In my previous post, we took a closer look at the importance of workforce development as one of the three foundational elements of the SHIFT. As a quick recap, the three interconnected key areas (the ‘3 KEYS’ you got to have) are workforce development (AKA education, training, and support), innovative technology (something better than what we have today and doesn’t make us cuss a lot), and enhanced practice (X + Y=…just kidding, I’m terrible at math…enhanced practice is the outcome when you combine the ‘right staff development’ approaches with the ‘right tech capabilities.’ Enhanced practice is not a
slogan or something we hope for; it’s achievable if we connect the right pieces to make it happen.)
Speaking of technology, let’s look at tech's critical role in bringing about true, lasting change in child welfare practices. This piece is important because, in many ways, I’m flipping the switch on how we viewed technology’s impact on practice historically. When technology first emerged in child welfare, we were somewhat leery of its uses in fieldwork and were cautioned not to allow technology to drive our practice. We were reminded countless times that practice drives technology (not the other way around), and it stuck, becoming somewhat of an oath that must be upheld. We took that vow seriously and believed that policy, legislation, and countless initiatives changed practice, not technology.
A walk down memory lane
You might have guessed the emerging technology I referenced is SACWIS. In 1993, SACWIS became the standard, establishing clear requirements for a federally funded child welfare case management tool. SACWIS was the ‘IT Girl’ of the time (see what I did there?) and the only game in town. Most of us know the ‘IT Girl’ and how her popularity waned over the years, but if you’re unfamiliar with her, SACWIS stands for Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System. That’s a mouthful, but we love our acronyms in child welfare.
In the late nineties and 2000s, we didn't realize that those of us on SACWIS projects were pioneers of child welfare technology. As a young caseworker, I viewed my SACWIS role as two-fold: first, I was there to describe the work to the vendor/project team, and second, I was there to ensure the technology did not change our practice. The oath…
It took 23 years…yes, more than two decades, before the Comprehensive Child Welfare Information System (CCWIS) rule passed in 2016, replacing the requirements previously laid out in SACWIS.
SACWIS (THEN) | CCWIS (NOW) |
Requirements = 51 | Requirements = 14 |
Monolithic | Modular |
Data - IN, Primarily for Fed Reporting | Data - Quality, Data-informed practices & program improvement |
By now, we’re all familiar with the main differences between SACWIS and CCWIS. For one, CCWIS isn’t as heavy on requirements. Yet, there’s something all too familiar about how things are shaking out, now 31 years later.
The shortfalls of current child welfare tech (it’s not entirely a tech problem)
Despite the millions of dollars that child welfare programs have invested in these systems over the years, most simply check the boxes for compliance and hit those basic requirements. As it turns out, technology offers game-changing opportunities realized in many sectors, yet we consistently miss the mark in the child welfare space by overlooking the possibilities. We’re not seeing the innovation that’s necessary to change lives. Yes, I said technology changes lives, and it’s up to us child welfare (business) professionals to make it happen. So, remember that oath I mentioned about ‘not changing practice?’ Throw that out because we must be the ones to abandon the status quo and accept nothing less than
change. We need tools that will transport us from the nineties and beyond 2016. We’re nearly a decade into CCWIS, and in many ways, it’s like we’re stuck in a time capsule.
If we’re not fundamentally changing how the work is done, we must ask ourselves, “What are we doing?” I don’t know about you, but if I’m spending a nice chunk of change to modernize, let’s say, my kitchen, then my new and improved, modern kitchen would be a glorious Zen space with all the bells and whistles. My cabinets and drawers would fit every gadget, pot, pan, and giant bowl I own. There’d be no more lost bags of pasta behind the lazy Susan cabinet, and the ridiculous number of Stanley cups (not the hockey one, although my Canadian husband might get behind that) we own would fit vertically
in any cabinet. You get the point. The innovation would change everything, including my attitude about cooking. That’s the kind of transformation we need by leveraging technology in child welfare. And I’m tired of hearing words like ‘efficient and easy’ to describe the worker benefits of ‘SACWIS-y’ type systems being implemented today. News flash: no one comes to this field because it’s easy. That’s not even a rumor. It’s not easy. We deal with people’s lives, families, relationships, and futures. There’s nothing easy about that. Our technology must connect people who are disconnected. It must uncover histories and present information in ways that rewrite stories and change the course for nearly 370,000 kids and youth in foster care today.
Flipping the Switch on Child Welfare Technology
1. Who’s in the driver's seat matters. Many tech implementations are primarily led by IT, often with little to no program-side input. Minimally, the business/program should co-pilot. I’ll go even further and suggest that the business side should lead, and IT should make it happen, enabling what we need to change lives. This may be one of our biggest challenges with current child welfare technology. The leaders, practitioners, and boots-on-the-ground caseworkers who use the tools after implementation have largely been left out of the conversation or are included too late to make a difference. Even on projects where this is not the case, it’s somewhat of a luxury and wishful thinking to suggest that program experts remain on board for the whole ride. Generally, we see more of a baton-passing exercise when we need continuity between programs and multidisciplinary perspectives down to the finish line. We need program experts at the table throughout the procurement, design, and implementation process. We don’t practice child welfare in silos. We’ve spent a lot of years removing silos and improving case transitions to minimize the impact on families. Yet, time and again, we’re running these projects like checkpoints from intake to investigations to case management and beyond. It’s not smooth or seamless. It’s clunky and disjointed.
2. Relationship goals for the win. This might seem strange in an IT culture, but we’re social
workers, and if we’re leading as we should, we must lead through our common ground,
partnerships, and collaboration. Think of the project team as one big child and family team. There are no dumb questions because we don’t all speak the same languages. Workers won’t know what an enterprise service bus is or what CRM stands for…they’re not supposed to know that stuff. Conversely, IT minds are likely not versed in what we do and see in the field. Take them on ‘ride-alongs.’ Bring them to court on a docket day. But no matter what you do, accept that we are not the same or from the same backgrounds. Create spaces where no one is afraid to speak up, and all voices have an impact. A favorite quote by Dr. Linda Hill says best: "Digital transformation is more about people and culture and less about technology.” The pivots and detours happening on our projects are largely because we’re not behaving like partners.
3. Prioritize innovation over compliance and timelines. Practice and technology have changed considerably since SACWIS, and in part, the CCWIS final rule intended for child welfare programs to use modern technology to support their unique program needs rather than building a one-size-fits-all solution. By narrowly focusing on checking the boxes, many tools become slightly, incrementally better than the previous SACWIS systems from 30 years ago. No game-changers here. While other industries explore the boundaries of AI, we’re left asking for a better case management tool that mirrors our processes.
What’s worse, many projects are seemingly more beholden to their timelines than to the applicability and usability of the final product. Yet, we see several projects that have gone off course or pivoted midway through their journeys, and with such regularity, it’s becoming commonplace to encounter these detours and delays. What if we made room for detours in the first place? What if we created ‘reality-checks’ in the project plan and spaced them throughout the schedule to continuously assess our path and ensure we’re building the right thing? Instead of becoming inundated with change orders, let’s take more time getting it right in the first place. That’s a true partnership. That’s working together to meet a common goal.
4. Never lose sight of why we’re innovating in the first place. One thing that will never change is the ‘WHY.’ The reasons why we do this work and the reasons why we need innovation to improve service delivery are one and the same. This work is about people. The people we serve and those called to serve. If we get the people part right, we can pave the way to lasting outcomes and brighter futures. It is within our reach, and it’s our responsibility to make it happen because it’s our bus (social workers / business / programs), and we must drive it. When planning for prevention, family stability, and community-based services, let us evolve our understanding beyond current best practices and envision how and where technology provides a better path forward. Rather than the standard use cases, I’m looking at the big picture first. Every CFSR (Child and Family Service Review), PIP (Program Improvement Plan), and nearly all of our agency strategic plans or mission statements that are boldly displayed on our websites tell the story. We’re not innovating for the sake of innovation. We’re innovating to do the stuff we’re about… protecting kids and youth, keeping families together as much as possible, building lifelong support systems, and ensuring well-being needs are met. How can we revert to checking boxes and timelines if we focus on these things?
Most of us know this (CCWIS) isn’t going as we’d hoped and agree that change is needed, even if we’re not saying it out loud. I think a big piece of that change begins when we all accept that technology and practice should mutually inform one another. With the right combination of child welfare practice and technology experts working together, we can create solutions that truly solve some of the biggest challenges facing child welfare workers and families. Let’s think beyond 14 checkboxes, focus on families, and prioritize delivering something that works. And hey, if it takes three years to get it right instead of four 16-week sprints that don’t hit the mark, isn’t it better to take the time getting it right instead of spending so much time and money getting it wrong?
Need help bridging the gap between the program and IT sides? Think of me as your translator. I’m a bona fide social worker well-versed in tech lingo.
Set up time with me to discuss your challenges and learn how I can help.
Resources for this piece:
Comments