Design Team

Note: The Design Team program was not responsive to the CEBC's inquiry. The following information was obtained from publicly available sources.

Scientific Rating:
NR
Not able to be Rated
See scale of 1-5
Child Welfare System Relevance Level:
High
See descriptions of 3 levels

About This Program

Design Team has been reviewed by the CEBC in the area of: Child Welfare Workforce Development and Support Programs, but lacks the necessary research evidence to be given a Scientific Rating.

Target Population: Child welfare agencies

Brief Description

The Design Team model helps agencies improve their workplace and cope with change through interventions designed and implemented by a team representing all agency levels. The intervention aims to improve agency climate, culture, and workforce retention.

Education and Training Resources

Publicly available information indicates there is a manual that describes how to implement this program, and there is some training available for this program.
See contact info below.

Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research

This program has been reviewed and it was determined that this program lacks the type of published, peer-reviewed research that meets the CEBC criteria for a scientific rating of 1 – 5. Therefore, the program has been given the classification of "NR - Not able to be Rated." It was reviewed because it was identified by the topic expert as a program being used in the field, or it is being marketed and/or used in California with children receiving services from child welfare or related systems and their parents/caregivers. Some programs that are not rated may have published, peer-reviewed research that does not meet the above stated criteria or may have eligible studies that have not yet been published in the peer-reviewed literature. For more information on the "NR - Not able to be Rated" classification, please see the Scientific Rating Scale.

Child Welfare Outcomes: Not Specified

Show relevant research...

Anderson-Butcher, D., Lawson, H. A., & Barkdull, C. (2002). An evaluation of child welfare Design Teams in four states. Journal of Health & Social Policy, 15(3/4), 131-161. doi:10.1300/J045v15n03_10

Type of Study: Two group pretest-posttest study
Number of Participants: 70 (48 Team One, 22 Team Two)

Population:

  • Age — Team One: 33-64 years (Mean=47.74 years), Team Two: Not specified
  • Race/Ethnicity — Not specified
  • Gender — Team One: 40 Female and 8 Male, Team Two: Not specified
  • Status — Participants were individuals that work within various sectors of the child welfare systems.

Location/Institution: Utah, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
This study describes Design Teams which were structured in four states to promote collaborative practices among professionals and former clients. Measures utilized include a brief survey assessing the overall effectiveness of the Design Team process. Forty-eight Design Team members completed follow-up surveys; these surveys explored individuals’ perceptions of their Design Team involvement. Second, 22 Design Team members were interviewed directly; they were asked questions about the benefits and accomplishments resulting from their Design Team experience. Results indicate both evaluation strategies found that the Design Teams had significant impacts on promoting family-centered practice. Additionally, 95% of the Design Team members interviewed noted that the Design Team enhanced attitudes, values, and beliefs about family-centered practice. Likewise, Design Team members surveyed strongly indicated that since their participation, they had “encouraged others to value the input of parents and families.” Limitations include lack of randomization, lack of control group, and lack of follow-up.

Length of postintervention follow-up: None.

Strolin-Goltzman, J., Lawrence, C., Auerbach, C., Caringi, J., Claiborne, N., Lawson, H.,...Shim, M. (2009). Design Teams: A promising organizational intervention for improving turnover rates in the child welfare workforce. Child Welfare, 88(5), 149-167.

Type of Study: Pretest-posttest with comparison group
Number of Participants: 82

Population:

  • Age — Mean=42 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — 98% White, 1% African American, and 1% Hispanic
  • Gender — 82% Female and 18% Male
  • Status — Participants were child welfare caseworkers, supervisors, and management and units (CPS, foster care, prevention, adoption, etc.).

Location/Institution: Northeastern United States

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
The purpose of this article is to describe results investigating the effects of the Design Team intervention designed to address organizational causes of turnover in public child welfare. Approximately 70% of workers (N= 526) completed the surveys at pretest and posttest. However, this analysis is a county agency level analysis (N=12), not an individual analysis. There were two groups: agencies that received no intervention and the Design Team agencies on preintervention and postintervention changes in the five outcome variables; and (2) comparison between the three self-sustaining Design Team agencies and the other agencies on the pre-post intervention changes in the five outcome variables. Results indicate agency leadership influenced and determined the Design Team composition, the teams’ developmental trajectories, their improvement priorities, and their achievements. Overall, agency leaders had the power to inspire, facilitate, constrain, and impede teams. Limitations include the lack of randomization, and small sample size.

Length of postintervention follow-up: None.

Strolin-Goltzman, J. (2010). Improving turnover in public child welfare: Outcomes from an organizational intervention. Children and Youth Services Review, 32(10), 1388-1395. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.06.007

Type of Study: Pretest-posttest with comparison group
Number of Participants: 82

Population:

  • Age — Mean=42 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — 98% White, 1% African American, and 1% Hispanic
  • Gender — 82% Female and 18% Male
  • Status — Participants were child welfare caseworkers, supervisors, and management and units (CPS, foster care, prevention, adoption, etc.).

Location/Institution: United States

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
This study examines the effects of the Design Team intervention on intention to leave child welfare. Child welfare agencies participated in either the Design Team intervention condition or a comparison condition. Measures utilized include Workforce Retention Survey. Results indicate significant changes for three of the six organizational variables (professional resources, commitment, and burnout) and intention to leave. Additionally, all of these interactions showed a greater positive improvement for the Design Team group than the comparison group. Limitations include the lack of randomization, small rural and suburban sample, and lack of diversity in the sample challenges the generalizability of the results to urban child welfare organizations.

Length of postintervention follow-up: None.

Claiborne, N., Auerbach, C., Lawrence, C., McGowan, B., Lawson, H., McCarthy, M.,...Caringi, J. (2014). Design Teams as an organizational intervention to improve job satisfaction and worker turnover in public child welfare. Journal of Family Strengths, 14(1), 1-24.

Type of Study: One group pretest-posttest study
Number of Participants: 361

Population:

  • Age — 20-60 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — 140 African American, 90 White, 49 Caribbean, 28 Hispanic/Latino, 14 African, 8 Asian, and 5 Native American
  • Gender — 240 Male and 121 Female
  • Status — Child welfare caseworkers and their immediate supervisors from twelve public child welfare agencies.

Location/Institution: Eastern United States

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
The purpose of this study was to assess if public child welfare agencies using the Design Team intervention experience improvements in workers’ job satisfaction and to explore the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover. Measures utilized include the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS). Results indicate significantly greater level of overall satisfaction for both the urban and rural sites. Both sites experienced significantly greater satisfaction with communication, operating procedures, contingent rewards, benefits, and finding work to be meaningful and enjoyable. Limitations include the lack of a control or comparison group, lack of randomization, and imitation of self-reported perceptions.

Length of postintervention follow-up: None.

References

No reference materials are currently available for Design Team.

Contact Information

Name: Jessica Strolin-Goltzman
Email:

Date Research Evidence Last Reviewed by CEBC: May 2017

Date Program Originally Loaded onto CEBC: June 2017