ASFA Logo - Bringing Together the Child Welfare Team
Reports
Individual State Responses
Curriculum
Training Guides
Syllabus
Home
METHODOLOGY

Child Welfare Agency Poll

The Muskie project team conducted the child welfare agency poll by telephone during January through May 2002. The team developed and used a data collection instrument that assessed areas in which meeting ASFA requirements has impacted staff or changed the way the agency does business and allowed agencies to update the information they provided during the 2001 poll. The final instrument consisted of ten questions. (A copy of the final child welfare agency phone poll instrument appears in Appendix C in this document.) Most of the questions were multi-part, closed ended, with selections based on the results of the 2001 poll. Space was provided for additional comments.

The nine questions covered a variety of topics. They were:

  • Understanding of ASFA. How would you rate your staff's understanding of ASFA?
  • Skills. What skills do managers, supervisors, and workers need to have to implement ASFA?
  • Activities. What activities has the agency undertaken as part of ASFA implementation?
  • Training. How is training on ASFA handled?
  • Information System. How well does the state's information system support implementation of ASFA?
  • Staff support. What worked best in supporting staff as they implement ASFA requirements?
  • Barriers. What were the barriers to the agency's support of staff as they implement ASFA?
  • Child and Family Services Review. Where is the agency in the process?
  • General Remarks. Do you have any other comments to make regarding the best way to implement ASFA?
  • County based. How does the fact that a state is county-based impact implementation of ASFA?

If possible the 2002 phone poll was conducted with the person who responded to the 2001 poll. The poll took approximately 30 minutes to complete. Once the poll was completed, the Muskie project team e-mailed or faxed a copy of the completed instrument to the respondent for review and comment. When the respondent's comments were returned, the project team coded and entered data into a statistical analysis program (SPSS). The analysts performed comparisons of data from the 2001 and 2002 polls, county-administered versus state based systems and states that were in the initial (planning and assessment) phases of the Child and Family Services Reviews versus those in the later phases (review completed and working under a Program Improvement Plan). Additionally, analysts ran frequencies to get an overview of the results. A complete print out of the child welfare agency poll frequencies appears in Appendix A. In addition, several direct quotes from the participants are presented in the Results portion of the report to more comprehensively explain the details of the responses.

Responses were received from 41 states, which is 6 fewer that last year. Two states indicated that they were no longer participating in written surveys or phone polls due to staffing shortages. The information on county-administered states represents the responses of 10 states where the child welfare system is state supervised, county administered. Responses were also received from two states that are regionally administered - Tennessee and Washington.

COURT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT POLL

As with the child welfare agency poll, the Muskie project team contacted the court improvement project representative who participated in the 2001 poll. The poll was conducted during January through May 2002. The poll took about 30 minutes to complete. (A copy of this instrument appears in Appendix D.) The team received responses from 3 of the 4 court improvement projects that participated in the 2001 poll. When the respondent's comments were returned, the project team coded and entered data into a statistical analysis program (SPSS) and ran comparisons and frequencies to get an understanding of the results. A complete print out of the court improvement project frequencies appears in Appendix B.

The questions covered a variety of topics. They were:

  • Understanding of ASFA. How would you rate the child welfare agency in terms of their understanding of ASFA requirements?
  • Skills. What skills do child welfare supervisors and workers need to implement ASFA?
  • Activities. As part of ASFA implementation have the court and child welfare agency undertaken or changed any day to day or joint activities or method of communication?
  • Sharing information. Is the court getting the information it needs from the agency?
  • Training. How is training on ASFA handled?
  • What worked best? What has worked best for the court in terms of working with the child welfare agency as it implements ASFA requirements?
  • Barriers. What does the court view as barriers in working with the agency as it implements ASFA?
  • General Remarks. Do you have any other comments to make regarding the best way to implement ASFA?

To Top

>> Continue to the Next Section

Reports
Individual State Responses
Curriculum
Training Guides
Syllabus
Home
Muskie Logo