Caseload and Workload Considerations in Public Child Welfare

Background and Purpose

Michael Lipsky’s theory of street-level bureaucracy holds that public human services operate in conditions of chronic resource constraint and that as a result, frontline staff will always have more work than they can actually complete. In child welfare, the impact of resource constraints may be partially mitigated by capping the number of families for whom case-carrying staff are responsible, as advocated by the Child Welfare League of America (CWLA). Caseload limits for frontline staff may be an antidote for the associated high workloads Lipsky details, including paperwork, court proceedings and other people-processing activities. 

The purpose of this study is to better understand the relationship between caseload levels and work-related time pressure for frontline child welfare staff, with a goal of identifying work conditions that support workers who serve vulnerable children, youth, and families.

Methods

This research employed a multi-site design to survey public child welfare staff about their work, their agencies, and the communities they serve. A total of 2,157 caseworkers in three states completed a baseline Comprehensive Organizational Health Assessment. In addition to demographic, organizational, and work-related questions, respondents were asked about their average caseload size (the number of families they work with) and their perceptions of time pressure in their jobs and job satisfaction (both measured on a 5-point scale).  

Results

In this sample, average caseload size was well above the CWLA recommendation of twelve families (M = 17.16, SD = 9.53), with a majority of caseworkers (72.4%) reporting caseloads greater than twelve and many (15.7%) reporting caseloads ranging from 24-50 families. Caseload was significantly correlated with time pressure (r = 0.20, p < .01). A stepwise regression predicting job satisfaction from caseload and time pressure was significant, F(1, 1837) = 119.43, p < .001, explaining 11% of the variance in job satisfaction.

Given that turnover is most common among new employees and is often related to job stressors, we predicted that more seasoned staff would experience less time pressure associated with size of caseload. In fact, tenure did moderate the association between caseload and time pressure but in the opposite direction [F(1, 1840) = 36.94, p < .001], with more seasoned staff reporting high time pressure regardless of caseload and newer employees reporting time pressure that was more proportionate to caseload.

Conclusions and Implications

This study is an important first step in building models to inform child welfare and other caseworker-based human services including behavioral health, gerontology and youth development.  High caseloads remain a significant problem in child welfare, but they are not a sufficient explanation for workers’ time pressure. As child welfare agencies work to address family needs among unpredictable fluctuations in caseload levels, these findings suggest that Lipsky’s theory holds true, and that caseload limits are not sufficient to address high workloads and time pressure.  Attempts to support and stabilize the workforce in child welfare, whose high levels of turnover confound efforts to serve families and ensure the safety and well-being of young people, must address multiple sources of pressure on staff.