Seeing the Forest AND the Trees: Customer Satisfaction and Comprehensive Family Services November 14, 2003 Child Welfare League of America “Tools that.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Objectives Present overview & contrast different models of case management: broker, clinical, strengths based clinical Identify roles of engagement & collaboration.
Advertisements

GO GOLDFIELDS A New Role for Local Government in Social Change.
From QA to QI: The Kentucky Journey. In the beginning, we were alone and compliance reigned.
Comprehensive Organizational Health AssessmentMay 2012Butler Institute for Families Comprehensive Organizational Health Assessment Presented by: Robin.
A New Chance Cross Border Fostering Project Project Manager: Eric Plunkett, Eric Plunkett, Principal Social Worker. Principal Social Worker.Consultant:
An Evaluation Model to promote linkages between community-based public health practice and academia.
Catulpa Community Support Services.  Use of an electronic data entry program to record demographic data and case notes to reflect service delivery 
Understanding Katie A and the Core Practice Model
HUD-VASH Case Management System Paul Smits, MSW Associate Chief Consultant, Roger Casey, PhD Director, Grant and Per Diem Program.
Building a System of Care in Child Welfare: North Carolina
An Assessment Primer Fall 2007 Click here to begin.
Caregiver Support. Child Intervention Intake Statistics  Calgary and Area 2013:  The Region received 14,100 reports about a child or youth who may be.
Family Resource Center Association January 2015 Quarterly Meeting.
Family Group Decision Making A Partnership Approach.
1 THE CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW (CFSR) PRACTICE PRINCIPLES: Critical Principles for Assessing and Enhancing the Service Array The Service Array.
Engaging Community Stakeholders and Building Community Partnerships
Addressing Disproportionality in Texas A Committed Community Collaboration Presented by: Carolyne Rodriguez, Director of Texas State Strategy, Casey Family.
Disability and special educational needs: local area responsibilities under the Children and Families Act, 2014 Charlie Henry HMI National lead for disability.
Introduction to Outcomes Based Service Delivery in Southern Alberta David O’Brien MSW, RSW Southern Alberta Child and Family Services Authority.
Shared Family Care: An Innovative Model for Supporting & Restoring Families through Community Partnerships Amy Price, Associate Director National Abandoned.
Partnering with Families for MRS/SOC Success!. North Carolina’s Family Support and Child Welfare System Family-centered practice and system of care principles.
[Hospital Name | Presenter name and title | Date of presentation]
Two Generations of Success Family Engagement in Full Service Community Schools Coalition for Community Schools April, 2010.
1 Statewide Parent Collaboration Group and Local Parent Support Group May 23, 2012 Presented by: Kathryn Sibley, Family Based Safety Services Program Specialist.
May 18, MiTEAM Is Michigan’s guide to how staff, children, families, stakeholders and community partners work together to achieve outcomes that.
Oregon’s Community-Involved Approach to Differential Response Implementation.
Lynn H. Kosanovich, HFA Regional Director Introduction to the Model.
The Vision Implementation Project
Participant Choice – Access to Recovery as a Voucher Service Delivery Model Presented to National Summit on Prisoner Re-Entry Sponsored by the White House.
©2008 National Association of Social Workers. All Rights Reserved. 1 Child Protection and Family Care Cora Hardy, LCSW Clinical Director Better Life Children.
1 Adopting and Implementing a Shared Core Practice Framework A Briefing/Discussion Objectives: Provide a brief overview and context for: Practice Models.
Chase Bolds, M.Ed, Part C Coordinator, Babies Can’t Wait program Georgia’s Family Outcomes Indicator # 4 A Systems Approach Presentation to OSEP ECO/NECTAC.
Lisa Pion-Berlin, PhD President and Chief Executive Officer Parents Anonymous ® Inc. Leah Davis, California State Parent Team Achieving Shared Leadership®
Measuring and Improving Practice and Results Practice and Results 2006 CSR Baseline Results Measuring and Improving Practice and Results Practice and Results.
Enhanced Case Management: Moving Beyond Service Brokering to Care Collaboration Unit I.
Managing Organizational Change A Framework to Implement and Sustain Initiatives in a Public Agency Lisa Molinar M.A.
Stanislaus County Children and Family Services Families In Partnership After Care Program A Parent Mentor Program.
Welcome to the ER/CalWORKs Webinar! You should have a panel on the right of your screen that shows other attendees and has a box at the bottom to write.
Vermont’s Early Childhood & Family Mental Health Competencies A story of Integration & Collaboration  How can they help me?
Engagement. Ask yourself the hard questions…  How can we better involve families, youth and caregivers in case planning?  How can we better empower.
Practice Model Elements Theoretical framework Values and principles Casework components Practice elements Practice behaviors.
Your Presenters Melissa Connelly, Director, Regional Training Academy Coordination Project, CalSWEC Sylvia Deporto, Deputy Director, Family & Children’s.
Getting Prepared in Region 5 Barbara Grice, MS, CHES Marge Heim, APRN, BC DHEC Public Health Region 5 South Carolina.
KEEPING SYLVIA’S IDENTITY Dementia & GDCP Working hand in hand with Community Health/LGA Forum 18 th June 2014.
Defending Childhood Protect Heal Thrive January 25-27, 2011 Sandra Spencer Executive Director National Federation of Families for Children’s Mental Health.
Mountains and Plains Child Welfare Implementation Center Maria Scannapieco, Ph.D. Professor & Director Center for Child Welfare UTA SSW National Resource.
Child and Family Service Review CFSR 101. Child and Family Service Review CFSR stands for the Child and Family Service Review. It is the federal government’s.
Tehama Linkages Commitment Presented by LaDeena Coates, Employment & Training Worker, II Richard Phillips, Social Worker, II.
Project KEEP: San Diego 1. Evidenced Based Practice  Best Research Evidence  Best Clinical Experience  Consistent with Family/Client Values  “The.
Mountains and Plains Child Welfare Implementation Center Maria Scannapieco, Ph.D. Professor & Director Center for Child Welfare UTA SSW Steven Preister,
Race and Child Welfare: Exits from the Child Welfare System Brenda Jones Harden, Ph.D. University of Maryland College Park Research Synthesis on Child.
Illinois Department of Children & Family Service/Chicago State University STEP Program - NHSTES May THE STEP PROGRAM Supervisory Training to Enhance.
ANNOOR ISLAMIC SCHOOL AdvancEd Survey PURPOSE AND DIRECTION.
Simpson County Schools Summer Leadership Retreat 2011 Enhancing Leadership Capacity and Effectiveness to Impact Student Learning and Staff Performance.
FOSTER CARE SERVICES Replicating Hope for Children Prepared by Wes Salsbury Foster Care Replication Committee.
Prepared by: Forging a Comprehensive Initiative to Improve Birth Outcomes and Reduce Infant Mortality in [State] Adapted from AMCHP Birth Outcomes Compendium.
Family-Centered Care Collaboration: Practice Components Unit II 1.
Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council Social Services CSSIW Performance Evaluation Report 2014–15.
Family Assessment Response. Welcome & Introduction Introduce yourself to the group: 1.Name 2.Work location 3.Work title 4.What is it about FAR that brought.
School Improvement Needs Assessment – © Iowa Association of School Boards Assessment Conducted by the Iowa Association of School Boards.
Working With Parents as Partners To Improve Student Achievement Taylor County Schools August 2013.
Pediatric Regional Integrated Services Model. Purpose The purpose of the Pediatric Regional Integrated Service Model (PRISM) is to provide streamlined.
Strategic Planning  Hire staff  Build a collaborative decision- making body  Discuss vision, mission, goals, objectives, actions and outcomes  Create.
Welcome to Southern Health Southern Health exists to improve the health, wellbeing and independence of the people we serve.
The Care Inspectorate Karen Anderson Director of Operations (Planning, Assurance and Public Reporting)
LOS ANGELES COUNTY. To learn about the Katie A. Settlement Agreement and its impact on the Child Welfare and Mental Health systems To appreciate the Shared.
Foster Care Managed Care Program
Introduction to Outcomes Based Service Delivery in Southern Alberta
Child Welfare Transformation in Leeds and Grenville – Here we go!!!
Palm Bay Academy presents… The Leader In Me Program
Presentation transcript:

Seeing the Forest AND the Trees: Customer Satisfaction and Comprehensive Family Services November 14, 2003 Child Welfare League of America “Tools that Work”

Authors Blake Jones, MSW, LCSW, ABD (Social Work) University of Kentucky Ruth A. Huebner, PhD, Child Welfare Researcher Sissy Cawood, MA, Director of Service Region Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children

Topics Rationale for Comprehensive Family Services Review of supporting literature Description of Comprehensive Family Services Customer Satisfaction as an Outcome Measurement Program Evaluation of CFS Results Discussion

Rationale for CFS New paradigm for engagement of families and “community partners” > Solution-focused vs. punitive (Christensen, Todahl, & Barrett, 1999) > Strengths-based vs. deficit-based (Powell & Batsch, 1997) > Collaborative vs. insular (Brun & Rapp, 2001) > Principles of Effective Family Focused Interventions (Kumpfer & Alvarado, 2003)

Studies of CFS-type Approaches Family-centered, strengths-based approach increases attachment, parental knowledge, and enhanced interaction among family members (Caro & Derevensky, 1991). Linkages to social services, health care, housing, and employment increase self-sufficiency (Lie & Moroney, 1992) Community-based approach to child protection is touted as one of the most effective way to “reform” CPS (Waldfogel, 2000)

Comprehensive Family Services Comprehensive Family Services Putting It All Together

CFS: A Philosophy Community-based Strength-based Prevention-focused Partnership-driven Integration of CFC services Everyone A Leader

CFS IS NOT: A Program An Initiative A Team Meeting Dependent on a facilitator “Levels” Only for “some” families

CFS IS: The way we think about our families, our co-workers and ourselves.

CFS IS: Treating our families, our co- workers and ourselves with respect and dignity.

CFS IS: Believing that our families, our co-workers and ourselves have strengths.

CFS IS: Believing that families and co- workers can contribute to the success of our work.

CFS IS: Partnerships with the community, other CFC agencies and our clients.

CFS IS: Actively listening to and respecting the opinion of others.

CFS IS: Focused on families rather than programs.

CFS IS: A belief that families can make good decisions about keeping children safe and being self sufficient.

CFS IS: The way we do business.

Implementation Co-house family support and Protection and Permanency Establish Levels of CFS Universal – strength based assessment Targeted – referrals within the agency Intensive – Family team meetings with community partners Roll out the program county by county as ready. Reinforcement and mentoring at all levels

Comprehensive Family Services Comprehensive Family Services Putting It All Together

CFS CFS Videotape

Discussion What did you observe that was similar between the two stories? What was different? How was the client treated and what was the worker’s philosophy of intervention? How is this different from typical treatment in child protection and family support? What were outcomes?

CFS CFS Summative Evaluation Are These Services Effective?

Challenges in Program Evaluation CFS is complex involving multiple practices CFS varies for each person, but all customers should be treated as partners with a belief in strengths CFS is universal - all customers CFS is targeted - needing resources CFS is intensive - needing full partnerships

Customer Satisfaction Involve Customers in Guiding Practices Consider clients as customers Empowers people to ask their opinion Satisfied customer worker harder, achieve better outcomes, and spread the word. Council on Accreditation and CFSR standards require customer input.

If CFC uses CFS beliefs and practices Then Customer Satisfaction should Be higher. Outcome: Customer Satisfaction

Population for Sampling 491,913 Total Population Foster Adoptive: 2290 Personnel: 5521 Community Partners: P&P Clients: Child Support: Family Support:

Process Overview

Response Rates 52% overall

CFS CFS Summative Evaluation Methodology

Method Customer Satisfaction Database CFS Indicators Added Months CFS in place by county Average: 5.59 months CFS Yes or No by county 63.8% had CFS in place

Client Groups and CFS

Average Total Client Satisfaction F (2, 4105) = ; p =.000, power =.99

Significant Differences for All Clients Call returned Easier to make appointments Staff treat me with respect Family is more able to care for themselves Family is safer and more secure with help and referrals made by the agency

P & P Clients Satisfied Most - Not Significant

Family Support Significant Difference

Child Support

Comments from Clients: Percent X 2 (1, 1142) = 13.15; p =.001

Community Partner Average Total Satisfaction F (1, 3185) = 23.0, p =.000; power =.98

Community Partner Most Satisfied Calls returned Communication Treated with respect Helps Community Families to be more independent, safe, and secure

Foster Parent Total Satisfaction F (1, 1387) = 17.93, p =.000; power =.98

CFS: Foster Pre-Adoptive Parents NO differences in: Recommending fostering to others Pride in helping families Biggest differences: Quality visits to child Receives information

% Satisfaction with Quality Visits to Foster Child F (1, 1387) = 46.73; p=.000

Other Significant Differences

Time and CFS The longer CFS was in place, the higher Client Satisfaction Community Partner Satisfaction Foster Parent Satisfaction All statistically significant at the.000 level.

CFS a way to do business Customer Satisfaction an Outcome

Limitations Regional differences in the way CFS is implemented (e.g., access to services, rates of poverty, rural regions) Confounding variables (interpersonal relationship skills of certain workers) Survey has not been empirically validated

What does this mean for practice? CFS shows promise Not cause and effect with this data Different effects for different programs Probably other effects at work CFS is consistent with best practices in the literature

Questions and Discussion