Research That Matters (January 17 - 20, 2008)

The declared intent of public child welfare is to provide safety, permanency, and well-being for children. However, lack of skilled staff and worker turnover can result in incomplete and inaccurate assessments and delays in service – reasons often cited for adverse outcomes (National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 2006). Conversely, it is posited that focusing on recruitment and retention of qualified workers will reduce adverse outcomes and improve service quality (Bernotavicz, 2006; US GAO, 2003). For these reasons, part of the mission of one's state Title IV-E Program is to ensure effective service delivery by increasing the number of child welfare workers with MSWs and to improve retention among public child welfare workers. This study examines the experiences of Title IV-E graduates in one state. The purpose of this study is 1) to describe a sample of one state's Title IV-E MSW graduates and 2) to explore the similarities and differences between those who choose to remain in public child welfare (stayers) and those who leave the field (leavers). This qualitative analysis of stayers and leavers identifies important themes for furthering our understanding of worker retention.

Methods

This study uses interview data to compare a self-selected sample of 304 stayers and 83 leavers who completed in-depth phone interviews regarding their career goals, educational and agency experiences. In the qualitative examination of the 387 interviews, grounded theory method was employed by devising categories which make implicit assumptions explicit (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). The responses to each interview question were reviewed by a single reader, who then coded question-by-question responses according to trends emerging from the initial review. Two randomly selected subsets of 20 interviews (10 stayers and 10 leavers) were then coded by a second and third reader to ensure coding, category, and thematic consistency. QSR N5/NVivo7 statistical software was used both as an organizing tool and to assist in analyzing the frequency of responses.

Results

Our analysis identifies supervision, workload, stress, and job satisfaction as main themes. While both stayers and leavers reported workload concerns and identified agency-level conditions which caused stress, the stayers more often talked about buffering or mediating forces – such as good quality supervision – to offset these challenges. Leavers recognized the value of buffers such as good supervision but felt that poor management and unresponsive supervision provided an added frustration which contributed to their decision to leave. Along with quality supervision and good management, stayers reported a good balance between meaningful work, job stability, and personal life. On the other hand, leavers appeared more likely to experience their job as causing an imbalance between professional and personal responsibilities.

Conclusion and Implications

In this ten-year qualitative retention study, a sample of one state's Title IV-E graduates provides insights into their choice of public child welfare, their opportunities and challenges, and their reasons for staying or leaving the field. This study furthers our understanding of worker retention by offering detailed feedback from the workers themselves. The findings from this study contain implications for further research and for management practice.