap

WHAT’S NEXT

• Worker Safety Alerts

• Pop-up Narrative

• History of Involvement

• Link to SDM

• Expanded Demographics

• Relationships

• Link screening to existing work

• Supervisor Review

• Save Referral to Legacy

• Search by Address

• Address validation

RECEIVEREPORT

FIND PEOPLE REFINE INFORMATION EVALUATE DETERMINE RESPONSE APPROVAL

USERJOURNEY

INITIALFEATURES

• Screener Information

• Screener Narrative

• Allegations• Incident

Information

• Person Demographics

• Reporting Party

• Decision and Response Time

• Cross Report

• Submit a Referral

• Person Search

Intake Hotline product roadmap

WHAT’S NEXT

• Worker Safety Alerts

• Pop-up Narrative

• History of Involvement

• Link to SDM

• Expanded Demographics

• Relationships

• Link screening to existing work

• Supervisor Review

• Save Referral to Legacy

• Search by Address

• Address validation

AND THEN WHAT?

• Upload files• Auto-fill basic

info• Pull info from

the Narrative

• Prioritize results by relationships

• Add photos of people

• ICWA• Custody

arrangements• Child location• Relationship

Genogram

• Pull old case/ referral from legacy

• SDM Integration

• Notify other workers

• Notify mandated reporters

• Generate SCAR, etc.

• Duplicate detection

• Caseload dashboard w/ notifications

Thank you

Feature(how)

Impact(what)

Actor(who)Goal

Reduce re-occurring

maltreatment

Screeners See less corrupt and meaningless data Person search to reduce creation of duplicates

Simplified data entry to encourage better data practices

History of Involvement summary view to aid decision making

Have more knowledge of a person’s past involvements with CWS

Ability to record non-referral decisions and submit

Investigators Have more knowledge of past actions taken by CWS

Feature(how)

Impact(what)

Actor(who)Goal

More timely initial contacts

Screeners Can create referrals and enter info more easily

Complete referral on one page

Simplified person search to speed up data entry

History of Involvement summary to aid decision making

Can enter most appropriate response time

Allow RT override to better reflect reality

SDM integrationInvestigators

Can work simultaneously while causing less “optimistic concurrency”

Can skim referrals more easily in IR situations

Can access more readable referrals to make conferencing easier

Feature(how)

Impact(what)

Actor(who)Goal

Increase use of appropriate services

Screeners Can contact the appropriate services/workers

Person search to reduce creation of duplicates

Simplified data entry to encourage better data practices

History of Involvement summary view to aid decision making

Can record preventative servicesAbility to record non-referral decisions

and submit

Investigators

Can see past history of services offered family

Evaluate out fewer referrals for investigation

History of Involvement summary view to aid decision making