Objectives: There are a host of methods currently being used to understand how much time it takes child welfare workers to execute the various functions of their job, such as journaling (time logs), shadowing, and random... [ view full abstract ]
Objectives: There are a host of methods currently being used to understand how much time it takes child welfare workers to execute the various functions of their job, such as journaling (time logs), shadowing, and random moment surveys, to name a few. Each of these methods has in common the use of the worker as the unit of analysis. In a major departure from this tradition, the method used for the current study – the Cost Calculator for Children’s Services, or CCfCS (developed by researchers at Loughborough University, England) – takes as the unit of analysis a single child, asking the question: how long does it take to complete the necessary set of casework activities for one child? The focus on the child as the unit of analysis allows for an understanding of the time allocations (and related costs) associated with particular groups of children (i.e., babies versus teenagers) or for particular types of experiences (i.e., reunification versus adoption). Another major strength of the CCfCS method is its conceptual framework: a core set of eight activity clusters or “processes” that are used to organize the tasks workers are required to do. This structure has been shown to be applicable across child welfare service systems in a number of countries. In this study we compare findings from two CCfCS studies conducted for two separate U.S. child welfare systems. The two systems differ in important regards, such as the extent to which they rely on private agencies for the provision of foster care services; the presence of a major urban center; and, their staffing structures. We explore patterns in the data and consider the policy implications both in terms of observed consistency in time use patterns and differences in the amount of time workers spend on key casework activities.
Methods: First, participant observation and interviews were used to better understand each system’s processes of care, local terminology, and staff roles. Focus groups were conducted to confirm the researchers’ understanding of the system and to generate preliminary time use estimates. Focus group data informed the development of a series of web-based time use surveys, which were administered to frontline and supervisory staff. Survey data were verified (establishing their feasibility) through the use of administrative, child level data. Time use data were then compared at the item and process level. An independent samples’ Student’s t-test was used to assess for statistically significant differences in the time workers from each jurisdiction spent on activities associated with each of the eight casework processes.
Results: Survey data for 601 unique child welfare workers are included in this analysis (n=206 in one jurisdiction; n=395 in the other). Workers from the two jurisdictions spent remarkably similar amounts of time on certain tasks, such as those related to non-court case reviews, legal activities, and activities related to discharging a child from foster care. There were some notable differences as well; for example, in the time workers spend developing the initial permanency plan; managing an unplanned placement change and maintaining a case on a monthly basis.
Conclusions: These findings offer additional evidence of the applicability of the eight processes as a way to organize the various tasks associated with work in child protection services. Findings from this study suggest that child welfare policies and system structures can have a strong impact on how workers spend their time on key casework activities. In the next phase of the work, these time use data will be linked with children’s administrative records, allowing for the consideration of the relationship between time use patterns and child-level needs and outcomes.
