Supporting Statement PartB_NSCAW_July 2023 clean_fin

Alternative Supporting Statement for Information Collections Designed for

Research, Public Health Surveillance, and Program Evaluation Purposes

National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being-Third Cohort (NSCAW III)

OMB Information Collection Request

0970 - 0202

Supporting Statement

Part B

July 2023

Submitted By:

Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation

Administration for Children and Families

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

4^th Floor, Mary E. Switzer Building

330 C Street, SW

Washington, D.C. 20201

Project Officers:

Christine Fortunato

Mary Bruce Webb

Part B

B1. Objectives

OMB approval for Phase II (DHHS/ACF/OPRE National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being Third Cohort (NSCAW III): Data Collection) was obtained in July 2017. At the time of approval, materials supported in-person interviewing during the baseline and follow-up waves. The objective of the current request is twofold: 1) to extend approval to allow for the completion of the follow-up wave of data collection and panel maintenance of the NSCAW cohorts, and 2) to reinstate the previously approved in-person interviewing option. Phase II Supporting Statements A and B (July 2017) are available for reference under ICR Reference No: 201702-0970-003 and include the following Appendices:

Appendix A: NSCAW III Summary of Interviews

Appendix B: NSCAW III Child Interview

Appendix C: NSCAW III Caregiver Interview

Appendix D: NSCAW III Caseworker Interview

Appendix F: Lead Letters and Fact Sheets

Appendix G: Consent and Assent Forms

Appendix H: Data Linkage Forms

Appendix I: HIPAA Authorization Forms

In January 2021, OMB approved a nonsubstantive change request for modifications to Phase II to reflect the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, a slightly higher child interview administration time, the addition of a non-monetary incentive for adolescent participants ages 11-17, the administration of caseworker interviews by telephone, and language updates requested by the Institutional Review Board and HIPAA Privacy Officer with oversight of the study. Five previously approved Phase II Appendices (i.e., Appendix B, C, D, F, G) were modified to accommodate those changes. The following two Phase II Appendices were added and approved:

Appendix F-1: Adolescent Fact Sheet

Appendix G-1: Caseworker Telephone Mode Consent Form

In September 2021, OMB approved a nonsubstantive change request for modifications to Phase II to allow for remote administration of the follow-up survey (Wave 2), to collect information on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on children and families, to reflect a delayed interval between the baseline and follow-up interview due to the pandemic, and to reflect a reduced follow-up survey administration time. The following nine Phase II Appendices were added and approved.

Appendix A-1: NSCAW III Summary of Remote Interviews

Appendix B-1: NSCAW III Child Remote Interview

Appendix C-1: NSCAW III Caregiver Remote Interview

Appendix D-1: NSCAW III Caseworker Remote Interview

Appendix F-2: Remote Lead Letters and Fact Sheets

Appendix F-2a: Remote Adolescent Fact Sheet

Appendix G-2: Remote Consent and Assent Forms

Appendix H-1: Remote Data Linkage Forms

Appendix I-1: Remote HIPAA Authorization Forms

In May 2022, OMB approved a nonsubstantive change request for modifications to Phase II to add social media items to the child and caregiver survey instruments in support of tracking and panel maintenance efforts. Four previously approved Phase II Appendices (i.e., Appendix B, B-1, C, C-1) were modified to accommodate those changes.

In September 2022, OMB approved a nonsubstantive change request for modifications to Phase II to update the sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) items in the child survey instruments and to allow for panel maintenance contacts with NSCAW cohort members. Two previously approved Phase II Appendices (i.e., Appendix B, B-1) were modified to accommodate those changes. The following two Phase II Appendices were added and approved.

Appendix J: Panel Maintenance Letter

Appendix K: Panel Maintenance Contact Card

To support the current request (March 2023), five previously approved Phase II Appendices (i.e., Appendix B-1, C-1, F-2, F-2a, G-2) have been modified to indicate that child and caregiver follow-up interviews may be completed remotely or in-person.

Appendix B-1: NSCAW III Child Remote Interview

Appendix C-1: NSCAW III Caregiver Remote Interview

Appendix F-2: Remote Lead Letters and Fact Sheets

Appendix F-2a: Remote Adolescent Fact Sheet

Appendix G-2: Remote Consent and Assent Forms

Phase III Study Objectives

The following are the objectives of the Phase III information collection:

• To use NSCAW III as a platform to collect workforce data from child welfare agency directors/administrators, supervisors, and caseworkers.

• To gain a better understanding of child welfare agency operations and priorities, as well as the characteristics and work experiences of child welfare workers.

• To collect data that will inform ACF’s efforts to increase child welfare workforce satisfaction and stability and to inform programs and practice related to the public child welfare workforce.

• To make the workforce data available to the research community for analysis.

Phase III data collection is complete; data analysis is ongoing.

Generalizability of Results

The Phase II NSCAW III sampling frame consists of all counties in the U.S. except counties whose state law prohibits the release of identified child maltreatment records required for the survey and states with five or more sampled counties that were unable to participate. These two groups represent approximately 23% of the child welfare population of interest. Therefore, Phase II NSCAW III results are generalizable to approximately 77% of the child welfare population. Phase III is intended to produce nationally representative estimates of the workforce constructs measured in the surveys completed by agency directors, supervisors, and caseworkers in participating NSCAW III agencies. Public child welfare workers employed in agencies that do not allow the release of identified child maltreatment records or in agencies that were unable to participate will not be represented in the estimates.

Appropriateness of Study Design and Methods for Planned Uses

Phase II data collection was designed to address questions of importance on the well-being of a nationally representative sample of children and families involved with the child welfare system. Data are collected longitudinally and with multiple informants associated with each sampled child, in order to get the fullest possible picture of that child. Baseline and 18-month follow-up surveys are conducted with the sampled child, the child’s current caregiver (e.g., biological parents, foster parents, kin caregivers, group home caregivers), and the child’s caseworker. Surveys were designed in collaboration with subject matter experts. Administrative data are collected and merged with survey data at the child level to enhance the robustness and overall utility of the study. Efforts to minimize nonresponse included repeated contact attempts by field interviewers who follow-up via phone, email, and/or text with sampled respondents. Field interviewers were trained to obtain valid responses with minimal unit and item nonresponse. Data quality monitoring activities were used to ensure high quality information collection. Data are weighted to compensate for disproportionate sampling, nonresponse and potential frame noncoverage issues and will produce the estimates to ensure valid inferences. Limits to representativeness and any other contextual details relevant to interpreting the findings will be clearly documented in the text of all written materials associated with the study.

Phase III data collection was designed to address questions of importance on workforce characteristics and competencies, training and professional development, and organizational factors. The surveys also collected information about the potential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on child welfare agencies and practice. (See Section A.2 for a complete listing of research questions.) The study design and methods were selected to produce externally and internally valid results of high quality. Probability sampling procedures were used to ensure that child welfare agencies that meet the target population definition are fully represented in the NSCAW III. The workforce surveys were designed in collaboration with subject matter experts. Efforts to minimize nonresponse at all three levels (agency director, supervisor, and caseworker) included repeated contact attempts by field interviewers who will follow-up via phone, email, and/or text. Field interviewers were trained to obtain valid responses with minimal unit and item nonresponse. Data quality monitoring activities were used to ensure high quality information collection. Finally, survey statisticians will weight the data to compensate for disproportionate sampling, nonresponse and potential frame noncoverage issues and will produce the estimates to ensure valid inferences. Limits to representativeness and any other contextual details relevant to interpreting the findings will be clearly documented in the text of all written materials associated with the study.

As noted in Section A.2, this information is not intended to be used as the principal basis for public policy decisions and is not expected to meet the threshold of influential or highly influential scientific information.

B2. Methods and Design

Target Population

The target population for Phase II includes all children ages 0-17½ who come into contact with the child welfare system during the 12-month sampling period, their current caregivers, and their caseworkers. Specifically, the target population includes children who were (1) were investigated or assessed for child abuse or neglect and (2) entered state legal custody through other pathways (e.g., juvenile justice). For each of the approximately 61 public child welfare agencies participating in NSCAW III, we will collect information from agency directors/administrators, supervisors, and caseworkers (Phase III).

Sampling and Site Selection

The two-stage sample design that guided the selection of child welfare agencies and children in Phase I and II of NSCAW III is included for reference in Appendix L. As with prior NSCAW surveys, NSCAW III employed a stratified, two-stage sample design. The primary sampling units (PSUs) were U.S. counties or contiguous areas of two or more counties (i.e., in larger metropolitan areas with branch offices) and the secondary sampling units were children involved with the child welfare system during the sample recruitment period. Once the PSUs were selected, child welfare agencies in these PSUs were contacted and asked to participate in the study. Data were then collected from a sample of children, caregivers, and caseworkers in these agencies, providing a full picture of child outcomes and their determinants.

Phase III has three sampling frames corresponding to the three levels of employees working in public child welfare agencies. For agency directors/administrators, the sample consists of all directors/administrators associated with the 61 agencies. The supervisor sample was randomly selected from rosters of supervisors employed within the 61 agencies (for details, see Q39 the attached Instrument 1_Agency Director Survey). The caseworker sample was randomly selected from rosters of caseworkers who report to the supervisors participating in the study. Initially, one supervisor was selected with certainty from each agency (for details, see Q19 in the attached Instrument 2_Agency Director Survey). For agencies having two or more supervisors, additional supervisors were randomly selected for participation. Up to three caseworkers were selected for each supervisor. If a supervisor had more than three caseworkers, three caseworkers were selected at random. For supervisors having fewer than three caseworkers, the caseworkers reporting to that supervisor will be selected with certainty. An average of two supervisor and three caseworker surveys per agency were anticipated.

Panel Retention Panel retention is a challenge for NSCAW and other longitudinal surveys. For each data collection wave of NSCAW, caregivers and youth ages 16 and older are asked to provide their address, telephone numbers, email address, and Social Security Number for locating purposes. They are also asked to provide names and contact information for up to two friends and relatives. The collection of this information is intended to support panel retention and increase the likelihood of locating respondents over time. To support cohort retention over time, caregiver and young adult cohort members will be recontacted at their last known address and/or telephone number to confirm or update their contact information.

B3. Design of Data Collection Instruments

Development of Data Collection Instruments

In July 2017, OMB approved in-person versions of the child, caregiver, and caseworker survey instruments (Appendices B, C, and D). A summary of the content of the in-person instruments is provided in Appendix A. In September 2021, OMB approved remote versions of the child, caregiver, and caseworker survey instruments (Appendices B-1, C-1, and D-1). Appendix A-1 provides a summary of the changes that were made to the Phase II in-person follow-up surveys to provide a remote administration option.

In situations where the remote child and caregiver surveys are completed in person, the field interviewer will complete the telephone portion of the survey with the respondent and then ask the respondent to complete the web portion of the survey on their own using the field interviewer’s laptop (see Appendices B-1 and C-1). The caseworker interview will be completed by telephone only.

Prior to Phase III, a panel with expertise in the child welfare workforce were convened to provide input on preliminary research questions, survey respondents, sampling, and potential constructs and measures to be included in the data collection instruments. A review of the workforce literature was also conducted to identify knowledge gaps and additional constructs and measures of interest. Standardized and validated measures were incorporated into the draft data collection instruments whenever possible. Draft data collection instruments were developed and underwent multiple iterations of review by the project team and selected experts.

B4. Collection of Data and Quality Control

The Contractor has and will continue to collect all data from sampled agency respondents.

Remote follow-up lead letters and fact sheets will be mailed to caregivers, legal guardians, emancipated youth, young adults prior to making telephone or in person contact and to caseworkers prior to making telephone contact. Remote lead letters and fact sheets include information on the study’s purpose, how they were selected, mode(s) of survey administration, survey topics to be covered, and assurances of privacy. Remote lead letters and fact sheets are provided in Appendix F-2. Appendix F-2a contains a remote adolescent fact sheet that will be provided to caregivers for their adolescent children.

Remote follow-up surveys with caseworkers will be conducted by telephone. Remote follow-up surveys with caregivers, legal guardians, emancipated youth, young adults, and adolescents will be conducted by either by telephone and web or in person and web. Remote consent and assent forms (Appendix G-2) will be provided to and reviewed with participants by telephone or in person to give them the information necessary to make an informed decision about their survey participation. The consent forms will be the same for remote or in-person consent forms (Appendix G) with revisions to reflect the timing of the follow-up interview, use of telephone/web/in-person administration modes, and collection of verbal consent. Consent will be recorded electronically on the interviewer’s laptop before initiating the telephone or in-person survey portion of the remote interview. The interviewers will provide a copy of the consent form to the respondent. If the current caregiver is not the child’s legal guardian, the legal guardian will be asked to provide consent for the child to be interviewed.

During the follow-up interviews, caregivers and youth 13 years and older will be asked to consent for their survey data to be linked to administrative data sources. Remote data linkage forms are provided in Appendix H-1. A separate linkage form will be used to request that the minor child’s survey data be linked to their Medicaid claims data (see remote authorization forms in Appendix I-1). Respondents will be provided copies of these forms. If the current caregiver is not the child’s legal guardian, the legal guardian will be asked to provide consent for data linkage.

Computer-assisted programs improve survey data quality by eliminating routing errors, implementing logical range checks, and increasing response rates. During the data collection period, several data quality monitoring activities will be employed on the study, including telephone verification of completed surveys and data frequency reviews.

NSCAW caregiver and child respondents ages 16 and older are asked to provide contacting information for panel maintenance purposes in the locator (LO and LF) modules of their surveys. Panel maintenance activities with NSCAW caregiver and young adult cohort members (II and III) will be conducted approximately nine months or more after their most recent interview. Caregiver and young adult cohort members will be recontacted at the last known address and/or telephone number to confirm or update their contacting information.  A panel maintenance letter (Appendix J) will be sent via mail and/or email.  Caregiver and young adult respondents will be asked to update their contacting information by mailing back a postage paid panel maintenance contact card (Appendix K), by calling a toll-free project phone number, or by visiting a secure project website. Contacting information requested will include address, telephone numbers, email address, and the names and contact information of two people who would always know how to reach the NSCAW cohort member. If the project team does not receive a mail or website response from the caregiver or young adult respondent or if the package or email is returned as undelivered, field interviewers will attempt to contact the cohort member by phone and/or in person to request updates. When an interviewer reaches a respondent, they will enter contacting information in a short instrument that mirrors the contact card and website.

B5. Response Rates and Potential Nonresponse Bias

Response Rates

The Phase II baseline data collection is complete; data analysis is in progress. The Phase II follow-up wave is in progress. An overall response rate of 55-68% for follow-up data collection is anticipated. A follow-up data collection response rate of 60% has been achieved for caregivers, with slightly lower response rates achieved for adolescent and young adult respondents to date. The addition of an in-person interviewing option during the remote follow-up will allow interviewers and respondents greater flexibility and is intended to support response rate goals. Additionally, the Phase III data collection is complete; data analysis is in progress. Phase III response rates were 78.7% for agency directors, 73.3% for supervisors, and 65.6% for caseworkers.

NonResponse

Phase II analysis weights are calculated after each wave of data collection to account for oversampling, nonresponse, under and over coverage in certain demographic groups, and extreme weights. Secondary data (e.g., NCANDS, American Community Survey-ACS) will be incorporated into the weighting process to compensate for nonresponse. A separate set of Phase III weights will be computed for the agency director, supervisor, and caseworker surveys. The three sets of weights are needed so that the estimates for each unit of analysis reflects its respective target population. For the agency director survey, design weights will be constructed that reflect the unequal probability sample of the agencies, which are the NSCAW III primary sampling units (PSUs). For the supervisor and caseworker surveys, the design weights will reflect both the agency and caseworker within agency selection probabilities.

To determine whether the design weights should be adjusted to compensate for nonresponse, the design weighted estimates will be compared to available sampling frame totals. It is unlikely that nonresponse weighting adjustments will be necessary or available for the agency director surveys because their response rate is expected to be high. For the supervisor and caseworker surveys, response rates are expected to be lower and nonresponse weighting adjustments may be warranted. If so, various levels of adjustments (e.g., agency, state, or region) will be compared for their impact on the mean squared errors of the estimates. Adjustments providing the best balance between bias reduction and variance inflation will be performed. Characteristics from the sampling frame, as well as from NCANDS data, will be considered in these adjustments.

Item nonresponse will also be evaluated and controlled to the extent possible. We expect that item missingness will be minimal, especially for surveys administered over the phone or in-person by an interviewer. The level of item nonresponse may be higher for surveys conducted via web. Imputation will be considered for cases where a response to a missing item can be inferred from the patterns of responses in the data.

B6. Production of Estimates and Projections

Estimates produced by this work will be prepared for internal use by ACF and external release by the agency in the form of reports, research briefs, and other publications or presentations. The estimation methods that will be employed in the analysis of the study data will follow statistical best practices. Estimates, including tabulations, descriptive analyses and model estimates, will be appropriately weighted for probabilities of selection and if deemed necessary, adjusted for nonresponse bias. Estimates and their standard errors will be produced using statistical software, such as SUDAAN, that is designed for weighted clustered samples from finite populations.

Deidentified Phase II and Phase III data will be archived at the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect (NDACAN). A data file user’s manual (DFUM) will accompany each dataset. The DFUM will include documentation of sampling methods, response rates, population of inference, construction of scoring and derived variables, and construction and appropriate use of survey weights. Also included will be annotated survey specifications and a codebook. The survey specifications will include the question text, variable names, response categories, and skip logic. The codebook will contain frequencies of all the variables in the dataset.

B7. Data Handling and Analysis

Data Handling

The Phase II child, caregiver, and caseworker surveys, and the Phase III supervisor and caseworker surveys utilize a computer-assisted interviewing (CAI) program.

The questionnaire programs will ensure data quality by implementing skip logic, filling specific wordings based on answers previously provided by the respondent, and implementing consistency and range checks. The programs will also provide greater expediency with respect to data processing and analysis. Several backend processing steps, including editing, coding, and data entry, will be part of the data collection process. The Phase III agency director survey is interviewer-administered using a paper instrument with a CAI data entry program.

Data Analysis

Phase II data analysis will address the most important knowledge gaps about children and families involved with child welfare and be responsive to ACF’s priorities. Baseline and follow-up data collection reports, research briefs, spotlight reports, and manuscripts will all be key dissemination products.

Phase III analysis will address the identified research questions and most important knowledge gaps about current workforce in public child welfare agencies, including child welfare staff characteristics and competencies; workforce issues (e.g., recruitment, hiring, retention/turnover); training and professional development; and organizational/agency factors. Several analysis strategies are planned for the workforce surveys. First, we will describe the characteristics of caseworkers, supervisors, and agency directors currently working within the child welfare system. We will use univariate methods to derive subpopulation estimates (proportions and means in particular) of important variables related to child welfare workforce characteristics and competencies, training and professional development, organizational factors, and policy to practice issues with a high degree of precision. The analysis plan will make calculation and interpretation of these estimates a priority.

Second, we will explore and evaluate a number of predictors of workforce competencies, job satisfaction, retention, burnout, and turnover variables, primarily through the use of group comparisons and bivariate correlations. These include contingency table (crosstab) analysis with appropriate statistical tests (e.g., Pearson’s χ2) and simple regression and correlation procedures. This will enable us, for example, to examine outcomes across type of child welfare workforce (caseworkers, supervisors, and agency directors), education level, age groups and gender, on the relationship between competencies, training, organizational factors, and policy with job satisfaction, retention, and turnover.

Multivariate models will play an important part in analysis of NSCAW III-workforce survey. There are circumstances, for example, in which important questions about what variables predict an outcome must use multivariate methods to take into account confounding variables that limit interpretation. Methods with multiple predictors may be needed to address the likelihood that some consumers of NSCAW results will interpret bivariate relationships as causal. Multiple indicator methods like structural equation modeling may be needed to adapt to measurement error that is likely to arise for some NSCAW measures (Biemer et al., 2009). Questions about the relationship between agency variables and child welfare workforce outcomes necessitate multivariate analysis, since they require hierarchical linear models that can take into account sampling both at the agency and child level. The project team will be focused and selective about our use of multivariate methods; the project team will not conduct multivariate methods for every dependent variable and/or if simpler methods will be more appropriate.

The special requirements of NSCAW preclude using “off the shelf” methods in many circumstances, and require careful programming with sophisticated statistical software such as SUDAAN, MPlus, or R.

Table 2 summarizes the Phase III analysis strategies, and data sources likely to be used to address each research question.

Table 2. Research Questions, Analysis Strategies, and Instruments/Data Sources

NSCAW III- workforce survey Research Questions	Population estimates	Group comparisons/ bivariate correlations	Multivariate models	Constructs	Potential Respondents of Data Sources	Potential Data Collection instrument, measure or items
What are the demographic and educational characteristics of the child welfare workforce, including caseworkers, supervisors, and agency directors? What are the primary roles and responsibilities of the child welfare workforce? What personal characteristics and competencies (knowledge, skills, and abilities) do child welfare staff members possess and/or demonstrate?	✔	✔		Workforce Characteristics and Competencies	Caseworker Supervisor Agency director	Title and function within agency; primary roles and responsibilities; prior CWS training/ experience when hired; years of experience; competencies; education; demographics; caseload characteristics variables.
What training did child welfare staff possess when they were hired? Did their training include any courses in child welfare? What recruitment practices do agencies use to attract and hire child welfare candidates? What onboarding practices do agencies have for new child welfare workers? What types of training and professional development opportunities are offered to child welfare staff? What factors influence child welfare staffs’ abilities to engage in training and professional development opportunities? What training and professional development opportunities do child welfare staff engage in? How does this training and professional development influence job satisfaction, retention, turnover, increased knowledge, and practice?	✔	✔		Training and Professional Development	Caseworker Supervisor Agency director	Types of training received; types of professional opportunities; mentoring; caseworker safety; perception of casework preparedness (e.g. court appearances; conducting risk assessments; dealing with resistant clients); supervisory support; quality of supervision
What is the public child welfare agency landscape? This includes the number of child welfare staff, caseload size, turn-over rates, ratio of supervisors to workers, vacancy rates, salary levels and benefits, and union/non-union. To what extent are public–private child welfare partnerships taking place? What is the extent of privatization and contracting out? What is the organizational culture and climate within the public child welfare agency? How do organizational culture and climate influence workforce issues, including role conflict, burnout, turnover, supervision, caseload/workload, or education and training requirements? How do child welfare staffs’ perspectives about organizational culture and climate influence workforce issues? How has the COVID-19 pandemic potentially influenced the work of child welfare staff?	✔	✔	✔	Organizational Factors	Caseworker Supervisor Agency director	Supervisory support; quality of supervision; frequency and content of staff meetings; salary level and benefits; stress/burnout (secondary traumatic stress); organizational culture, organizational climate, work attitudes; mastery of work; agency structure and organization

Data Use

As mentioned previously, we will release a data file user’s manual (DFUM) to inform and assist researchers who might be interested in using the data for future analyses. The manual includes (1) background information about the study; (2) information about the sample design on the number of study participants, response rates, and weighting procedures; (3) an overview of the data collection procedures, data collection instruments, and measures; and (4) data preparation and the structure of data files, including data entry, frequency review, data edits, and creation of data files.

As noted in Section B6, dissemination of study findings may include reports, research briefs, 1-page data spotlights, webinars, and/or other publications or presentations. Dissemination materials will include a discussion of the limitations of the data and guidance on how to interpret the findings. Priority audiences for these products will include researchers, program staff, and technical assistance providers interested in the characteristics of and challenges faced by the child welfare workforce. Deidentified data files and documentation made available to the research community via NDACAN will contextualize and assist in the interpretation and use of the data. Data collected from agency directors will be merged with other agency-level contextual information available in NCANDS and AFCARS. Data from all workforce surveys will be analyzed to address the research questions provided in Section A.2.

We anticipate significant interest from the research community given NSCAW’s standing as a nationally representative data source and the employment of a nested design intended to represent the perspectives of multiple levels of child welfare agency personnel.

B8. Contact Persons

Christine Fortunato

Senior Social Science Research Analyst
Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation

Administration for Children and Families

370 L’Enfant Promenade, S.W.

Washington, DC 20447

[email protected] | 202.401.5460

Paul Biemer

Distinguished Fellow, Statistics

RTI International

Post Office Box 12194

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

[email protected] | 919.541.6056

Previously Approved Attachments

*Appendix A: NSCAW III Summary of Interviews

*Appendix A-1: NSCAW III Summary of Remote Interviews

*Appendix B: NSCAW III Child Interview

*Appendix B-1: NSCAW III Child Remote Interview (Revisions included with this request)

*Appendix C: NSCAW III Caregiver Interview

*Appendix C-1: NSCAW III Caregiver Remote Interview (Revisions included with this request)

*Appendix D: NSCAW III Caseworker Interview

*Appendix D-1: NSCAW III Caseworker Remote Interview

*Appendix F: Lead Letters and Fact Sheets

*Appendix F-1: Adolescent Fact Sheet

*Appendix F-2: Remote Lead Letters and Fact Sheets (Revisions included with this request)

*Appendix F-2a: Remote Adolescent Fact Sheet (Revisions included with this request)

*Appendix G: Consent and Assent Forms

*Appendix G-1: Caseworker Telephone Mode Consent Form

*Appendix G-2: Remote Consent and Assent Forms

*Appendix H: Data Linkage Forms

*Appendix H-1: Remote Data Linkage Forms

*Appendix I: HIPAA Authorization Forms

*Appendix I-1 Remote HIPAA Authorization Forms

*Appendix J: Panel Maintenance Letter

*Appendix K: Panel Maintenance Contact Card

Workforce ICR Appendix A: NSCAW III Phase II Research Questions

Workforce ICR Appendix B: 60-Day Federal Register Notice

*Appendix L: NSCAW III Phase I-II Site Selection and Sampling (Previously approved as Workforce ICR Appendix C)

Workforce ICR Appendix D: Research Questions and Constructs by Respondent Type

Instrument 1: Agency Director Survey

Instrument 2: Supervisor Survey

Instrument 3: Caseworker Survey

Workforce ICR Appendix E Agency Director Lead Letter

Workforce ICR Appendix F: Supervisor Lead Letter

Workforce ICR Appendix G: Caseworker Lead Letter

Workforce ICR Appendix H: Agency Director Consent Form

Workforce ICR Appendix I: Supervisor Consent Form

Workforce ICR Appendix J: Caseworker Consent Form

References

Bai, Y., Wells, R., & Hillemeier, M. M. (2009). Coordination between child welfare agencies

and mental health service providers, children's service use, and outcomes. Child abuse & neglect,

33(6), 372-381.

Biemer, P., Christ, S., & Weisen, C. (2009). A general approach for estimating scale score reliability for panel survey data. Psychological Methods, 14(4), 400–412.

Folsom, R. E., & Singh, A. C. (2000). The generalized exponential model for sampling weight calibration for extreme values, nonresponse, and poststratification. In Proceedings of the 2000 Joint Statistical Meetings, American Statistical Association, Survey Research Methods Section, Indianapolis, IN (pp. 598–603). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

Jacobson, N.S. & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 12–19.

12