I always try to keep the article focused on child welfare, but often I end up commenting on some book I've read or some parenting experience I have had that ties into the child welfare issue I'm addressing. Luckily, the responses have been overwhelmingly positive, and that has contributed to my decision to begin this blog. Keeping work in balance with life is a huge part of my life calculus for sure, and one that I am forever thinking about and adjusting.
So, at least every quarter, I will share my PSF article. It doesn't look like they copyright it, and even if they did, PSF is such a great organization that I'm certain they'd give me permission to re-publish (have I mentioned I'm an ask forgiveness not permission kind of a gal?).
So, here it is...
The Calculus of Child Welfare
Full
Disclosure: I just finished reading
Michael Lewis’ “Moneyball,” and whether you are a baseball fanatic like my
husband, or just married to one like I am, “Moneyball” is a beautifully written
and fascinating book.
When you think about
baseball, you can’t help but think about statistics—batting averages, runs
batted in, on base percentage, earned run average, and the list goes on. As a child welfare professional, I have been
both a little suspicious and a little jealous of all these seemingly endless
items that are painstakingly tracked in connection with the game of
baseball. Baseball seems to measure
everything, so they must have it all worked out! But as hard as we try in the child welfare
world to come up with performance metrics, score cards, predictive analytics,
and foolproof ways to measure our efforts, prevent serious injury and death of
children, and ensure best outcomes, we continue to fall short.
I always thought it was
for a variety of reasons: 1) we’re late to the game and have only recently
begun trying to operate in this realm of data and evidence-based outcomes; 2)
we’re wasting a lot of time because just like Mark Twain said, “There are three
kinds of lies—lies, damned lies, and statistics,” or in other words, why bother
because numbers will never tell the truth about the complex world that is child
welfare, and 3) even if there is something to be gained from looking at these
numbers, we will never have the level of resources dedicated to this task to
allow us to do it right.
But after reading
“Moneyball,” I feel differently.
Baseball has also struggled both to measure the right things and to
properly interpret the many, many numbers they have at their disposal. The biggest message I took from Lewis’ book
is that statistics in and of themselves are not truth, but if you are willing
to ask, “Why?”, the statistics and information you gather can help you gain
insight into the most important issues you are dealing with, empower you to
creatively solve problems and improve outcomes, and allow you to make the most
of your limited resources. The Oakland A's, under the guidance of General Manager Billy Beane, are the case in point
that “Moneyball” focuses on, and it is an inspiring story. If the A's can consistently create a top-notch
team in an economical way by understanding the needs of the team and the
abilities each player brings to the equation, we in the child welfare
profession can do the same thing.
This week, I received
the May Scorecards for both the community-based care agencies and child
protective investigations, and Partnership and our Circuit 3/8 investigators
looked good, as usual, with their measurements of things such as, recurrence of
abuse and reentry into the child welfare system, permanence for youth,
investigation commencement times, timely closure of cases, case loads, and
measures related to education and administrative costs. My Children’s Legal Services team is also in
preparation for our Northeast Regional Review of our work, where we will be
evaluated on things such as case load size, quality of legal writing, quality
of legal decision making and documentation, timeliness of adjudication of
dependency and permanence, courtroom preparation and skills, efforts to address
children’s educational, safety, permanence, and well-being needs, and whether
children have the appropriate goals and are moving through the court system
appropriately. I have also had the
privilege over the last several years of working with Casey Family Programs on
the Cold Case Project, where we use predictive analytics to identify the youth
in our system of care who are at greatest risk of “aging out” without permanent
connections. We then do in-depth reviews
of cases and participate in Permanency Round Tables where we share our findings
and help to develop action plans focused on achieving legal permanence.
With all of this
information and analysis and grading and comparison, it is easy to get
overwhelmed, and even defensive and discouraged. But I prefer the approach of Billy Beane and
the Oakland A's. I want to find ways to
dig into all of this data and make sense out of it so that we can use it to
improve our work. I want to make sure we
are tracking the right things and that we are gathering accurate information. I want to make sure we are making smart
decisions about where to focus our resources and how to improve our system.
Also this week, I
received a report that indicated that around 25 percent of the children in care
in the Northeast Region do not have a father listed for them in our Florida
Safe Families Network database (the statewide database we use to record all of
our child welfare investigations and cases).
One possibility in response to this report would be to conclude that 25
percent of the children in care in the Northeast Region have no legal
father. Instead, we should be asking
where the information came from and whether it is accurate. Until we understand that, we don’t really
know what the problem is and what the best approach would be. Do we have a data entry problem, do we have a
problem with identifying fathers, or do we have a problem with establishing
paternity? Probably a little of each,
but until we can get a better handle on the proportions, we don’t know how or
where to devote our resources.
I could go on and on,
but there is only so much space in this newsletter, so I will just say
this: the data we collect and what we do
with it matter. We should never lose
sight of the individual children and families, but we should also spend time
gathering information, understanding what it can and can’t tell us, and never
being afraid to ask why. And then, to
quote a wise man, “Do. Or do not. There is no try.”
No comments:
Post a Comment