Building a Model and Framework for Child Welfare Supervision

The project team contacted potential interviewees by email or telephone and made appointments
with those who agreed to be interviewed. In advance of the appointment, the interview protocol was
emailed to them. Interviews were conducted by phone, with at least two project team members
attending; one conducted the interview and the other took notes. Interview length ranged from 30
minutes to over an hour. Respondents were assured that their comments would remain anonymous
and that interview excerpts included in project products would not be attributed by respondent’s
name or agency. One respondent chose to complete the interview protocol and return it via email
rather than complete the interview over the phone.
Once an interview was completed, we inquired whether it would be possible to interview the
respondent's administrator, supervisor, and/or caseworker in order to complete the triad. Due to the
unpredictable nature of child welfare staff activities, it was difficult to complete interviews as
scheduled. Nineteen (19) interviews were completed: nine administrators, six supervisors, and four
caseworkers.
Data analysis
The interview data were compiled and analyzed by the project team. A content analysis was
conducted by each of the three project team members; themes identified in the data and responses to
specific protocol questions were compared. Data were reviewed in the aggregate as well as by
interviewees’ agency job positions to identify similarities and differences between supervisors,
administrators and caseworkers. Descriptive statistics of key informants’ ratings regarding the
importance of child welfare supervisors’ job responsibilities (i.e. most important, important, not
important, not applicable/not aware) were also analyzed and compared to determine the ways in
which these were similar and different when findings were grouped by agency position. When these
analyses were completed, the findings were reviewed with working group members, who provided
feedback regarding the consistency of the findings with their observations in the field and also
raised questions for further data analysis.
Interviews with subject matter experts
Following data analysis, we reviewed our findings with three subject matter experts who have
worked extensively in the area of child welfare supervision and have completed demonstration
projects addressing effective supervision. These experts, Crystal Collins-Camargo, Ph.D. of the
University of Kentucky School of Social Work, and Steve Preister, Ph.D. and Joe Murray of the
National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement, were either members of
the advisory committee or were identified by members knowledgeable of their work. The findings
were shared and reviewed with the subject matter experts in order to seek their perspectives about
the ways in which the findings were consistent or inconsistent with their own observations in the
field. All project team members attended each subject matter expert interview, and the notes from
the interview were transcribed. These experts also provided written materials on their demonstration
projects.
46