The Effects of Standardizing the Core Curriculum of Child Welfare Trainings for the Bay Area

1
The Effects of Standardizing the Core Curriculum
of Child Welfare Trainings for the Bay Area

• By Mirthala Santizo
• PA 706
• Professor Stowers

2
Background

• History of child welfare training
• Trainings are federally funded though Title IV-E
  grants.
• Funding was created due to the states inability
  to aid families and children appropriately.
• Department of Health and Human Services allowed
  each state to create a plan on how they would
  provide trainings.

3
California Child Welfare Training

• California Department of Social Services (DSS)
  decided to fund regional training academies to
  administer the program.
• Five academies were created
• Bay Area Academy
• Central California Child Welfare Training Academy
• Inter-University Consortium Department of
  Children and Family Services Training Project
• Northern California Training Academy
• Public Child Welfare Training Academy Southern
  Region

4
The academy used for research is the Bay Area
Academy
5
Brief History of Bay Area Academy

• The Bay Area Academy (BAA) is the youngest
  academy and began regional training in 1997
• It serves 12 counties

• Alameda
• Contra Costa
• Marin
• Monterey
• Napa
• San Benito

• San Francisco
• San Mateo
• Santa Clara
• Santa Cruz
• Solano
• Sonoma

6
BAA Regional Training Program

• What
• Training classes
• Seminars
• Other professional development resources
• Who
• County child welfare and probation staff serving
  children and families in the foster care program.
  
• Public health nurses,
• Support staff
• Foster care providers
• Community agencies who work with clients served
  by the public child welfare system.

7
BAA Regional Training Program cont.

• Type of Regional Trainings
• Core skills and knowledge for new child welfare
  workers
• Advanced skills and knowledge for experienced
  child welfare workers
• Core skills and knowledge for new and experienced
  supervisors
• Interdisciplinary training for social workers,
  nurses, mental health workers and other
  disciplines, and core training for new managers.
• Benefit to Trainees
• Receive Continuing Education Units and receive
  certificate of completion for all core training
  series.
• Update knowledge and skills that are federally
  mandated

8
Changes Started at the State Level

• In 2001, Californias Child and Family Services
  Review analyzed the services provided by the
  counties child welfare service systems.
• Noticed that the counties child welfare service
  systems needed improvement in safety and
  well-being of the children and families of
  California.
• A redesign of the systems was initiated

9
Changes to the Regional Training Core Curriculum

• In January 2003, a Performance Improvement Plan
  (PIP) was developed by Californias Child and
  Family Services Review (CFSR)
• Overall improvement plan for the CA Child Welfare
  Service system in the following areas
• Safety
• Permanency
• Well Being
• Systematic Factors

10
Changes to the Regional Training Core Curriculum
cont.

• In the Systematic Factors, implementing common
  core curriculum was stated as a goal to be
  achieved.
• CA Needed improvement for the following reasons
• Lack of uniformity on statewide staff training
  and staff development.
• Case Managers and Supervisors inability to
  mentor new staff and provide sufficient hands-on
  training due to high caseloads.
• No statewide requirements for on-going training
  of staff that support the goals of the Child and
  Family Services Plan

11
Changes to the Regional Training Core Curriculum
cont.

• How to improve Core Curriculum training
• Six Action Steps
• Self assessment of current counties training
• The counties, the California Social Work
  Education Center (CalSWEC) and the Regional
  Training Academies (RTAs) will develop a
  standardize core curriculum
• Training to child welfare and probation
  supervisors on good case planning practice will
  be provided

12
Changes to the Regional Training Core Curriculum
cont.

• Child welfare managers and supervisors should
  receive priority training on evidence-based
  techniques for mentoring new and seasoned staff.
• Resource Center for Family Focused Practice will
  ensure that probation officers receive priority
  training on child welfare requirements
• CDSS will conduct focused training regarding
  Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) requirements and
  cultural considerations of Native American
  children for both county staff and tribal ICWA
  workers.

13
Changes to the Regional Training Core Curriculum
cont.

• The six Core Curriculum Training that was
• standardized
• Child Maltreatment Identification, Part I
  Neglect, Physical Abuse and Emotional Abuse
• Framework for Child Welfare Practice in
  California
• Placement and Permanency
• Critical Thinking in Child Welfare Assessment
  Safety, Risk and Protective Capacity
• Family Engagement in Case Planning and Case
  Management
• Human Development (not standardized at this time)

14
Implementation

• The Regional Training Academies needed to
  implement the core curriculums by
• June 30, 2005

15
Analysis of Core Curriculum StandardizationGener
al Benefits for Trainees

• Receive the core curriculum training that is
  standardized in CA
• Be able to transfer skills and training if
  trainee moves to a different county

16
Analysis of Core Curriculum StandardizationGener
al Disadvantages for Trainees

• Trainer unable to modify curriculum for their
  audience.

17
Analysis of Child Welfare TrainingsGeneral
Benefits for Trainees

• Update on core skills
• Update on changes in child welfare practice
• Learning new techniques/skills
• Learning skills to be culturally competence
• Receive support from other trainees

18
Analysis of Child Welfare TrainingsGeneral
Disadvantages for Trainees

• Problems implementing the skills they learn
• Unable to learn the skills
• Training curriculum does not suit the trainees
  learning curve
• Training style does not suit the trainee
• Technology problems
• Others disadvantages not directly training
  related
• For some child welfare workers, the inability to
  attend the trainings due to high caseload is a
  problem itself.

19
Research question

• Will standardizing the core curriculum be an
  effective training tool to child welfare workers?
• Will the trainer be able to effectively teach
  the standardize core curriculum?

20
Hypothesis

• There is a statistical significance difference
  between the trainees evaluations scores before
  and after the implementation of the standardized
  core curriculum on 6/30/2005.

21
Research Methodology

• Sample population
• The child welfare workers being trained by the
  Bay Area Academy and the core trainers in 2005
• Two sets of data
• 2005 evaluations from the core trainings
  (trainees)
• Surveys from the 2005 core trainers

22
Research Methodology cont.

• Analysis
• Calculate the percent mean of each the trainees
  evaluation scores according to the trainer, date,
  and training. Cross-sectional on three
  independent variables and two dependent variables
• Evaluate the trainers views on the standardized
  core curriculum and Bay Area Academy

23
Research Design

• Evaluations
• Analysis
• Cross-sectional on three independent variables
  (date, trainer and training) and two dependent
  variables (evaluation scores)
• Data
• Scores on all 2005 Core training evaluations
  from Bay Area Academy
• Type of analysis
• Quantitative analysis on evaluations on SPSS
• Variables
• Independent variables date (pre 6/30/05 and
  post 6/30/05), trainer and training
• Dependent variables evaluation scores of
  Overall Rating of Trainer and Overall Rating of
  Training

24
Research Design

• Survey
• Analysis
• Content analysis on the trainers ability to
  learn and teach the standardized core curriculum.
• Data
• Survey answers and open questions sent to the
  Core Trainers
• Type of analysis
• Qualitative analysis on surveys using themes
• Unit of Analysis
• Themes Core Curriculum opinions (positive and
  negative)
• Academys Assistance (positive and negative)

25
Research Findings

• Evaluations 1st Analysis
• Ind. Var. Date and Training
• Dep. Var. Overall Rating of the Course
• Findings
• Child Maltreatment
• Pre-6/30/05 93.30 felt the training was
  effective
• Post-6/30/05 96.40 felt the training was
  effective
• However, rating for very effective fell
  -11.30, while somewhat effective increased by
  14.40
• Framework for Child Welfare
• Unable to analyze no pre-6/30/05 evaluations

26
Research Findings

• Placement and Permanency
• Pre-6/30/05 70.00 felt the training was
  effective
• Post-6/30/05 99.00 felt the training was
  effective
• Rating for very effective increased by 43.00,
  while the remainder decreased.
• Safety, Risk and Protective Capacity
• Pre-6/30/05 100.00 felt the training was
  effective
• Post-6/30/05 77.50 felt the training was
  effective
• Rating for very effective fell -46.90
• Family Engagement
• Pre-6/30/05 96.80 felt the training was
  effective
• Post-6/30/05 87.60 felt the training was
  effective
• Rating for very effective fell -27.60
• Human Development
• Unable to analyze no standardized core
  curricula has been created.

27
Research Findings

• Evaluations 2nd Analysis
• Ind. Var. Date and Trainer
• Dep. Var. Overall Rating of the Trainer
• Findings
• Margie Albers
• For both Pre-6/30/05 and Post-6/30/05, 98.80
  felt the trainer was effective
• However, the rating for very effective fell
  -5.60
• Lilli Miles
• Pre-6/30/05 100.00 felt the trainer was
  effective
• Post-6/30/05 98.00 felt the trainer was
  effective
• However, rating for very effective fell -11.20
• Nora Gerber, Betty Hanna, Irene Becker, Bruce
  McKee, Mary Garrison
• Unable to analyze did not train before 6/30/05
• Trainers Not Listed
• Unable to analyze did not train after 6/30/05

28
Research Findings

• Survey findings
• Core Curriculum opinions
• Learning the curriculum
• - Curriculum was not organized in a presentable
  way
• - Curriculum had too much information
• Ability to train
• - Curriculum did not have relevant exercises
• Curriculums culturally sensitivity
• - Area is not covered enough in curriculum
• Overall Opinions
• - Curriculum is written poorly and is very
  long. Trainers had a difficult time adapting to
  the curriculum

29
Research Findings

• Survey findings
• Academy opinions
• Overall, trainers had good experiences with the
  Academy.
• BAA helped trainers with Core Curriculum training
• BAA was supportive
• BAA has improved from the past

30
Limitations of Research

• Evaluation
• Significance difference between the number of
  pre-6/30/05 evaluations and post-6/30/05
  evaluations.
• Pre-6/30/05 n 213
• Post-6/30/05 n 541
• Not all trainings were performed before and after
  6/30/05
• Not all trainers trained before and after 6/30/05
• Not all trainings had evaluations done
• BAA was missing evaluations.
• Survey
• There were only seven core trainers and only
  three sent back surveys. Due to limitations at
  BAA, I was unable to contact them since surveys
  were supposed to be anonymous.

31
Conclusion of Findings

• Scores between training greatly differed

32
Conclusion of Findings

• Found that trainers had a hard time adapting to
  the new standard core curriculum guidelines.
• The trainers were not in support of the standard
  core curriculum.

33
Conclusion of Findings

• Overall, it is too difficult to tell whether
  the standard core curriculum had a positive or
  negative affect on the trainees. Some trainings
  did well (Child Maltreatment and Placement and
  Permanency), while others had poorer scores
  (Safety, Risk and Protective Capacity and Family
  Engagement).

34
Conclusion of Findings

• Trainees did score the trainers lower after
  6/30/05. This is understandable after the
  qualitative analysis of the trainers surveys.
• At this time, it still is too difficult to
  determine whether the trainers were able to
  effectively teach the standardized core
  curriculum
• Limitations on getting back the surveys
• The higher scores trainees gave to trainings