Upload
hashim
View
22
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Connecting the Dots: Workforce Selection & Child Welfare Outcomes. Nancy McDaniel, MPA Butler Institute for Families, University of Denver [email protected] Presented at the 2010 Florida Coalition for Children Annual Conference. It’s not a straight line . . . - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Nancy McDaniel, MPAButler Institute for Families, University of [email protected]
Presented at the 2010 Florida Coalition for Children Annual Conference
Connecting the Dots:
Workforce Selection & Child Welfare Outcomes
It’s not a straight line . . .
But a Long and Winding Road...
Workforce Selection
Child Welfare Outcomes
2
Retention
Turnover
Supervision
Task Assistance
Social & Emotional Support
Interpersonal Interaction
Personal Factors• Commitment to Child
Welfare/Agency• Self-Efficacy• Low-level of emotional
exhaustion• Job Satisfaction
Organizational
Factors• Supervisory &
co-worker support• Salary & benefits Burnout
Title IV-E Educatio
n Child Welfare
Outcomes
Recruitment-Selection
• Competency Based• Realistic Job Preview (RJP)
3
Overview of Presentation:
Workforce and Child Welfare Outcomes
Multiple studies reflect the complexity:
Workforce Factors linked to Child Welfare Outcomes
AND Workforce Factors linked to Retention
and Turnover of Child Welfare Staff4
Workforce Factors: Impact of Turnover on Child Welfare
Outcomes
Delay in timeliness of investigations
Frequency of worker visits with children, hampering attainment of safety and permanency goals
GAO, 2003
Large caseloads and worker turnover linked to:
5
Workforce Factors: Impact of Turnover on Child Welfare
Outcomes
High functioning agencies had lowest turnover (9%), best paid staff, best compliance with practice standards, and lowest rates of re-abuse
Lowest functioning agencies had highest turnover rates (23%), lowest staff pay, highest average rates of re-abuse
NCCD, 2006
Turnover and other workforce factors linked to re-abuse
6
Workforce Factors: Impact of Turnover on Child Welfare
Outcomes
Children with:– 1 worker achieved permanency in 74.5%
cases– 2 workers, permanency in 17.5% cases– 3 workers permanency in 5.2% cases
A picture speaks a thousand words…
Flower, McDonald, Sumski, 2005
Increase in number of worker changes negatively correlated with permanency.
7
Series1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
7 Workers - 0.1% 6 Workers - 0.1% 5 Workers - 0.3% 4 Workers - 2.2%
3 Workers - 5.2% 2 Workers - 17.5% 1 Worker - 74.5%
Children Entering and Exiting Care to Permanency: January 1, 2003 through September 2004 (N=679)
Flower, McDonald & Sumski, 2005
Impact of Education on Staff Competency and Child Welfare
Outcomes
California
Kentucky
Texas
9
Impact of Education - Title IV-E and Staff Competency:
California
Methodology Annual Online for MSW students at graduation, 6 months,
and 1.5 yr post graduation. Comparison of IV-E and non-IV-E participants in training
academy
Competency Findings Statistically significant knowledge gains on pre-post tests
for both Title IV-E and non IV-E participants IV-E participants scored higher at pre and post-test than
non-IV-E
California Social Work Education Center (CalSWEC), 2010 10
Impact of Education - Public Child Welfare Certification Program (PCWCP) and Child Welfare Outcomes: Kentucky
Safety PCWCP group more likely to:
– Continue a case & substantiate abuse– Un-substantiate low-risk cases, substantiate moderate-risk cases, and
continue care for high-risk casesPermanency PCWCP group is:
– More likely to place children with relatives or adoptive homes– Less likely to place in residential settings or emergency shelter
placements– More likely to have established permanency goal– For children in care for 13+ months, more likely to have adoption goal
vs. return homeWell-being Children with non-PCWCP case manager are older, with longer stays in care
and more moves in careBarbee, Antle, Sullivan, Huebner, Fox, Hall, 2009
11
Impact of Education - Title IV-E Child Protection Workers and Child Welfare
Outcomes: Texas
MethodologyPart A: State Case Outcomes – Examine existing administrative data to
determine how case outcomes are affected by Title IV-E training Recurrence of child maltreatment Foster care re-entries Stability of Foster care placement Length of time to achieve reunification Length of time to achieve adoption
Data: 1.8 million unduplicated interventions. Part B: CPS Worker Survey – Investigate characteristics of individual CPS
workers Included all state CPS workers 4078 current employees identified; 2,303 matched, 1,043 usable Compared Title IV-E with Non-Title IV-E Employee
Leung, 2010
12
Impact of Education - Title IV-E Child Protection Workers and Child Welfare
Outcomes: Texas
Findings of 3 CFSR Measures Not Statistically Significant…
Recurrence of child maltreatment– Not statistically significant but direction in favor of Title IV-E
Foster care re-entries– Not statistically significant but direction in favor of non-Title IV-
E
Stability of Foster care placement– Not statistically significant but direction in favor of non-Title IV-E
Leung, 2010 13
Impact of Education - Title IV-E Child Protection Workers and Child Welfare
Outcomes: Texas
Findings of 2 CFSR Measures Significant in favor of IV-E CPS workers:
Less time to achieve reunification Title IV-E workers had fewer children who were not reunified within 12
months (31.8% compared to 38.2%) Title IV-E workers had more family reunifications within 12 months (68.2%
compared to 61.8%).
Length of time to achieve adoption Title IV-E workers (70.6%) had more finalized adoptions within 24 months
than Non-Title IV-E (46.9%). About 53.1% of the children from Non-Title IV-E workers were without
finalized adoptions within 24 months as opposed to only 29.4% for Title IV-E.
Leung, 201014
Workforce Factors Linked to Retention and Turnover of Child
Welfare Staff
Education and Title IV-E programs
Recruitment and Selection
Personal and Organizational Factors
Supervision
15
Impact of Education: Title IV-E
and Staff Retention
California
Pennsylvania
16
Impact of Education - Title IV-E, Workforce Factors and Staff
Retention: California
Methodology Online survey completed annually by MSW graduates at
graduation, 6 months, and 1.5 yr post graduation. Comparison of IV-E and non-IV-E participants in training
academy classes
Retention Findings Having access to training more than twice a year is
associated with longer retention Getting agency support for licensure is associated with
longer retention
California Social Work Education Center (CalSWEC), 2010
17
Impact of Education - Title IV-E, Organizational Climate and Staff
Retention: PennsylvaniaMethodology Trend study of MSW graduates and agency climate at 3 yrs post
graduation Organizational Climate Survey (Glisson and Hemmelgarn,1998)
Findings 80% remained in public CW agency and 20% had left public CW
agency Factors Explaining Retention
– Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, cooperation Factors explaining Departure
– Emotional exhaustion, Job dissatisfaction, personal accomplishment
Factors explaining Job Satisfaction– Using skills/abilities, exercising independent judgment and being
recognized Promotion not as important as using skills
Cahalane, 201018
Impact of Education - Public Child Welfare Certification Program (PCWCP)
and Staff Retention: Kentucky
Methodology Telephone interviews with 15 PCWCP graduates who left
the child welfare agency after two-year period was completed.
Findings about Reasons for Leaving Inadequate supervision Unsupportive coworkers Stressful work environment (bureaucracy, inadequate
resources, and insufficient time to fulfill policy requirements for assigned caseloads)
Barbee, Antle, Sullivan, Huebner, Fox, Hall, 2009
19
Impact of Recruitment and Selection: Job Analysis and Competency-based
Approach
Focus on Competencies needed for the task
Job analyses leading to: Structured interviews and Work Sample
Tests Consistent, well trained selection teams Strong selection processes
Dickinson and McCarthy, 200920
Impact of Recruitment and Selection: Realistic Job
PreviewsWhat are realistic job previews? Introduction to the job prior to employment Balanced view of the job and organization, both
positive and negative Presentation of client and worker perspectives Method for encouraging self-selection and to
meet expectations Can be be videos, internship, dramatization,
information, job shadowing, job sample test
21
Realistic Job Previews and Staff Retention
Methodology Reviewed development of child welfare RJPS, summarized
content of 10 RJPs and reported outcome data from one state.
Findings of 2 studies in 1 State At one year, 12% of staff who had watched RJP had left
versus 21.7% who had not. At one year, 6.2% of workers who had viewed RJP had left
job versus 21.6% who had not (3x higher) Costs Range from 18K – 27K for production (plus some in-
kind)
Faller, Masternak, Grinnell-Davis, Grabarek, Sieffert, Bernotavicz, 2009 22
Examples of Realistic Job Previews
Maine http://www.cwti.org/RR/JobPreview.htm North Carolina http://ssw.unc.edu/jif/rr/rjp.htm Colorado
http://www.cdhs.state.co.us/childwelfare/
23
Workforce Factors: Linked to Staff Retention and
Turnover
Personal Characteristics
Organizational Characteristics
24
Impact of Personal and Organizational Characteristics on
Staff RetentionLiterature review of studies examining retention or turnover
– 154 documents, 9 studies published between 1984 and 2005.
Reasons People Stay: Personal Characteristics
– Workers’ commitment to child welfare– Self-efficacy– Low-levels of emotional exhaustion
Organizational Factors– Supervisory and co-worker support– Salary and benefits
DePanfilis, Zlotnik, 200825
Supervision and Staff Retention
Dimension 1: Task Assistance – supervisor provides tangible, work-related advice and instruction
to workers Leads to: Empowerment, Organizational citizenship, Behavior,
Job Satisfaction, RetentionDimension 2: Social and Emotional Support
Leads to: improved Well-being, Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction
Dimension 3: Interpersonal Interactions – worker’s perception of the quality of the supervisory relationship
Leads to: Sense of competence and personal accomplishment, Organizational Citizenship, Behavior, Job Satisfaction
Mor Barak, Travis, Pyun, and Xie, 2009Synthesis prepared by Munson, 2010
26
Impact of Supervision on Staff Retention
Overall Findings Dimension 1: Task Assistance, had greatest
impact on positive worker outcomes.
Dimensions 2 & 3: Social and Emotional Support and Interpersonal interaction were associated with: – Reduced worker anxiety, stress, depression,
somatic complaints, burnout, intention to leave, and turnover
Mor Barak, Travis, Pyun, and Xie, 2009Synthesis prepared by Munson, 2010 27
Other Findings
Staff who take jobs because they are committed to the mission of the agency were more satisfied and less inclined to leave
Workers were more likely to think about leaving if they thought the organization did not provide what they expected.
Chernesky and Israel (2009) Workers with greater match between job expectations and
skills are less likely to leave Practice-focused and supportive supervision associated with
higher retention Higher risk of turnover in first 2 years and then levels off.
Dickinson and Painter (2009)
28
Other Findings
Should I stay or should I go?Most decisions are made in the first 3 years. MSW less likely to remain in child welfare (usually
leave early in career) Peer support, supervisor support and having an
MSW all predict agency retention Negative agency climate impacts agency
retention (more likely to leave) Supervisor support predicts retention in the child
welfare field
Chenot , Benton, Kim, 2009
29
Public and Private Agencies in Child Welfare
Are there differences?Findings from one mid-western state: Factors preventing turnover: commitment to agency, to child
welfare, good supervision, and job satisfaction.
Reasons for taking the job were important– Private agency workers more likely to take job because only
job available (correlated with level of commitment to job and child welfare).
– Public agency workers more likely to take job because of pay, benefits, job security, opportunities and variety.
– Higher proportion of private agency endorsed “a good first job to take.”
More than 80% of both public and private agency workers selected as a reason to work in child welfare “to help children and families”.
Faller, Grabarek, Ortega, 2010 30
About NCWWI: Vision
skilled at delivering effective and promising practices that improve outcomes for children, youth and families;
strengthened by professional education; sustained through leadership development; and supported by organizational practices that mirror
systems of care principles.
A committed, competent and high performing child welfare workforce that is:
31
NCWWI Purpose
To build the capacity of the nation’s child welfare workforce and improve outcomes for children, youth and families through activities that support the development of child welfare leaders.
32
NCWWI Goals
Identify and deliver child welfare leadership training for middle managers and supervisors.
Facilitate BSW and MSW traineeships. Engage national peer networks. Support strategic dissemination of
effective and promising workforce practices.
Advance knowledge through collaboration and evaluation.
33
NCWWI Program Components
Executive Steering Committee National Advisory Committee Knowledge Assessment and Management
(KAM) Leadership Academies
– Middle Managers (LAMM)– Supervisors (LAS)
Peer Networks BSW and MSW Traineeships Dissemination Evaluation
34
NCWWI Project PartnersUniversity at AlbanyMary McCarthy & Katharine Briar-
LawsonCo-Principal Investigators
University of MarylandNancy DickinsonProject Director
University of Iowa Miriam Landsman
University of DenverCathryn Potter
University of Southern MaineFreda Bernotavicz
Michigan State UniversityGary Anderson
University of MichiganKathleen Faller
Fordham UniversityVirginia Strand
National Indian Child Welfare Association Terry Cross Melissa Clyde
Portland State UniversityKatharine Cahn
Children’s Bureau/ACF/DHHS Randi Walters Federal Project Officer
35
Contact us: www.ncwwi.org [email protected]
Questions?
A Service of the Children’s Bureau, a Member of the T/TA Network 36