Inside the Black Box - Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago

More documents

Recommendations

Info

success. Providers would like to include additional measures regarding accomplishments, such as achievement of intermediate outcomes during participation in the program and achievement of additional outcomes later, such as obtaining industry credentials and further education. Several provider organizations noted that they need to look beyond whether individuals are getting and keeping jobs for ways to measure client self-sufficiency and impacts on families and communities. This kind of data would reflect the larger value of the organization to families and the broader communities they serve. One organization wanted to answer questions such as What is the impact...of a person moving from $20,000 a year to $50,000 a year in the community [and] How much does that increase the purchasing power of the family and what is the multiplying effect in the economy Finally, programs noted the current emphasis is largely placed on outcome measures when collecting more information to assess process measures would help them to better allocate resources and to learn about areas in their operations that need improvement, such as participant attrition and support services uptake. The Need for Better Data Management Systems Agencies expressed a desire to improve and expand data collection to provide a more complete perspective on organizational performance. One of the most common challenges expressed by programs was that they are often using multiple data systems to collect and report program measures, making entering, management, and use of data cumbersome. Most data systems are designed for a specific function or to track a specific population supported by a particular funding source. For example, the Illinois Workforce Development System (IWDS) is used to collect participant information and outcomes on those supported by the WIA or Trade Adjustment and Assistance Act (TAA) funding sources. While all of the programs in our study use IWDS, most expressed frustration with its limited capacity for meaningful case management and outcomes assessment. Additionally, the four Centers for Working Families (CWF) grantees in our study are required to use the Efforts to Outcomes (ETO) data system for case management and assessing outcomes that are part of the CWF services. 3 While ETO was reported to be useful for case management, interviewees did not find it to be useful for all programs; it particularly did not help with measures surrounding the educational aspects of programs. Despite recognizing the value of this system, one provider called ETO “really burdensome” because of the sheer volume of data 3 According to the website for the Centers for Working Families, their “approach brings together—or bundles—access to a full range of essential economic supports in a convenient location to help families build self-sufficiency, stabilize their finances, and move ahead.” (http://www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/CenterforFamilyEconomicSuccess/CentersforWorkingFamilies.aspx) Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago 20
that needs to be collected. Another interviewee said that maintaining the system has been “intense,” but has resulted in a more “data-driven culture” within the organization. Furthermore, the organizations reported using a variety of other program-specific data systems for collecting information on all of their participants for purposes of case management and tracking outcomes. Additional data systems are used to collect and assess other programmatic aspects, such as referrals, process measures, and engagement with employers. The capacity and customizability of these data systems varies widely. Although all of the programs have to use the standard measures of the state’s IWDS, they augment this with other systems such as business-management software like Salesforce, or basic data software such as Microsoft Excel or Access. Because of the fragmentation and sheer number of multiple data systems, interviewees noted that it can require significant staff time to coordinate and use the systems and data correctly. Organizations devote varying levels of money and staff towards maintaining these systems. As a consequence, many programs do not use the data to its fullest potential. At least some manual data entry is required to keep the data in the systems updated and consistent. Not only do staff enter and update the information in the databases, but because the systems are often not integrated, staff also have to devote time to transferring data between systems to keep the systems in synch. The cumbersome data requirements staff must navigate can translate into staff having less time to devote to program services. Several program interviewees expressed a desire for a more unified, comprehensive data management system that includes all participants served and contains a broader set of useful measures. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago 21
Page 1 and 2: Inside the Black Box: What Makes Wo
Page 3 and 4: Acknowledgments We would like to th
Page 5 and 6: Policy and Advocacy Efforts .......
Page 7 and 8: Executive Summary The workforce dev
Page 9 and 10: 1. Interface with other required da
Page 11 and 12: While acknowledging funding as a pr
Page 13 and 14: Introduction The workforce developm
Page 15 and 16: Figure 1: Interaction of Influences
Page 17 and 18: Review of Recent Literature A revie
Page 19 and 20: development system and found that i
Page 21 and 22: for contributing to program success
Page 23 and 24: capture all of the participants’
Page 25: The organizations also reported tha
Page 29 and 30: Recommendation 2: Develop longitudi
Page 31 and 32: seldom systematically collected by
Page 33 and 34: With regard to the planning and dev
Page 35 and 36: models in order to best serve their
Page 37 and 38: organizations are interested in col
Page 39 and 40: Poor attitude, poor work history, o
Page 41 and 42: Organizations often use a wide rang
Page 43 and 44: …a more holistic approach to work
Page 45 and 46: in the industry. Professional crede
Page 47 and 48: Success Factors: Workforce Provider
Page 49 and 50: education or no work experience. Ot
Page 51 and 52: equirements. As part of these effor
Page 53 and 54: given as the reason organizations d
Page 55 and 56: passion to see, to transform this c
Page 57 and 58: permanent job opportunities. These
Page 59 and 60: Meet the Needs of Participants Many
Page 61 and 62: participant is linked to an opening
Page 63 and 64: Provide Business Services to Engage
Page 65 and 66: The organizations in the study all
Page 67 and 68: community, such as the services the
Page 69 and 70: depend more heavily on other fundin
Page 71 and 72: Sometimes a legislation that is out
Page 73 and 74: on the participants they serve. Als
Page 75 and 76: Community engagement is also essent
Page 77 and 78:
Website Description Length of Progr
Page 79 and 80:
Eligibility Participants Served Par
Page 81 and 82:
Participants Served ninth grade lev
Page 83 and 84:
Length of Program Size of Program E
Page 85 and 86:
Size of Program Eligibility Partici
Page 87 and 88:
Eligibility Participants Served Ind
Page 89 and 90:
Bragg, D.D., Kim, E., & Barnett, E.
Page 91 and 92:
Herr, T., & Wagner, S. L. (2007). B
Page 93 and 94:
NGA Center for Best Practices, Nati
Page 95 and 96:
The Workforce Boards of Metropolita
Page 97 and 98:
The qualitative design of this proj
Page 99:
1313 East 60th Street Chicago, IL 6
show all

Inside the Black Box - Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?