|
|
Lessons Learned: Notes from the Pilot States[Kentucky] [Rhode Island] [South Carolina] [Utah] [Wyoming]
In year two of the grant, the project team collaborated with child welfare agencies in five states to refine, customize and then deliver the core curriculum. The states that field-tested the curriculum in year two of the project were Kentucky, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah and Wyoming. This chapter of the curriculum document presents information from the pilot states describing their experience as pilot states, including their lessons learned from and the impact on practice, policy and systems of delivering the Using Information Management to Support the Goals of Safety, Permanency and Well Being training. For further information about Kentucky's experience with the curriculum contact: Denis Hommrich, Family Services Specialist 1. Briefly describe how you implemented the pilot project in your state. Mention who you trained, the format of the training, who the trainers were and the types of adaptations you made to the core curriculum. WE BASICALLY CONDENSED THE TWO-DAY TRAINING INTO 6 MODULES, COMBINING SOME CONCEPTS WITH THE CHANGE MODULE AND THE SUPERVISION MODULE. WE ASKED FOR SUPERVISORS TO ATTEND AND WE GOT SUPERVISORS AND OTHERS—SOME SPECIALISTS, AND A COUPLE OF STAFF WHO ARE TWIST TRAINERS FOR THEIR REGIONS. ADAPTATIONS INCLUDED MORE EXERCISES, COMBINING MODULES AROUND CHANGE, GOING OVER LOCAL REPORTS AND DATA, AND DEVELOPING AND USING A CASE EXAMPLE OF OUR OWN. 2. Describe the lessons learned from your experience, including what worked best for you and what needed improvement. ONE LESSON WE LEARNED WAS THE IMPORTANCE OF REAL DATA FOR STAFF TO DISCUSS AND ANALYZE; STAFF RESPONDED WELL TO OUR CASE EXAMPLE BUT WANTED MORE LOCAL TEAM AND COUNTY DATA. WE LEARNED WE NEED TO ADD EVEN MORE OF THIS TYPE OF DATA ANALYSES TO THE NEXT TRAINING WE DO, STAFF SEEMED READY FOR IT, AND EXPECTED IT IN THIS TRAINING. WHICH LEADS TO ANOTHER LESSON, WE ARE GOING TO STAY AWAY FROM THE NAME ‘SACWIS’ TRAINING AND TRY TO MORE CLEARLY DEFINE WHAT THE TRAINING IS ALL ABOUT.
Rhode Island For further information about Rhode Island's experience with the curriculum contact: Lori Herz, Consultant/Trainer 1. Briefly describe how you implemented the pilot project in your state. Mention who you trained, the format of the training, who the trainers were and the types of adaptations you made to the core curriculum. 2. Describe the lessons learned from your experience, including what worked best for you and what needed improvement. Initially, we held a workshop for administrative staff to give them a preview of the curriculum and get their revision recommendations. The group didn’t think we should spend a lot of time on definitions or basic information about SACWIS, databases, and similar concepts because our system has been up for some time and most of our supervisors are aware of the terms and concepts. They also didn’t relish the Cascadia Case exercise because they didn’t think it necessary (and too time consuming) for their supervisors to analyze data that extensively. What they suggested instead was a brief exercise using real reports whereby supervisors could analyze “trends”. As a result of this workshop, we cut Module 1 down to a true “introductory” piece, got them involved right away in a brainstorming exercise in Module 2 regarding the Impact of Technology, then focused on Identifying and Locating Key Data and Best Practices in Module 3 and Using Case Data as a Supervisory Tool in Module 4. Module 5 focused on reports, Module 6 on Outcome Measures and Data Analysis. Module 7 was Change Management, Module 8 was Integrating Information Management Techniques Back in the Office. Another pilot project, Child Welfare Federal Review, ran concurrently with the Information Management pilot project, so we incorporated the Case Review Document being used in that pilot into our Module 8. The document asked supervisors to measure one case in their unit against the ASFA goals of Safety, Permanency and Well-Being. Questions asked could be answered by accessing both online and hard copy case records. Since we had four chances to “try out” the curriculum, we adjusted it slightly each time. Group dynamics also played a big role in how each module was presented. Overall, we learned that the most effective pieces were reports, outcomes data, change management, and the impact of technology/best practices discussions. In the future, we may present this course as a one-day workshop, whereby supervisors would be shown how to access and analyze data available in our SACWIS system, both in the form of reports and online case records. Ultimately, we want our supervisors to feel comfortable using that data as a daily supervisory tool. One major area of improvement that was identified in quite a few of the session evaluations is the need to explain the Information Management Competencies in more detail. We had the benefit and pleasure of the Maine Project Director’s expertise in explaining these competencies during our first seminar, but in subsequent seminars, we didn’t explain them clearly enough. Part of the reason for participant’s misunderstanding of these concepts may be related to a lack of familiarity with competency-based training in general. 3. Describe what the impact of the training already has been on those you trained, the system and practice. If you can foresee a long-term impact, please discuss that also. The SACWIS Information Management seminars brought to light over 50 issues regarding our SACWIS system. The issues were divided up into five categories: Reports/Templates, System Maintenance/Change Requests, Hardware/Software/Interfaces, Policy/Workflow and Training. We forwarded these issues to the appropriate parties in MIS and Administration and received a quick response to most of the issues. As a result of this pilot project, several additional MIS staff were hired and assigned to the Report Design/Maintenance team; the Department is researching mobile technology to allow workers to utilize downtime when off-site (i.e. in court) to update case information; NCANDS and AFCARS data is being distributed to supervisors throughout the Department, whereas before it remained with MIS and the Administrators; a committee has been formed in each division to analyze existing reports and design new reports; a Supervisor Information Management Manual is being created which will consist of reports available to supervisors, “cheat sheets” on how to access and manipulate the reports, and cheat sheets on accessing key data online; follow-up and communication between MIS and end-users has improved tremendously. Long-term, we are expecting MIS to provide supervisors with better ad hoc reporting tools, allowing for greater data manipulation, up to date report information (some reports are generated weekly or monthly right now), and less reliance upon hard copy data (i.e. all/most data will be accessible via our SACWIS system). 4. Because this was a pilot program, we asked you to conduct several types of evaluations---the pre-training survey, the session evaluation, the post-training and the focus group. Please give us your comments on the evaluation process and components. Were they burdensome? If so, what part(s)? Were they useful to you? If so, how? How could we improve the process in the future? The pre- and post-seminar surveys were a nice way to ease into the idea of competency-based training in our state. For the most part, evaluation instruments are not competency-based because of union restrictions. Once the curriculum is fully integrated with supervisory core curriculum in our state (being revamped now), we would like to see a pre- and post-test format. From a data analysis standpoint, that would make quantifying the results much easier. The session evaluation instrument was Likert-scaled, so analyzing results was a snap. We used SPSS statistical software for that purpose. We have conducted two focus groups so far and have two more planned to capture as many of our seminar participants as possible. We found the follow-up process a very effective means for communicating resolutions to many of the issues brought up by seminar participants and for demonstrating a couple of new reports that have since been developed. Most focus group participants did not find the time to complete the “homework assignments” we had given them. However, many of the supervisors were also participating in the federal audit pilot project, so they were able to speak with experience about the Case Review Document (used in the audit also) we handed out as “homework”. 5. You have worked with the information management competencies for supervisors for several months now. Before we finalize them, please give us your advice on adding to, deleting from or modifying these competencies. The Systems Thinking and Information Systems core competencies are very relevant to the topic, Information Management. The Change Management competencies, however, may not belong under Information Management. Nevertheless, Change Management should definitely be one of the core supervisor competencies. 6. What else do you want to tell us about your experience with the SACWIS Supervisory Training Pilot? In Rhode Island, our experience both adapting the curriculum and training our supervisors on it was very rewarding. This pilot project has sparked positive change, particularly with regards to reports and other electronic supervisory tools. In addition, policy, workflow, training and system issues have been identified, communicated and are in the process of being resolved. Without this project, we wouldn’t be at this point for quite some time yet. We also want to praise the Maine Project Team for their guidance, patience, flexibility and expertise in managing this project. Their enthusiasm, consistent communication and follow-through enabled us to meet deadlines and complete the project on time. And their great sense of humor reassured us when we needed it! 7. To give readers an idea of how their agency compares to yours, please provide brief descriptions of
The RIDCYF consists of approximately 800 employees. The Family Service units are regionalized and include four regional offices. The Juvenile Probation units are also regionalized and include 6 regional offices. The Child Protective Services (CPS) division is currently housed at what used to be the central location for all DCYF protective and family service units. However, they will soon be relocating to one of our regional offices. The Children’s Behavioral Health division will also be relocating soon to one of our regional offices. All other support services, with the exception of Staff Development & Training, will be relocating to one of our regional offices within the next few months. The Staff Development & Training unit is currently under contract with Rhode Island College to form a Child Welfare Institute and as such, will remain on college grounds (where they are now). Our SACWIS system, called Rhode Island Children’s Information System (RICHIST), was implemented in August 1997. Since that time, the Department has committed to making many system changes, policy changes, and workflow changes to accommodate the demands of legislation and the needs of the staff. To give you an idea of how far we’ve come, the first version of the software implemented was 2.1; the latest to be implemented this August is version 6.7. Until recently, supervisors haven’t benefited from system generated reports, mainly due to MIS resources being funneled to system changes, rather than report design and maintenance. However, because of the SACWIS Information Management pilot project, report design and maintenance has become a high priority. Supervisors are now receiving both system-generated and ad hoc reports. MIS has made a concerted effort to meet with representatives of each division for the purpose of assessing reports already available and designing new reports. With regards to ASFA, NCANDS and AFCARS, our state is making great strides to meet reporting requirements and legislative mandates. In April 2000, we implemented an exception report for measuring AFCARS data. This report is available to all supervisors via a desktop icon and is updated weekly. Since implementation, we are only in penalty on one item for the previous reporting period and hope to have that cleaned up prior to the September 30, 2000 re-submittal deadline. If we succeed, it will be the first penalty-free report yet! The AFCARS report has proven to be a very valuable supervisory tool. Our NCANDS data submission has been penalty-free since the inception of RICHIST. ASFA mandates have been answered in several ways by RIDCYF. Supervisors receive a monthly TPR report highlighting which children on their unit’s caseload have been in placement for 15 out of the last 22 months. Supervisors can then advise their workers to begin TPR proceedings, if they haven’t already. In addition, there are changes being made to our Case Plan module in RICHIST to incorporate Permanency Planning. After implementation in September, workers will be able to document compelling reasons for not filing a TPR petition for a child in penalty right in the Case Plan window. The Department’s core curriculum for training supervisors is currently being revamped to incorporate competency-based training 8. We would like to also thank the following people: Leon Saunders, Acting Chief of MIS Research and Evaluation, RIDCYF
For further information about South Carolina's experience with the curriculum contact: Sissy Jeffords, Training Coordinator 1. Briefly describe how you implemented the pilot project in your state. Mention who you trained, the format of the training, who the trainers were and the types of adaptations you made to the core curriculum. Our pilot training session was held on March 21 and 22, 2000. Our focus group was held on April 27, 2000. In attendance were a group of 14 foster care and child protective services supervisors. Eleven of these supervisors returned for the focus group. We followed the prescribed training format in presenting all modules. Minor changes were made to adapt the material for our state. The trainers included: Sissy Jeffords, MSW - Training Coordinator - Staff Development and Training Division -Sissy delivered modules 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 10. Cynthia Maxwell, MSW - Management Support Specialist - County Operations - Cynthia delivered modules 8 and 9. Cookie Schaekel, MSW - Program Specialist - Child Protective Services - Cookie delivered module 3. Frank Oakley - Management Support Specialist - County Operations - Frank delivered module 7. Kathryn Kendrick, MSW - Supervisor of Foster Care, Technical Assistance and Recruitment Kathryn led the focus group. 2. Describe the lessons learned from your experience, including what worked best for you and what needed improvement. One thing we found was that the most, if not all participants expected this training to be specific, hands on, systems training. We needed to be more specific ourselves regarding what the training was and was not, beforehand.We need to include information/exercises using SACWIS generated reports.We need to emphasize safety, permanency and well being more throughout the training. We need to schedule the focus group session to occur sooner after the training (like within two weeks of the training session). 3. Describe what the impact of the training already has been on those you trained, the system and practice. If you can foresee a long-term impact, please discuss that also. We think that the participants got a pretty good feel for the concepts of information technology and information management as well as a better understanding of the concept that data becomes information which becomes knowledge. Therefore they left with a better appreciation of the need for accurate data entry. They also seemed to gain more appreciation for the fact that inaccurate data entered into the system yields inaccurate information. 4. Because this was a pilot program, we asked you to conduct several types of evaluations---the pre-training survey, the session evaluation, the post-training and the focus group. Please give us your comments on the evaluation process and components. Were they burdensome? If so, what part(s)? Were they useful to you? If so, how? How could we improve the process in the future? It was a little difficult getting the pre-training surveys done because of the time factor. We had under two months to get the training curriculum revised and ready for South Carolina. The majority of this work fell on one person who already had a full agenda. This complicated matters. For our purposes, the session evaluations were helpful but we did not make any particular use of the pre and post-training surveys. The session evaluations themselves helped us to identify those aspects of the training that participants found most useful. 5. You have worked with the information management competencies for supervisors for several months now. Before we finalize them, please give us your advice on adding to, deleting from or modifying these competencies. We commend your efforts regarding the information management competencies and think you have done an excellent job in identifying said competencies. 6. What else do you want to tell us about your experience with the SACWIS Supervisory Training Pilot? When we initially became involved with the project, upper management committed staff to work on the project. However, priorities were reassessed and we lost support for the project. This made our involvement and active participation more difficult. Hopefully, in the fall, we will see a recommitment and be able to offer the training to all child welfare supervisors. The opportunity to work with you folks at The Muskie School's Institute for Child and Family Policy has been a very positive and beneficial experience, even with the internal problems we ended up having. Your dedication, professionalism and hard work are obvious and appreciated. 7. To give readers an idea of how their agency compares to yours, please provide brief descriptions of:
The South Carolina Department of Social Services (SCDSS) is headed by a State Director who is appointed by our Governor. We have a central State Office, 46 county offices, 7 regional Adoptions offices and 7 regional Managed Treatment Services for Children (MTS) offices. SCDSS employs approximately 5,083 staffs. Around 1200 of these are child welfare employees. The average caseload size is 30, with MTS staff carrying smaller caseloads. SACWIS has been fully implemented in South Carolina. Currently work is being done to make the system more "user friendly". The following management reports are available to supervisors from SACWIS: Report CR711B-R01 - CPS Investigations Case Management Report - which is designed to track CPS investigation information including the referral number, date referral accepted, case number, 10 day staffing due date, whether risk assessment tool completed, 45 day determination due date, and 15 day extension date if applicable. Report CR711B-R02 - CPS Referrals Accepted for CPS Investigation - which tracks the total number of case determination that are overdue, due in the next 01-15 days, and due in the next 16-45 days. Report PR711B-R01 - Foster Care Monthly Case Management Summary Report - which tracks episode start date, episode end date, current permanent plan, current and next FCRB date, last and next permanency planning hearing date, date of last face-to-face with child. Report PR713B-R01 - Foster Care Profile Report - which is a count of children in care by age range, race and sex. This report also includes the number of children and average months in care, removal reason, permanent plan, diagnosed conditions, placement types, and case activity during the month. Report LB711B-R01, R02, R03 - Foster Home Licensing Case Management Reports - These reports run on the first working day of each month. They lists all facilities licensed by worker/county/office. They identify licensed homes/facilities that may require some type of corrective action. These reports are run on a monthly basis consisting of the R01 (detail listing by county/office), R02 (county/office summary), and R03 (statewide summary). The R01 and R02 are distributed to the county office and the R03 is distributed to the state office. SC had legislation very similar to ASFA prior to the passage of ASFA. For example, permanency planning hearings are required every 12 months, with the first due no later that 12 months after the child's entry into foster care. SC's legislation also included the requirement that the court approve all permanent plans including any plan other than reunification and adoption. SC continues to work on implementing early reunification and concurrent planning to reduce the length of time to put the child's permanent plan into place. Regarding AFCARS, counties receive exception reports which list AFCARS data elements that have not been updated or which are inconsistent with AFCARS rules. The original version of SACWIS had design problems which have caused difficulty in overall implementation of SACWIS and thus AFCARS. The exceptions on the monthly report reflect some of those design problems. In particular, SC has had difficulty in timeliness of entering termination of a foster care episode on the existing system. . South Carolina has been an NCANDS Summary Data Collection (SDC) and Detailed Case Data Collection (DCDC) participant since the inception of both projects. Staff persons have been involved at the federal level with both original AFGARS and NCANDS DCDC designs. As a result, South Carolina has been proactive in the incorporation of the elements needed for the three activities into our SACWIS design. While SC has an operating SACWIS system, it is currently undergoing redesign to modify the imported system which forms the core of the current system. The new system will reflect the modifications discussed at the June 2000 NCANDS meeting for the SDC and the DCDC data initiatives, as well as AFGARS and the ASFA measures. Currently all supervisors are required to attend the following training provided by the agency:
We also offer a training for child welfare supervisors called The Consultative Role. This is program specific supervisory training which deals with the stages of worker development and how supervisors can help move workers along in their development. We also have available through the SC Budget and Control Board a supervisory track where supervisors can earn their Associate Public Manager and Certified Public Manager Awards. This involves participating in a certain amount of required training courses over a limited period of time. 8. We would like to also thank the following people: Georgette Boulware - Management Support Specialist - County Operations *All are employed by the South Carolina Department of Social Services
For further information on Utah's experience with the curriculum contact: Navina Forsythe, Information Analyst 1. Briefly describe how you implemented the pilot project in your state. Mention who you trained, the format of the training, who the trainers were and the types of adaptations you made to the core curriculum. Utah’s Division of Child and Family Services is divided into seven regions. The training for the pilot project was conducted to all supervisors, community service managers, and the associate director in our Eastern Region. The training was done in two groups of approximately 10 people each. The training was set up to allow introduction of topics, exercises or practice of the topics, and discussion by participants. Anita Sorensen, supervisor of the SACWIS system helpdesk and training unit, and Navina Forsythe, lead information analyst of the data, analysis, and reporting unit, conducted the training. In Utah the SACWIS system has been available for two years, consequently the Utah adaptation of the curriculum focused less on acceptance of technology and more on inclusion of the use of data and the SACWIS system by supervisors. 2. Describe the lessons learned from your experience, including what worked best for you and what needed improvement. 3. Describe what the impact of the training already has been on those you trained, the system and practice. If you can foresee a long-term impact, please discuss that also. 4. Because this was a pilot program, we asked you to conduct several types of evaluations---the pre-training survey, the session evaluation, the post-training and the focus group. Please give us your comments on the evaluation process and components. Were they burdensome? If so, what part(s)? Were they useful to you? If so, how? How could we improve the process in the future? 5. You have worked with the information management competencies for supervisors for several months now. Before we finalize them, please give us your advice on adding to, deleting from or modifying these competencies. 6. What else do you want to tell us about your experience with the SACWIS Supervisory Training Pilot? 7. To give readers an idea of how their agency compares to yours, please provide brief descriptions of
For further information on Wyoming's experience with
the curriculum contact: 1. Briefly describe how you implemented the pilot project in your state. Mention who you trained, the format of the training, who the trainers were and the types of adaptations you made to the core curriculum. Wyoming chose to do two training sessions: one for county and region managers and one for social workers These two groups represented varying degrees of computer knowledge and skills. The lowest level of skills represented was one who understood only data entry while there were people who had been working in this precise area for some time. The makeup of the groups presented initial problems of adjusting the curriculum so no one felt it was condescending. Trainers included three county managers, a social service manager and a field audit person. We used parts of the curriculum provided. We condensed the modules and concentrated on the key concepts in each module. In Module 1, we did not use a workbook and we emphasized supervisory competencies providing the competency book to each attendee. We did not use Module 2 but made some verbal references to these concepts throughout the training. From Module 8, we used the Family Net case and Stages of Change Commitment to present the concepts of the entire module. Module 3 was combined with Module 9 and the Federal Outcomes were used to demonstrate the concepts presented in both modules. Modules 4 and 5 were combined re-titled "How WYCAPS Supports Casework Supervision" and was presented using WYCAPS screens to demonstrate. Module 6 was used for the opening of the second day. On the second day, much of the time was concentrated on the data developed by Andy Aldrich, which provided longitudinal data as a supervisory measure. Instead of Module 11, we chose to follow-up with a questionnaire about the projects that supervisors choose to do. 2. Describe the lessons learned from your experience, including what worked best for you and what needed improvement. The first thing we learned was that this curriculum should be initiated at the time a SACWIS project is implemented. Wyoming's system had been in place for almost two years when the project was initiated. Wyoming is currently developing reports that are more useful for direct supervision. Because of the current dirth of reports there was some tension regarding training on the use of reports that are under development. However, the supervisors and managers were really enthusiastic about the possibilities of a new way of supervising. Using the longitudinal studies firmly delivered the message that individuals can develop and use the system in new ways. 3. Describe what the impact of the training already has been on those you trained, the system and practice. If you can foresee a long-term impact, please discuss that also. Fortunately training came during a time of transition for the agency because new leadership at all levels of the agency understood the need for better information practices. Several projects are underway to improve both reports and manager skills in using data. There is a strong multi-level commitment to improved information systems. In addition, the Administrator of the Information Services Division will be contacting the University of Wyoming about using the WYCAPS system as part of the social work education curriculum. The training unit will be working with the Division of Management Development to develop training and this subject will be included in this project. 4. Because this was a pilot program, we asked you to conduct several types of evaluations---the pre-training survey, the session evaluation, the post-training and the focus group. Please give us your comments on the evaluation process and components. Were they burdensome? If so, what part(s)? Were they useful to you? If so, how? How could we improve the process in the future? Our curriculum changed several times and I failed to change the post-evaluation to truly address the curriculum we presented. However, most attendees were able to answer the survey anyway. The training unit collated the responses and was able to use their standard process to do this. I believe that the surveys were well done but they should be adjusted to each state's curriculum. The focus group (Module 11) was a problem for Wyoming. This training was scheduled at a time when several other trainings were mandated and offered. Due to the geographical problems in Wyoming, the original plan for focus groups was not completed. I do believe the responses we did receive more than adequately show the information received in the training was very useable. I would encourage the development of an alternate method for feedback for situations similar to Wyoming's. 5. You have worked with the information management competencies for supervisors for several months now. Before we finalize them, please give us your advice on adding to, deleting from or modifying these competencies. These competencies are great and I would not adjust or change them. 6. What else do you want to tell us about your experience with the SACWIS Supervisory Training Pilot? The support and flexibility of the project director and staff has been wonderful. It must have been very difficult trying to coordinate and adjust for the demographics of all the different states. Kudos to all of you. 7. To give readers an idea of how their agency compares to yours, please provide brief descriptions of
The Wyoming Department of Family Services is a state-supervised system which includes all public assistance programs, all child welfare programs, juvenile justice programs, two juvenile correctional facilities, child support programs and several regulatory programs. Total staff is just about 700. The field operations is divided into 10 districts with a total of 27 field offices and 10 child support offices and the two correctional facilities. Our social services caseload is 4000 plus cases. This includes juvenile services, child welfare and adult protection. We implemented SACWIS in July, 1998. While there are many reports available, those that are in the system are not always a lot of help because they provide no analysis just pure data. We are in line with all federal requirements for ASFA, NCANDS and AFCARS. Most training is done by our agency staff who have expertise and, occasionally, resource people outside our system. 8. We would like to also thank the following people: Bruce Twine
|
