|
APPENDIX A.
CHILD WELFARE AGENCIES -
PARTICIPANT COMMENTS/FREQUENCIES
1. How would you rate your agency's staff in terms
of their understanding of ASFA requirements? We are particularly interested
in the level of understanding of managers, supervisors and workers. Please
rate their understanding on a scale from 1 to 5 with 1 being 'poor' and
5 being 'comprehensive'.
A. Managers:
| POOR |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
COMPREHENSIVE |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 3.00 |
6 |
14.6 |
| 4.00 |
17 |
41.5 |
| 4.50 |
2 |
4.9 |
| 5.00 |
16 |
39.0 |
Average of the Rating: 4.27
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| ASFA
requirements understood well |
7 |
17.1 |
| County-based
system answer based on limited knowledge of staff |
6 |
14.6 |
| Comprehensive
training understanding |
4 |
9.8 |
| Good understanding
of some elements not others |
2 |
4.9 |
| ASFA requirements incorporated
not seen as ASFA |
2 |
4.9 |
| High staff turnover affects
understanding |
1 |
2.4 |
| Need more training |
1 |
2.4 |
B. Supervisors:
| POOR |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
COMPREHENSIVE |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
2 |
4.9 |
| 3.00 |
7 |
17.1 |
| 3.50 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 4.00 |
24 |
58.5 |
| 4.50 |
3 |
7.3 |
| 5.00 |
3 |
7.3 |
Average of the Rating: 3.78
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Good
understanding of some elements, not others |
5 |
12.2 |
| Staff already
familiar with ASFA requirements |
2 |
4.9 |
| County-based
system answer based on limited knowledge of staff |
2 |
4.9 |
| High staff turnover affects
understanding |
2 |
4.9 |
| Need more training |
2 |
4.9 |
| Comprehensive training
understanding |
1 |
2.4 |
| Understand ASFA but not
always a priority |
1 |
2.4 |
C. Workers:
| POOR |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
COMPREHENSIVE |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
4 |
9.8 |
| 3.00 |
16 |
39.0 |
| 4.00 |
18 |
43.9 |
| 5.00 |
4 |
2.4 |
Average of the Rating :
3.41
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Knowledge
of issues unaware of relation to ASFA |
4 |
9.8 |
| High staff
turnover rate affects understanding |
4 |
9.8 |
| ASFA requirements
understood well |
3 |
7.3 |
| County-based
system answer based on limited knowledge of staff |
2 |
4.9 |
| New staff
gets lots of ASFA information |
2 |
4.9 |
| Understand
ASFA but not always a priority |
1 |
2.4 |
| Comprehensive training
understanding |
1 |
2.4 |
| Good understanding of
some elements not others |
1 |
2.4 |
2.
Following are some of the skills that managers, supervisors and workers
need to have to implement ASFA. Please rate each of these on a scale of
1-5 with one being ‘do not need it’ and 5 being ‘extremely important.’
A. Managers:
Case work skills
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 2.00 |
5 |
12.2 |
| 3.00 |
11 |
26.8 |
| 4.00 |
13 |
31.7 |
| 4.50 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 5.00 |
10 |
24.4 |
Average of the rating: 3.67
Collaborative Skills
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 4.00 |
13 |
31.7 |
| 4.50 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 5.00 |
25 |
61.0 |
Average of the rating: 4.55
Understand Requirements
of ASFA
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 4.00 |
6 |
14.6 |
| 4.50 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 5.00 |
32 |
78.0 |
Average of the rating: 4.72
Understand how to implement
ASFA requirements
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
3 |
7.3 |
| 4.00 |
7 |
17.1 |
| 5.00 |
30 |
73.2 |
Average of the rating: 4.61
Using Data Effectively
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
3 |
7.3 |
| 4.00 |
7 |
17.1 |
| 5.00 |
30 |
73.2 |
Average of the rating: 4.70
B. Supervisors
Case work skills
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
2 |
4.9 |
| 4.00 |
17 |
41.5 |
| 5.00 |
21 |
51.2 |
Average of the rating: 4.41
Communication Skills
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 3.00 |
3 |
7.3 |
| 4.00 |
8 |
19.5 |
| 5.00 |
30 |
73.2 |
Average of the rating: 4.66
Collaborative Skills
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 3.00 |
5 |
12.2 |
| 4.00 |
9 |
22.0 |
| 5.00 |
27 |
65.9 |
Average of the rating: 4.54
Understanding how to
implement ASFA requirements
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 3.00 |
2 |
4.9 |
| 4.00 |
17 |
36.6 |
| 5.00 |
21 |
58.5 |
Average of the rating: 4.54
Using data effectively
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
6 |
14.6 |
| 4.00 |
17 |
41.5 |
| 5.00 |
17 |
41.5 |
Average of the rating: 4.22
C. Workers
Case work skills
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
2 |
4.9 |
| 4.00 |
3 |
7.3 |
| 5.00 |
35 |
85.4 |
Average of the rating: 4.76
Collaborative Skills
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 3.00 |
4 |
9.8 |
| 4.00 |
15 |
36.6 |
| 5.00 |
22 |
53.7 |
Average of the rating: 4.44
Communication Skills
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 3.00 |
3 |
7.3 |
| 4.00 |
9 |
22.0 |
| 5.00 |
29 |
70.7 |
Average of the rating: 4.63
Understanding how to
implement ASFA requirements
| DON'T
NEED IT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT |
N=41
| Skills |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 3.00 |
10 |
24.4 |
| 3.50 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 4.00 |
13 |
31.7 |
| 5.00 |
17 |
41.5 |
Average of the rating: 4.16
3. In the
past year, since our earlier survey, as part of your ASFA implementation
has the agency undertaken any activities in the following areas:
Agency structure?
Yes or No.
If yes, please describe.
N=41
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yes |
17 |
41.5 |
| No |
23 |
56.1 |
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Added
new department division or unit |
7 |
17.1 |
| Restructured
department or unit |
7 |
17.1 |
| Added additional
staff |
6 |
14.6 |
| Added new
position(s) |
2 |
4.9 |
| Strengthened
community development partnerships |
2 |
4.9 |
| State supervised,
county administered system - multiple ways of doing things |
1 |
2.4 |
| Created
technical assistance program with ASFA, TPR & permanency planning
topics |
1 |
2.4 |
| Efficient
in service delivery |
1 |
2.4 |
| Increased funds to local
areas |
1 |
2.4 |
| Conducted training |
1 |
2.4 |
| Generated new reports
to field workers |
1 |
2.4 |
| Combined or formed workgroups |
1 |
2.4 |
Internal communication?
Yes or No.
If yes, please describe.
N=41
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yes |
28 |
68.3 |
| No |
12 |
29.3 |
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Increase
in communications |
8 |
19.5 |
| Increase in
communication with field staff, districts, regions |
7 |
17.1 |
| Increase in
use of e-mail, intranet web sites |
4 |
9.8 |
| Training for
staff |
4 |
9.8 |
| Implemented
quality review system to monitor work |
3 |
7.3 |
| Supporting
good case work practice |
2 |
4.9 |
| Data
mapping project need CWIS policy procedure changes |
2 |
4.9 |
| Improved
tracking, identifying of children, better matching |
2 |
4.9 |
| Annual implementation
study |
1 |
2.4 |
| Set up committees
to focus on information systems/casework |
1 |
2.4 |
| Permanency
planning newsletter |
1 |
2.4 |
| Faster processing
of paperwork |
1 |
2.4 |
| Teleconferences,
video conferences held |
1 |
2.4 |
| Focus on strategic
planning |
1 |
2.4 |
| Increased communication
with court staff |
1 |
2.4 |
| System to deal
with permanency planning |
1 |
2.4 |
| Peer review
begun |
1 |
2.4 |
| Self assessment
process |
1 |
2.4 |
| Pre-planning
has led to more unified practice |
1 |
2.4 |
| Increased collaboration |
1 |
2.4 |
Performance appraisals?
Yes or No.
If yes, please describe.
N=41
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yes |
10 |
24.4 |
| No |
29 |
70.7 |
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Self
assessment process being developed or used |
2 |
4.9 |
| Using case
check list with ASFA requirements |
2 |
4.9 |
| New performance
appraisal instrument the focal point of evaluation |
2 |
4.9 |
| Child welfare outcomes
incorporate CFSR outcomes |
2 |
4.9 |
| Better internal reporting
results in better case flow tracking |
1 |
2.4 |
| Made modifications, refinements
to policy |
1 |
2.4 |
| Using performance based
system |
1 |
2.4 |
| Looking at instruments |
1 |
2.4 |
| Changes being implemented
(overall agency plan) |
1 |
2.4 |
Job descriptions? Yes
or No.
If yes, please describe.
N=41
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yes |
6 |
14.6 |
| No |
33 |
80.5 |
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Insured
that job descriptions reflect ASFA requirements |
2 |
4.9 |
| Social workers
changed due to licensing requirements |
1 |
2.4 |
| Plan proposed
to upgrade job titles |
1 |
2.4 |
| Minor changes |
1 |
2.4 |
| Changed job titles, classifications |
1 |
2.4 |
Staff recruitment? Yes
or No.
If yes, please describe.
N=41
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yes |
9 |
22.0 |
| No |
30 |
73.2 |
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Recruiting
more, not ASFA related |
2 |
4.9 |
| Hiring freeze
layoffs |
2 |
4.9 |
| Efforts for recruitment,
retention made |
2 |
4.9 |
| Emphasis on hiring people
with skills related to ASFA |
1 |
2.4 |
| Continuing education training
for para-professionals to MSW |
1 |
2.4 |
| Approval to hire people
without social work degree, licensure |
1 |
2.4 |
| Added staff |
1 |
2.4 |
Case Review? Yes or
No.
If yes, please describe.
N=41
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yes |
27 |
65.9 |
| No |
11 |
26.8 |
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Modifications
to case review process |
9 |
22.0 |
| Changes planned,
not implemented |
4 |
9.8 |
| Supervisors/coordinators
review cases |
3 |
7.3 |
| Some work in connection
with CFSR |
3 |
7.3 |
| Review part of accreditation
site visit, ASFA topics |
3 |
7.3 |
| Case review done regardless
of ASFA |
3 |
7.3 |
| Using IV-E Federal Review
tools |
2 |
4.9 |
| QA unit performance report
measures compliance |
2 |
4.9 |
| Implemented QA review
that mirrors CFSR |
2 |
4.9 |
| Case Review process implemented |
2 |
4.9 |
| Administrative Review
Division works with programs/courts |
2 |
4.9 |
| Statewide review program
evaluates items/develops case plans |
1 |
2.4 |
| Redesigning QA tool |
1 |
2.4 |
| Redesigning case conference
tool |
1 |
2.4 |
| Legal issues |
1 |
2.4 |
| Going through review now |
1 |
2.4 |
| Foster Care Review board
increased involvement |
1 |
2.4 |
| Checks for ASFA compliance |
1 |
2.4 |
Foster/Adoptive Parents?
Yes or No.
If yes, please describe.
N=41
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yes |
23 |
56.1 |
| No |
15 |
36.6 |
N=41
| Comments |
Frequency |
Percent |
| On-going
campaigns focused on recruitment |
6 |
14.6 |
| Changes planned,
not implemented |
5 |
12.2 |
| Increased support for
foster/adoptive parents |
4 |
9.9 |
| Private agencies contracted
to perform recruitment function |
4 |
9.8 |
| Staff assigned or hired
to focus on recruitment |
3 |
7.3 |
| Performance based focus
on kinship care/permanency |
1 |
2.4 |
| Emphasis on minority recruitment |
1 |
2.4 |
| Started program as part
of PIP |
1 |
2.4 |
| Implemented concurrent
planning statewide |
1 |
2.4 |
| Layoffs in recruiting
positions |
1 |
2.4 |
| Committee workers, supervisors,
workers develop recruitment |
1 |
2.4 |
| Refined on-going process |
1 |
2.4 |
| Cross jurisdictional placement
recruitment |
1 |
2.4 |
| Restructured recruitment
efforts to focus on collaboration |
1 |
2.4 |
| Using MAPP |
1 |
2.4 |
| Emphasis on ASFA issues |
1 |
2.4 |
| Increase in funding for
recruitment efforts |
1 |
2.4 |
| Changed training strategies |
1 |
2.4 |
4. In the
past year, since our earlier survey, has there been any ASFA training
for child welfare agency personnel? If yes, go to question 4a. If no,
go to question 4e.?
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yes |
25 |
61.0 |
| No |
11 |
26.8 |
A. What topics were covered
in that ASFA training?
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
Various
ASFA topics |
9 |
22.0 |
| Permanency
Issues |
8 |
|
| Timeframes
reunification |
5 |
12.2 |
| Concurrent
Planning |
5 |
12.2 |
| Termination
of parental rights |
4 |
9.8 |
| Legal issues |
4 |
9.8 |
| Court requirements |
4 |
9.8 |
| Best Practice |
4 |
9.8 |
| ASFA elements
in new worker training |
4 |
9.8 |
| Reasonable Efforts |
3 |
7.3 |
| Customized training according
to local needs |
3 |
7.3 |
| ASFA incorporated into
all relevant trainings |
3 |
7.3 |
| Safety well-being |
2 |
4.9 |
| Preparation for CFSR |
2 |
4.9 |
| Joint training with various
agencies |
2 |
4.9 |
| IV-E eligibility |
2 |
4.9 |
| Federal regulations |
2 |
4.9 |
| Compelling reasons |
2 |
4.9 |
| Child Welfare issues including
CFSR |
2 |
4.9 |
| Case planning |
2 |
4.9 |
| Tracking of children in
placement not adoptive homes |
1 |
2.4 |
| Supervising ASFA outcomes
measures |
1 |
2.4 |
| State/agency policies |
1 |
2.4 |
| Recruitment |
1 |
2.4 |
| MEPA training |
1 |
2.4 |
| Importance of relationship
between agency/community |
1 |
2.4 |
| Home studies permanency
reviews kinship placement |
1 |
2.4 |
| Dependency/Neglect case
law update |
1 |
2.4 |
| Cross system training |
1 |
2.4 |
| Court Orders |
1 |
2.4 |
| Attorneys judges trained |
1 |
2.4 |
| Assessment |
1 |
2.4 |
| Adoptions |
1 |
2.4 |
C. Which of the following
methods did you use for the ASFA training?
N=41
| Methods |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Statewide
training |
24 |
58.5 |
| In service
training |
20 |
48.8 |
| Information
is circulated about ASFA |
15 |
36.6 |
| Pre-service
training |
14 |
34.1 |
| Managers train
people |
12 |
29.3 |
| Conferences
on ASFA topics |
11 |
26.8 |
| Regularly
scheduled meetings |
10 |
24.4 |
| Teleconferences on ASFA
topics |
9 |
22.0 |
| Forums on ASFA topics |
8 |
19.5 |
| Training by federal agencies |
6 |
14.6 |
| Interactive video on ASFA
topics |
3 |
7.3 |
| New Worker Training |
1 |
2.4 |
C. Who did the training?
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
Forums
on ASFA topics
|
8 |
19.5 |
| Training by
federal agencies |
6 |
14.6 |
| Interactive
video on ASFA topics |
3 |
7.3 |
| New Worker Training |
1 |
2.4 |
D. Was the training just
on ASFA or was it incorporated into other training that you provide?
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Incorporated |
24 |
58.5 |
Incorporated
into new worker training
|
21 |
51.2 |
| Not incorporated |
8 |
19.5 |
E. In the past year, since
our earlier survey, have you done any of the following ASFA training with
or for the courts?
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Agency
and court staff have worked together on local level |
22 |
53.7 |
| Court Improvement
Project events attended by agency people |
19 |
46.3 |
| Agency staff have trained
court people |
13 |
31.7 |
| Joint training sessions |
12 |
29.3 |
| ASFA workgroups of agency
and court staff |
10 |
24.4 |
| Agency published a newsletter
for court staff |
3 |
7.3 |
| Regional meetings held
Court staff lead |
1 |
2.4 |
| Children’s Law Project |
1 |
2.4 |
F. What topics were covered
in that ASFA training for the courts?
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Permanency
issues |
11 |
26.8 |
| Court requirements |
9 |
36.3 |
| Various ASFA topics |
8 |
19.5 |
| Reasonable Efforts |
6 |
12.2 |
| Preparation for CFSR |
4 |
9.8 |
| Timeframes reunification |
3 |
7.3 |
| Best Practice |
3 |
7.3 |
| IV-Eligibility |
3 |
7.3 |
| Court Orders |
3 |
7.3 |
| Termination of parental
rights |
3 |
7.3 |
| Compelling reasons |
2 |
4.9 |
| MEPA training |
2 |
4.9 |
| Indian Child Welfare Act |
2 |
4.9 |
Home studies permanency
reviews kinship placement
|
2 |
4.9 |
| Child Welfare issues including
CFSR |
2 |
4.9 |
| Judge worker attorney
roles |
2 |
4.9 |
| Adoptions |
2 |
4.9 |
| Case planning |
2 |
4.9 |
| Joint training with various
agencies |
2 |
4.9 |
| Customized training according
to local needs |
1 |
2.4 |
| Scheduling |
1 |
2.4 |
| Collaboration of services
drug/alcohol |
1 |
2.4 |
| Legal issues |
1 |
2.4 |
| Bringing court and agency
systems together |
1 |
2.4 |
| Safety well-being |
1 |
2.4 |
| Attorneys judges trained |
1 |
2.4 |
| Federal regulations |
1 |
2.4 |
| Importance of relationship
between agency/community |
1 |
2.4 |
| State/agency policies |
1 |
2.4 |
G .Have you done ASFA
training with or for any of the following:
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
Mental
health providers |
11 |
26.8 |
| Tribes |
7 |
17 |
| Health care providers |
3 |
7.3 |
| Foster Care providers |
3 |
7.3 |
| Schools |
2 |
4.9 |
| Contract providers |
2 |
4.9 |
| Child welfare board members |
2 |
4.9 |
| Community stakeholders
|
2 |
4.9 |
| Citizen review panel |
1 |
2.4 |
| Substance abuse providers |
1 |
2.4 |
| Judges |
1 |
2.4 |
| Court services |
1 |
2.4 |
| Legislators |
1 |
2.4 |
| Parents |
1 |
2.4 |
| Child care providers |
1 |
2.4 |
| Social services |
1 |
2.4 |
| Internal staff |
1 |
2.4 |
H. What topics were
covered in the ASFA training?
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
Permanency
issues |
6 |
14.6 |
| Timeframes
reunification |
5 |
12.2 |
| Best practice |
4 |
9.8 |
| Various ASFA topics |
4 |
9.8 |
| Safety well-being |
3 |
7.3 |
| Compelling reasons |
3 |
7.3 |
| Indian Child Welfare Act |
2 |
4.9 |
| Preparation for CFSR |
2 |
4.9 |
| State/agency policies |
2 |
4.9 |
| Court requirements |
2 |
4.9 |
| Adoptions |
2 |
4.9 |
| Customized training according
to local needs |
1 |
2.4 |
| Reasonable efforts |
1 |
2.4 |
| Recruitment |
1 |
2.4 |
| Home studies permanency
reviews kinship placement |
1 |
2.4 |
| Child Welfare issues including
CFSR |
1 |
2.4 |
| MEPA training |
1 |
2.4 |
| Federal regulations |
1 |
2.4 |
| CPS |
1 |
2.4 |
| Judge worker attorney
roles |
1 |
2.4 |
| Case planning |
1 |
2.4 |
5. How
well does your information system support the work of managers, supervisors
and workers in implementing ASFA? Please rate the support provided by
your system on a scale from 1 to 5 with 1 being 'poor' and 5 being 'outstanding'
N=41
| POOR |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
OUTSTANDING |
N=41
| Responses |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
2 |
5.3 |
| 2.00 |
4 |
10.5 |
| 2.50 |
1 |
2.6 |
| 3.00 |
11 |
28.9 |
| 3.50 |
1 |
2.6 |
| 4.00 |
13 |
34.2 |
| 4.50 |
1 |
2.6 |
| 5.00 |
5 |
13.2 |
Average of the Rating: 3.43
A. Why did you give your
system that rating?
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Good
system for all our needs |
7 |
17.1 |
| New system |
7 |
17.1 |
| In process
of upgrading system |
6 |
14.6 |
| Old system
insufficient for needs |
5 |
12.2 |
| Working on developing
reports |
4 |
9.8 |
| Reports and data not good |
3 |
7.3 |
| Outstanding for ASFA implementation |
3 |
7.3 |
| Gives a lot of information |
2 |
4.9 |
| Inconsistent use of system |
2 |
4.9 |
| Administrators/supervisors
work well with data not staff/supervisors |
2 |
4.9 |
| Relying on MIS system
to give data |
2 |
4.9 |
| Need more training on
system |
2 |
4.9 |
| Enhanced system |
1 |
2.4 |
| System difficult to use |
1 |
2.4 |
| Ability to track time
limits statewide |
1 |
2.4 |
B. If a rating of 1 or
2 is given, probe as to the status of the SACWIS system.
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Do
not have SACWIS system |
2 |
4.9 |
| New System |
2 |
4.9 |
| Development implementation
of system in progress |
1 |
2.4 |
6. Please
rate the importance of the following in terms of supporting staff as they
implement the ASFA requirements, with 1 being ‘not important’ and 5 being
‘crucial.’
Training
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 4.00 |
15 |
36.6 |
| 5.00 |
24 |
58.5 |
Average of the rating: 4.53
Increased Communication
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
3 |
7.3 |
| 4.00 |
13 |
31.7 |
| 5.00 |
22 |
53.7 |
Average of the rating: 4.35
Resources to support
staff
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
2 |
4.9 |
| 3.00 |
2 |
4.9 |
| 4.00 |
11 |
26.8 |
| 5.00 |
25 |
61.0 |
Average of the rating: 4.43
Collaborative efforts
with stakeholders
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
5 |
12.2 |
| 4.00 |
9 |
22.0 |
| 5.00 |
25 |
61.0 |
Average of the rating: 4.32
Seeing ASFA as good
casework practice
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 4.00 |
8 |
19.5 |
| 4.50 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 5.00 |
28 |
68.3 |
Average of the rating: 4.56
Management Support
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 4.00 |
7 |
17.1 |
| 5.00 |
32 |
78.0 |
Average of the rating: 4.73
Revising policy to
support ASFA
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
3 |
7.3 |
| 4.00 |
9 |
22.0 |
| 5.00 |
25 |
61.0 |
Average of the rating: 4.44
Monitoring implementation
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 1.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 2.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 3.00 |
2 |
4.9 |
| 4.00 |
11 |
26.8 |
| 5.00 |
25 |
61.0 |
Average of the rating: 4.45
Support from front
line supervisors
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 5.00 |
2 |
4.9 |
Average of the rating: 5.00
Sufficient staff to
do work
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 4.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
| 5.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
Average of the rating: 4.5
Staff opportunity to
discuss ASFA issues
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 5.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
Average of the rating: 5.00
Constructive feedback
to front line staff
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 5.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
Average of the rating: 5.00
Time available to monitor
success of process
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 3.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
Average of the rating: 3.00
Discussion local level
between courts/agency
| NOT
IMPORTANT |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
CRUCIAL |
N=41
| Rating |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 5.00 |
1 |
2.4 |
Average of the rating: 5.00
7. Do you
see any of the following as barriers to your agency's support for staff
as they implement the requirements of ASFA (check if ‘yes’)?
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
Staff
turnover
|
34 |
82.9 |
| Lack of resources |
31 |
75.6 |
| Heavy workload |
39 |
70.7 |
| Lack of services |
24 |
58.5 |
| Large number
of cases |
22 |
53.7 |
| Difficult
relationship with courts |
20 |
48.8 |
| Lack of time |
19 |
46.3 |
| Differences
in interpretation |
14 |
34.1 |
| Limitations
or lack of computer system |
13 |
31.7 |
| Difficulty
meeting ASFA requirements |
13 |
31.7 |
| Lack of understanding/knowledge
about ASFA |
10 |
24.4 |
| Lack of training |
10 |
24.4 |
| Lack of support |
9 |
22.0 |
| Problems caused
by a county-based system |
6 |
14.6 |
| Lack of Mental Health/Substance
Abuse programs |
1 |
2.4 |
| Lack of assistance with
interpretation |
1 |
2.4 |
8.
(For County based systems only.) Do any of the following impact your ASFA
implementation (check if ‘yes’)?
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Must
be responsive to local needs |
8 |
19.5 |
| Limited resources |
7 |
17.1 |
| Lack of uniform
practice standards |
6 |
14.6 |
| Communication
can be difficult |
5 |
12.2 |
| Limited state
control |
5 |
12.2 |
| Approach is
fragmented |
4 |
9.8 |
9.
At which point in the Child and Family Services Review process is your
agency?
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Statewide
assessment underway |
15 |
36.6 |
| Planning |
10 |
24.4 |
| Review complete |
7 |
17.1 |
| Working to
complete the activities described in the PIP |
5 |
12.2 |
B. Are there any significant
lessons you learned from the CFSR process that you suggest we include
in our curriculum? If so, please describe.
N=41
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Preparation
using agency staff |
3 |
7.3 |
| Case planning |
3 |
7.3 |
| Statewide
assessment helpful identifying strengths weaknesses |
2 |
4.9 |
| Be prepared
practice be familiar with instruments |
2 |
4.9 |
| Be organized and communicate
with team |
2 |
4.9 |
| Understanding what to
do first who can help |
2 |
4.9 |
| Assessments need improvement
focus on implementing strategies |
2 |
4.9 |
| Start statewide assessment
after national data profile given |
1 |
2.4 |
| Go through Federal Review
without any other distractions |
1 |
2.4 |
| Stakeholders not seeing
broad picture, educate them |
1 |
2.4 |
| Lack of info from Federal
Agency |
1 |
2.4 |
| Coordinate agency activities
with review |
1 |
2.4 |
| Utilize ACF representatives |
1 |
2.4 |
| Integration of policy
information system training |
1 |
2.4 |
| Instructions should be
easy to understand simple language |
1 |
2.4 |
| Review data as soon as
possible |
1 |
2.4 |
| For the on-site reviews
pull 50 cases ASAP |
1 |
2.4 |
| Work closely w/foster
parents |
1 |
2.4 |
10.
Is there anything else that you want to tell us regarding the best way
to support staff as they implement the requirements of ASFA?
| Topics |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Training |
6 |
14.6 |
| Design training
to show ASFA is part of everyday work |
3 |
7.3 |
| Empower staff
through knowledge training |
3 |
7.3 |
| Have adequate
staff |
3 |
7.3 |
| Management support for
staff |
2 |
4.9 |
| Internal/External resources
difficult |
2 |
4.9 |
| Courts should understand
ASFA system |
2 |
4.9 |
| Using teamwork approach
to casework |
2 |
4.9 |
| Provide follow-up to reinforce
training |
2 |
4.9 |
| Develop coordinated services
at local level |
2 |
4.9 |
| Retention |
2 |
4.9 |
| Increase communication
keep staff informed |
2 |
4.9 |
Work together with tribes
to reunite kids back to tribes
|
1 |
2.4 |
| Staff unaware of financial
impact |
1 |
2.4 |
| Recognize cases casework
achievement |
1 |
2.4 |
| Lower caseloads |
1 |
2.4 |
| Coordination between workers
courts |
1 |
2.4 |
| Family support team |
1 |
2.4 |
| Training on use understanding
of data |
1 |
2.4 |
| Interested in what other
states doing with courts successfully |
1 |
2.4 |
| Train managers on casework/understanding
casework |
1 |
2.4 |
| Need useful information
for county administered systems |
1 |
2.4 |
| Understand ASFA requirements |
1 |
2.4 |
| See ASFA as systems change
understand it that way |
1 |
2.4 |
| Funding for resources |
1 |
2.4 |
| Curriculum needs updating
information old |
1 |
2.4 |
| Improve working conditions |
1 |
2.4 |
To Top
>> Continue
to the Next Section
|
