• Login
    View Item 
    •   UMB Digital Archive
    • School, Graduate
    • Theses and Dissertations All Schools
    • View Item
    •   UMB Digital Archive
    • School, Graduate
    • Theses and Dissertations All Schools
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UMB Digital ArchiveCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Alternative Response in Child Welfare: A Mixed Methods Study of Caseworker Decision Making

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    Shipe_umaryland_0373D_10840.pdf
    Size:
    1.841Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Author
    Shipe, Stacey LeAnn
    Advisor
    Harrington, Donna
    Date
    2017
    Type
    dissertation
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    A family's entrance into the child welfare system begins once a report meets a jurisdiction's definition for child maltreatment. Alternative response (AR), a legislatively mandated policy in Maryland, is an approach to child protective services (CPS) where caseworkers are required to provide a family-centered, strengths-based approach as opposed to making a final determination of abuse/neglect. Once a family begins their trajectory into the child welfare system they are reliant on caseworkers to make the best decisions for them, but these decisions are influenced by multiple factors. This mixed-methods study examined caseworker decision making and the influence child, family, and organizational factors had on recurrence. The quantitative phase of this study used administrative data for 2,871 families from three jurisdictions in the state of Maryland. Using child and caregiver characteristics that are predictive of recurrence, differences were examined between families who received a traditional response (TR) versus an AR. These same characteristics were used to predict which families would receive a subsequent investigation, and among those, what predicted a substantiated recurrence. In the qualitative phase, AR caseworkers participated in focus groups where they were asked about the findings from the quantitative portion of the study as well as other organizational factors that influenced their overall decision making for families. County level differences were found among the TR and AR families for child and caregiver race, maltreatment allegation, Medicaid receipt, and re-investigation. These differences held when the counties were examined individually. The number of children, child gender, and Medicaid receipt predicted a subsequent investigation. Child age, maltreatment allegation, Medicaid receipt, previous investigative finding/response, and county predicted a substantiated recurrence. The findings from the focus groups revealed challenges specific to agency mandates and that caseworkers rarely differentiated their approach between a TR and AR. The results suggest that additional research is needed to fully understand the influence of case factors and organizational context and its impact on family outcomes. Also needed is additional training for caseworkers to fully understand the purpose of AR as well as the processes that place families on an AR track.
    Description
    University of Maryland, Baltimore. Social Work. Ph.D. 2017
    Keyword
    alternative response
    caseworkers
    child protective services
    mixed methods
    Child welfare workers
    Decision Making
    Identifier to cite or link to this item
    http://hdl.handle.net/10713/6718
    Collections
    Theses and Dissertations School of Social Work
    Theses and Dissertations All Schools

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Policies | Contact Us | UMB Health Sciences & Human Services Library
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.