Research That Matters (January 17 - 20, 2008)

Objectives: The present study explores the implementation of the SDM� model and its impact on child welfare decision making and outcomes. Background: Structured Decision Making� (SDM�) is a child welfare decision making model that was adopted by the State of California in 1999, and subsequently implemented in several counties, including Los Angeles County. A multi-level study was conducted in conjunction with the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) to explore the implementation of SDM� and its effects on child welfare decision making and outcomes. One of the sub-studies involved a survey of DCFS caseworkers and managers in Los Angeles County. The survey was designed to examine the social workers' experiences with the DCFS-led training and implementation of SDM�, their feelings regarding any changes in their decision making and the perceived effectiveness of the SDM� tools with respect to various child welfare outcomes (e.g., protecting children, reducing the rate of subsequence abuse/neglect substantiations). Method: A total of 485 DCFS caseworkers and managers who implemented the SDM� model completed a web-based survey. In order to understand the implementation of the SDM� model, descriptive analyses of the usability (e.g., ease of use, reliability, accuracy) and actual usage of each tool were conducted. To examine SDM�'s impact on child welfare decision making and outcomes, latent path analyses were conducted. First, using AMOS 5.0, confirmatory factor analyses were performed to test the validity of two latent constructs of perceived effectiveness of SDM�. Once the measurement model was established (CFI=.99, RMSEA=.07), a latent path model was estimated to examine the effects of worker characteristics, DCFS-led training, and implementation of SDM� on worker decision making and service outcomes (CFI=.98, RMSEA=.04). Results: Findings reveal considerable variation in the implementation of the SDM� tools. Of all the tools, the family strengths/need assessment tool (86%) was most utilized, followed by the safety assessment tool (80%); the least utilized tool was the hotline/response priority tool (8%). Descriptive statistics show that child welfare workers had largely positive perceptions about the SDM� model and tools. For example, 94% of the participants found the SDM� tools easy to use, and 92% found the model to be accurate. Results of the structural equation modeling suggested that organizational tenure (�=-.28) and job position (i.e., being a frontline worker) (�=-.23) had a significant effect on perceived effectiveness of SDM� on decision making. In addition, social workers who were more satisfied with the SDM� training were more likely to think that SDM� had a positive impact on their decision making (� = .10). Finally, perceive effectiveness of the SDM� tools on worker decision making was found to have a strong positive impact on the perceived effectiveness on service outcomes (� = .83). Conclusion: Implications for child welfare policy and best practices are considered, particularly those related to training and implementation of the SDM� tools and model. Also considered are issues related to the conceptualization of structured decision making and implications of our findings for future research on SDM�.