Instrument 1 - JCAMP CIP Data Capacity Survey_032822

OMB Control # xxxx-xxxx and Expiration Date: xx/xx/xxxx

JCAMP CIP DATA CAPACITY SURVEY

Title: Judicial, Court, and Attorney Measures of Performance (JCAMP) Study

Protocol No.: None

IRB Protocol #

Sponsor: Children’s Bureau, ACF DHHS

InvestigatorS: Alicia Summers, PhD, MS

682 Talus Way

Reno, Nevada 89503

United States

Sophia Gatowski, PhD, MA

2-6988 177 Street

Surrey, BC V3S 2K1

Canada

STUDY-RELATED

PHONE NUMBER(S): Alicia Summers, Ph.D.

(775) 686-8545

Sophia Gatowski, Ph.D.

(604) 807-4617

The Capacity Building Center for Courts has received Children's Bureau funding to review existing child welfare court performance measures, with the goal of developing a set of measures which not only builds on lessons learned from past performance measurement, but also incorporates the best and latest thinking on judicial, attorney and court performance measures for child welfare cases.

Determining the extent to which different measurement categories are currently being captured will be extremely important to this project, as it will assist in defining and prioritizing measures, and indicate areas where courts may be challenged in collecting data and require more guidance. To obtain the most up-to-date information about performance measurement, you have been invited to complete a survey about the collection of judicial, attorney and court performance measures in child welfare cases in your jurisdiction. The survey asks you about your current court performance measurement capacities.

The survey should take 50 minutes to complete. Your participation in the survey is voluntary. You may refuse to take part in the research or exit the survey at any time without penalty or loss of otherwise entitled benefits. You may decline to answer any question you do not wish to answer for any reason. There are no foreseeable risks involved in participating in the survey. Your alternative is to not participate. You will receive no direct benefits from participating in this research study. However, your responses will help us learn more about child welfare court data capacity in your state.

Your survey responses will be sent to a link on the Qualtrics survey platform where data will be stored in a password protected electronic format. People overseeing the study such as the IRB may review records. Survey responses you provide may be associated with the name of your state and included in a report shared within the Children’s Bureau and the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) and may be shared in public reports, articles, and presentations. Information from this study may be securely shared with qualified researchers to help guide future research and support program improvement.

Your responses to this survey will remain private to the extent permitted by law.

If you have questions or concerns, or complaints about the survey or study, or to report a research-related problem, you may contact Co-Principal Investigators Dr. Alicia Summers and Dr. Sophia Gatowski.

Co-Principal Investigator

Alicia Summers, Ph.D.

Data Savvy Consulting

682 Talus Way, Reno, NV 89503

(775) 686-8545

Co-Principal Investigator

Sophia Gatowski, Ph.D.

Systems Change Solutions Inc.

2-6988 177 Street, Surrey, BC., Canada, V3S 2K1

(604) 807-4617

This research is being overseen by WCG IRB. An IRB is a group of people who perform independent review of research studies. You may talk to them at 855-818-2289 or [email protected] if:

• You have questions, concerns, or complaints that are not being answered by the research team.

• You are not getting answers from the research team.

• You cannot reach the research team.

• You want to talk to someone else about the research.

• You have questions about your rights as a research subject.

• The Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: The described collection of information is voluntary and will be used to help us understand Court Improvement Program data capacity. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 50 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and reviewing the collection of information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB number and expiration date for the described collection are OMB #: xxxx-xxxx, Exp: xx/xx/20xx. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Dr. Alicia Summers; [email protected] and Dr. Sophia Gatwoski; [email protected].

Please select ”agree” or “disagree” below. You may print a copy of this consent form for your records. Clicking on the “Agree” button indicates that:

• You have read the above information;

• You voluntarily agree to participate;

• You are 18 years of age or older

☐Agree ☐Disagree

Thank you in advance for your participation and input!

Data Capacity

1. For CIPs, in what state or U.S. territory do you currently work?

2. For title IV-E tribes or Tribal Court Improvement Programs, in what tribe do you work?

3. Do you have a statewide court case management system? A statewide court case management system means you have an electronic case management system operated by the courts that is the same in all the jurisdictions. Yes No

4. Do you have localized or jurisdiction specific electronic court case management systems? This would include if jurisdictions all run the same program but they are not connected statewide or if some sites have different court software than others. Yes No

5. How easy is it to change or add data fields to your system? That is, if you wanted to add a variable to the system (like ICWA applicability yes/no), how simple or hard is that process to complete. Very easy might mean that the system is flexible and adding fields is inexpensive and easy for IT to do. Very difficult may mean that the system is expensive to make changes to and that all changes take lengthy amount of time to complete.

	Very easy
	Easy
	Somewhat easy
	Neither easy nor difficult
	Somewhat difficult
	Difficult
	Very difficult

6. What is the approval process like for making changes for the case management system?
   
   
   

	It is fairly quick and easy.
	It takes a moderate amount of time to get approval
	It is challenging and lengthy to get approval for changes.
	Don't know
	Other (please specify)

7. Can you query your court case management system? That is, are you able to build reports from the case management system on some (or all) data of interest? Yes No

8. Does your system track whether the case is an ICWA case? Yes No
   Other:

9. Does your system track race/ethnicity of the parents? Yes No

10. Does your system track race/ethnicity of the child? Yes No

11. Do you have a system or process in place for your court case management system to share data with the agency? Yes No

Court Performance Measures- Toolkit

We are interested in learning more about whether you currently collect data on the court performance measures identified in the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Child Abuse and Neglect Court Performance Measures (Toolkit). The Toolkit was released in 2008 and has recommended court performance measures related to safety, permanency, timeliness, and due process.

For each measure, please indicate if your statewide court case management systems collects the data, if the statewide system can report on it, if your local systems collect the data (if any can do it, mark yes), your local systems can report (if any can, mark yes), if you collect this data in another method (e.g., through file review, court observation, surveys, etc.) and if the agency reports this type of data to you. For all items EXCEPT the agency provides data to the court, mark ONLY if the court collects the data in some way. Please check all that apply.

Please note: We are most interested in data that is collected as a field or value in your system. If your system allows you to scan in entire documents and the information would be in the document, that is not the same as if your system has a field where the data are entered. We are looking for the data field specifically.

12. Safety
    
    
    

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Maltreatment while under court jurisdiction
Maltreatment after exiting court jurisdiction (Reentry into care)

13. Permanency

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Achievement of Permanency; % Discharged to Specific Permanency Outcomes (e.g., reunification)
Children Not Achieving Permanency (% of children aging out of foster care)
Children Moved While Under Court Jurisdiction (e.g., number of placement moves)
Re-entry into foster care after return home
Re-entry into foster care after adoption or guardianship

14. Due Process

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Number of Judges Per Case
Service of Process to Parties
Early Appointment of Advocates for Children
Early Appointment of Counsel for Parents (e.g., when attorneys appointed)
Advance Notice of Hearings to Parties
Advance Written Notice of Hearings to Foster Parents, Preadoptive Parents, and Relative Caregivers
Presence of Advocates During Hearings
Presence of Parties During Hearings
Continuity of Advocates for Children
Continuity of Counsel for Parents

15. Timeliness

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Time to Permanency Placement/Permanency (e.g., average median days to from petition filing to case closure)
Time to Adjudication
Time to Disposition Hearing
Timeliness of Disposition Hearing (e.g., percent held within statutory requirements)
Timeliness of Case Review Hearings (e.g., percent held within statutory requirements)
Time to First Permanency Hearing
Time to Termination of Parental Rights Petition Filing
Time to Termination of Parental Rights (e.g., final orders for both parents)
Timeliness of Termination of Parental Rights Proceedings (e.g., TPR hearings)
Time from Disposition Hearing to Termination of Parental Rights Petition
Timeliness of Adoption Petition
Timeliness of Adoption Proceedings

New Categories of Performance of Measurement

A comprehensive literature review of federal child welfare laws, standards of practice for courts and court professionals, and the research literature helped us to identify multiple categories of potential performance measurement in the field. Please tell us if you collect data on any of the following.

For each measure, please indicate if your statewide court case management systems collects the data, if the statewide system can report on it, if your local systems collect the data (if any can do it, mark yes), your local systems can report (if any can, mark yes), if you collect this data in another method (e.g., through file review, court observation, surveys, etc.) and if the agency reports this type of data to you. For all items EXCEPT the agency provides data to the court, mark ONLY if the court collects the data in some way. Please check all that apply.

The categories are broad. The definitions in parenthesis below are meant to give an idea of what the category contains. If you collect something that you would classify in this category, please mark it as a yes.

16. Court Judicial Processes

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Judicial appointment (Structures used to appoint judges who will hear child welfare cases)
Judicial assignment (Following appointment, processes used to assign a judge to hear child welfare cases)
Judicial workload (Judicial resources directed towards hearing child welfare cases)
Judicial training (Training or knowledge prerequisites for judges as well as other training resources)
Judicial support (Resources to help judges complete case-related activities)

17. Court Attorney Processes

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Attorney appointment (Processes used to appoint an attorney to a case)
Attorney workload (Attorney resources directed towards hearing child welfare cases)
Attorney compensation (Amount an attorney is paid)
Attorney training (Training or knowledge prerequisites for attorneys as well as other training resources)

18. Court Structure

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Court docketing/calendaring (Processes used to schedule court hearings)
Court environment (Facilities and conditions at the court hearings)
Data transparency/CQI processes (Activities by the court to collect and analyze operational data to assess their own performance)
Court planning (Preparation and activities to ensure continuity of court )
Additional legal/advocacy supports (Appointment of supports outside judge and attorney framework)

19. Court Collaboration with Child Welfare System Stakeholders

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Cross-system communication (Communication involving court and system partners )
Cross-system activities (Joint activities between court and system partners, e.g., training, designing interventions)
Information sharing (Court and system partners collaboration regarding aggregate data on system performance and child wellbeing)
Shared accountability (Court and system partners identification of shared goals and the means to measure them)

Practices

This page focuses on practices of judges and attorneys both inside and outside of court. For these measures, we are very interested if you have collected data on them to explain how you measured/defined the construct.

20. Judge Activities (Outside of Hearings)

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Activities outside of hearings (Case-related activities the judge does to prepare for, and follow-up on hearings)
Collaborative activities (Activities by judge involving collaboration with system partners)
Administrative activities (Activities to ensure the efficient court operation)
Judicial training (Training received by the judge)

21. If you answered YES, that you collect data on Judicial Activities (Outside of Hearings), can you please identify how you have measured this.

22. Attorney Activities (Outside of Hearings)

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Attorney pre-petition legal practice (pre-petition legal representation)
Activities outside of hearings (Activities the attorney does to prepare for, and follow-up on hearing)
Collaborative activities (Activities by attorney involving collaboration with system partners )
Attorney training (Training received by the attorney)

23. If you answered YES, that you collect data on Attorney Practices (Outside of Hearings), can you please identify how you have measured this.

24. Judge Activities (During Hearings)

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Judicial engagement/inquiry (Judge’s interactions with parties, professionals, and other stakeholders present at the hearing)
Legal requirements met (The judge makes required findings and orders that federal laws require)
Safety decision-making (Discussion and decisions made regarding child safety)
Court decorum (Judge conducts an orderly and efficient hearing)
Orders Made to CW Agency and Partners (Orders made by the judge to child welfare agency and partner agencies (e.g., schools, juvenile justice)
Discussion of Key Issues (The topics discussed and level at which they are discussed in hearings)

25. If you answered YES, that you collect data on Judge Activities (During Hearings), can you please identify how you have measured this.

26. Attorney Activities (During Hearings)

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Attorney presence (Attorney is present at the hearing)
Attorney advocacy (Attorney activities during the hearing to presence evidence and advocate for the client)
Professional requirements met (Adherence to standards of practice)

27. If you answered YES, that you collect data on Attorney Activities (During Hearings), can you please identify how you have measured this.

28. Family Experience (During Hearings)

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Parent and youth access/presence (whether parents and youth attend the hearing)
Family understanding of hearing (Whether family members understand the purpose and results of the hearing)
Family/community presence and participation (whether family members, including tribal representatives, attend the hearing)

Intermediate Outcomes During Case

For each measure, please indicate if your statewide court case management systems collects the data, if the statewide system can report on it, if your local systems collect the data (if any can do it, mark yes), your local systems can report (if any can, mark yes), if you collect this data in another method (e.g., through file review, court observation, surveys, etc.) and if the agency reports this type of data to you. For all items EXCEPT the agency provides data to the court, mark ONLY if the court collects the data in some way. Please check all that apply.

29. Intermediate outcomes during case

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Visitation/family time (Amount and type of time children spend with parents, siblings, and other relatives )
Child placement during case (Type and continuity of the child’s temporary placements during the case)
Family engagement during case (Family’s communication with the court, participation in decision-making, and participation in services and in the court process during the case)
Child safety during case (The absence of child maltreatment during the case )
Child well-being (The child is able to grow and thrive during the case)

30. Prevention

	statewide system collects	statewide system can report	local system collects	local system can report	data collected from other court methods	agency provides data to court	no data collection of this item
Prevention/ Family Preservation (Families can safely care for their children)

31. Do you collect any data (does not have to be statewide) on parent experience with the child welfare system? Yes No

32. If yes to question 31, please describe.

33. Do you collect any data (does not have to be statewide) on the child’s experience with the child welfare system? Yes No

34. If yes to question 33, please describe.

35. Do you collect data on system legitimacy (i.e., the extent to which clients and professionals believe the system has the right and justification to operate)? Yes No

36. Do you track and report any of your performances by race and ethnicity? If yes, please explain.

37. Do you track anything else related to equity in your system (e.g., disability, sexual orientation, etc.)? If yes, please describe.
    
    Those are all of the questions we have for you. Thank you so much for your time. If you would like to make any additional comments about your jurisdiction's capacity to collect and report on judicial, attorney and court performance measures, please use the space provided below to do so. If you have any questions about the project or this survey, you can contact Alicia Summers - [email protected]
    
    
    

38. Any additional comments?

17