Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSR) Interview Protocol for CFSR State Leads and CFSR Specialists

Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSR) State Leads and CFSR Specialists: Interview Protocol

OMB Control No.: 0970-0401

THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) The purpose of this information collection is to gather feedback about your experiences with the Center for States services. Your contribution to the evaluation effort is extremely valuable and will be used to improve future services. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 60 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and reviewing the collection of information. This is a voluntary collection of information. A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and no individual or entity is required to respond to, nor shall an individual or entity be subject to a penalty or failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number. If you have any comments on this collection of information, please contact Christine Leicht, Center for States, by e-mail at [email protected].

Expiration Date: 06/30/2024

Prior to the Interview¹

Interviewer: Please familiarize yourself with the Tailored Services CFSR Round 4 Support Plan one week prior to conducting the interview. Specify the planned activities or stated deliverables from the list below.

• Statewide assessment planning and development

• Data consultation, planning, and/or analysis, including any analysis of potential disproportionality and identified disparities

• Root cause analysis

• Intervention and/or strategy selection and development (includes identifying how strategies will address root causes)

• Partner engagement, inclusion, and involvement (examples of partners include: legal/judicial system partners, tribal partners, community service providers, or state agencies)

• Engagement, inclusion, and involvement of people with lived experience and/or lived expertise r (including youth and families)

• Implementation and evaluation planning including theory of change development

• PIP development

• Review of draft documents

• Any other areas associated with Center supports that I did not mention? Please describe.

Highlights= summarize (not necessary to read word for word)

Bold= read word for word

Italics= probes

Overview

Briefly discuss the purpose of the interview:

The purpose of our conversation is to gather feedback on your experiences with the Center for States (Center’s) CFSR Round 4 related supports and services [insert name of jurisdiction]. Your contribution to this substudy is extremely valuable and will be used for continuous quality improvement (CQI) purposes and to inform the development of future services and supports as it relates to the CFSR process. We estimate that the entire interview will last about 60 minutes.

Convey to each interview participant our privacy policy:

(1) The interview is voluntary; (2) you can decline to answer any questions, or you can stop participating in the interview at any time; (3) Data from this interview will be kept private by the evaluation team. The Information from today’s interview will be reported and may be shared with the Children’s Bureau and the Capacity Building Collaborative’s 3rd party evaluator. When reported this information will be aggregated across all jurisdictions and your name will not be associated with it. In some instances, however, the information you provide about the success and outcomes of the project might be tied to the project itself in our reporting.

Interview approach:

For this interview, I will be sharing my computer screen, so that you can see a few questions that are survey-like and have rating scales. We have included these scaled questions, so that we can compile results to share responses more quickly with Center staff and the Children’s Bureau for continuous quality improvement purposes. By expediting these results, Center staff will be better equipped to support other jurisdictions more rapidly in subsequent years of the CFSR process.

Ask permission to record the interview:

To ensure we capture the discussion accurately and completely, I would like to obtain your permission to record the session. This recording will only be accessed by our evaluation team. If you choose not to have the interview recorded, we will take notes. Your name will not be included in any reporting.

Will you allow us to record this interview?

The interviewer asks the notetaker to start the recording.

Thank you, the recording has started.

Ask if they have any questions for you before you begin.

Ask them to provide their verbal consent to participate in the interview.

Do you have any questions before we begin?

Introduction

We recognize that you may have already participated in the online survey that we distributed about 6 months ago. Please note that we are collecting feedback (via survey) approximately six-months after Tailored Services CFSR support plan services begin and then again via interviews after your Statewide Assessment is submitted. We appreciate the time and perspective that you have provided to date and for this interview.

For today’s interview, we would like you to primarily focus on your experience with Center CFSR-related supports and services implemented within your jurisdiction since the start of the Tailored Services CFSR support through the submission of your Statewide Assessment. We recognize that you may not have knowledge of all the Center CFSR-related services delivered within your jurisdiction, so we ask that you speak to the areas that you are most familiar with.

We will use the following three terms in this interview. Please try to use the following definitions in your responses to the questions.

• A racial equity approach refers to a deliberate approach to identifying the systemic and institutional structures, policies, and practices that produce disparate outcomes for Black, Indigenous, and people of color [and their] communities. This approach requires taking intentional steps to address these inequities.”²

• Lived experience “can provide insight into patterns, common behaviors, challenges, and barriers among individuals who share similar experiences in the child welfare system.”³

• Lived expertise refers to “the unique ability to translate personal experiences in the child welfare system into meaningful system change. Developing lived expertise is a process that takes ongoing training, support, and skill building”⁴

Questions

First, we are going to ask you a bit about your experiences. This will include some general questions but also a few 'survey-like' questions to help us aggregate the results.

Q1. What was your overall experience with the Center’s CFSR supports and services of your Tailored Services CFSR Support Plan?

Q2. On a seven-point scale where 1= strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree, to what extent do you agree that the Center’s CFSR Round 4 supports and/or services were helpful for your CFSR process? 

Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Somewhat Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Somewhat Agree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Don't Know
(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(9)

• [If 5 = “Somewhat agree” or higher]: Can you provide any examples about why the Center’s CFSR Round 4 supports or services were helpful?

• [If 4 = “Neither agree nor disagree” or lower]: How could the Center’s CFSR supports or services better meet your jurisdiction’s needs? Probe: What would be; or what would have been helpful?

Q3. I am going to ask you about each of the goals that were listed in your Center CFSR support plan [Evaluation team to identify prior to the start of the interview, list at the top of page 1]. For each one, would you please tell me if it was achieved?

Interviewer:

• For those goals that were achieved or “mostly” achieved ask: "Why do you think your jurisdiction was able to accomplish this? Probe: Can you share more details about any facilitators of success?

• For those goals that were not or only “partially” achieved: “Why do you think it wasn't achieved? Probe: What barriers did your jurisdiction face?

Goal:__________

Goal:__________

Goal:__________

Q4. Has the knowledge and skills gained from using the Center’s CFSR services and supports transfer to other aspects of your jurisdiction’s work beyond the CFSR process work (e.g., use of data, engagement of stakeholders with lived experience and/or expertise, and planning and implementation processes)?

• In what way(s)? Or, can you say more about why not?

Q5. Reflecting back on the CFSR process with the Center to date, are there any areas where you would have liked your jurisdiction to gain capacity (or more capacity but didn’t)? The Center defines “capacity building” as an ongoing, evidence-informed process used to develop a system’s potential to be productive and effective.⁵ It can also be more plainly described as ensuring that child welfare agencies have what they need to sustain changes to improve their own practice and systems. Further, the Tailored Services Practice Model defines capacity in terms of five dimensions - resources, infrastructure, knowledge/skills, culture/climate, and engagement/partnership. [Interviewer, if unclear, ask is this a capacity that you would have liked your jurisdiction to gain; or if this capacity was gained, what additional support would have been helpful, if any.]

The next questions are about Center CFSR supports and/or services as they relate to Racial Equity. Please rate your agreement with the following statements:

Q6. “The Center is building the capacity of my jurisdiction to meaningfully integrate (i.e., needs actively identified, informed decisions, and intentional steps taken) a racial equity approach as we complete the planned CFSR activities.” On a seven-point scale where 1= strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree.

Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Somewhat Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Somewhat Agree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Don't Know
(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(9)

Q7. A racial equity approach was meaningfully integrated (i.e., needs actively identified, informed decisions, and intentional steps taken) into CFSR supports and/or services by Center staff and Center consultants? On a seven-point scale where 1= strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree.

Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Somewhat Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Somewhat Agree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Don't Know
(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(9)

Q8. “My jurisdiction is able to integrate a racial equity approach beyond the planned CFSR activities (e.g., use processes).” On a seven-point scale where 1= strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree.

Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Somewhat Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Somewhat Agree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Don't Know
(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(9)

Q9. What about the Center’s support has been most helpful to you in integrating a racial equity approach in a way that works for your jurisdiction?

Q10. What would have improved the Center’s services and/or supports to help your jurisdiction integrate a racial equity approach into its planned CFSR activities?

Probe: What could the Center have done to better meet your jurisdiction’s needs to meaningfully integrate (i.e., needs actively identified, informed decisions, and intentional steps taken) a racial equity approach into CFSR supports and/or services? What would have been helpful?

The next set of questions relates to the Center’s efforts to promote engagement and partnerships with individuals who have lived experience and/or lived expertise. This might include anything from the Center tailored services projects, products, resources, tools, peer groups, partnerships with youth and family consultants, etc. [Note to interviewer if asked for definition of lived experience or lived expertise: For the purposes of this interview, lived experience “provides insight into patterns, common behaviors, challenges, and barriers among individuals who share similar experiences” while lived expertise “takes ongoing training, support, and skill building and involves a unique ability to translate personal experiences in the child welfare system into meaningful system change.”

[Interviewer: Only ask Q11 and Q12 for those jurisdictions that had “Lived experience and/or expert stakeholder engagement and inclusion” in their support plan. Note that this should be included in most support plans].

Please rate your agreement with the following statements:

Q11. [Only asked of those that have LE in their Support Plan] “The Center is building the capacity of my jurisdiction to engage individuals with lived experience and/or lived expertise.” On a seven-point scale where 1= strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree.

Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Somewhat Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Somewhat Agree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Don't Know
(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(9)

Q12. [Only asked of those that have LE in their Support Plan] “My jurisdiction is able to meaningfully engage individuals with lived experience and/or lived expertise (i.e., they are equipped to actively contribute and help inform decisions) beyond the planned, CFSR-related activities (e.g., use of data, planning and implementation processes).” On a seven-point scale where 1= strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree.

Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Somewhat Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Somewhat Agree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Don't Know
(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(9)

Q13. The value of engagement and the intentional inclusion of lived experience and expertise was modeled by Center staff and consultants.

Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Somewhat Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Somewhat Agree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Don't Know
(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(9)

Q14. What about the Center’s support has been most helpful to you in integrating lived expertise in a way that works for your jurisdiction?

Q15. What would have improved the Center’s services and/or supports to help your jurisdiction meaningfully engage individuals with lived experience and/or expertise in the CFSR process (so that they are equipped to actively contribute and help inform decisions)?

Probe: What could the Center have done to better meet your jurisdiction’s needs to meaningfully engage individuals with lived experience and/or lived expertise in the CFSR process? What would have been helpful?

We have just a few more questions before we end today.

Q16. What lessons or recommendations do you have for jurisdictions in the beginning phases of their planned CFSR activities with the Center?

Q17. Are there any other comments you would like to provide about your experience with the Center for States? 

Thank you for taking the time to share your perspectives with us!

1 These interviews will occur after the Statewide Assessment is submitted.

2 Capacity Building Center for States (2023). Diversity, racial equity, and inclusion in child welfare: Terms and Definitions. https://capacity.childwelfare.gov/states/resources/rei-terms-and-definitions

3 Given, L. M. (Ed.). (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (Vol. 2). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909

4 Pauter, S. M., Dicharry, L., Cuza, H., Harvey, J., Hernandez, V., McDaniel, S., & Trochtenberg, R. (2019, July). Definition of partnership. In S. Pauter (Chair), Think tank on partnering with youth and young adults in child welfare. Symposium conducted at the Chadwick Center, San Diego, CA. https://www.tipscenter.org/public/uploads/ckeditor/5e98837a743cf1587053434.pdf

5 Capacity Building Center for States. (2019). Change and implementation in practice: Implementation planning and capacity building. Washington, DC: Children’s Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

1