Usability of Evidence-Based Supervision Strategies in Time-Constrained Child Protection Settings

Background:

Evidence-informed, effective supervision strategies are urgently needed to meet critical threats to the quality of child welfare services (e.g., high burnout and turnover rates, racial disparities at every level of the child welfare system). Supervision has been associated with improved services and increased workforce retention through reducing workers’ stress and increasing workers’ sense of self-efficacy. However, available research has yet to clarify what supervision strategies are necessary to reduce staff turnover rates and address service delivery disparities. This study used a taxonomy of 21 evidence-based supervision practice elements to assess child protection supervisors’ perspectives on each strategies’ usefulness, and determinants to using them within supervision.

Methods:

This concurrent mixed methods study sent anonymous electronic survey links to all county and tribal child protection service supervisors and tribal leaders in one midwestern state (N=405). Eligibility criteria included current employment in a child protection agency and providing supervision to staff. Survey questions focused on respondents’ supervision practices, Likert scale ratings of the usefulness of 21 evidence-based supervision strategies, and demographic items. Open-ended questions asked respondents to describe determinants for using the listed supervision strategies. Descriptive analyses identified the supervision practice, the usefulness of supervision strategies, and areas for further training on supervision strategies. Qualitative data from open ended response questions was extracted and thematic coding identified barriers and facilitators to the use of the supervision strategies within child protection supervision.

Results:

Respondents (N=90) represented a 22% response rate and covered 53 of the state’s 87 counties and tribal territories. The majority of respondents identified as women (93%), White (88%), between 36 and 55 years of age (71%).

At their current agency, respondents reported on hours spent in supervision with each supervisee (M=3.25, SD=15.83). Supervision time was reportedly comprised of informal conversations (37%), clinical content (31%), and administrative content (28%). Of the 21 listed supervision strategies, elicitation (90%) and supportive listening (90%) were frequently ranked as useful, and role play (29%) and supervisor teaching tools (27%) were ranked more frequently as not useful. Supervisor teaching tools were less commonly identified as useful and identified more frequently as an area of need for training. Two major themes emerged in respondents’ qualitative descriptions of barriers to using supervision strategies: limited time and the importance of co-creating with supervisees.

Conclusion and Implications:

Respondents echoed concerns present in existing research on this topic: they have very little time, are stretched thin across many responsibilities, and are working in a crisis-rich environment. Respondents identified an interest in supervision strategies that are substantively more structured, but also ranked the more structured strategies as less useful than the more passive approaches. Qualitative data illuminated a tension between the utility of structured tools and an urgent need for easy-to-use guidance around this important aspect of supervisors’ jobs. Findings suggest child protective supervisors must simultaneously attend to the time scarce, high stress aspects of their environment along with the emotionally taxing nature of the work. Thus, their supervision strategies must provide a higher amount of structure and contain flexible, process-oriented components.