Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Child Youth Serv Rev. 2013 Oct 13;39:147–152. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.10.004

Table One. Characteristics of the Child Welfare Agencies Participating in CCWII.

Characteristic Weighted %
Professional disciplines of staff by agency
 MSW 16.4%
 BSW 28.5%
 BA or below 53.4%
 Other degrees 1.7%
Had difficulty filling vacant case worker positions: Yes 46.9%
Continuing education: Yes
 Pay for courses 52.6%
 Reimburse for courses 34.8%
 Provide for continuing education 80.7%
 Allowed to attend during work hours 94.8%
Collect standardized child outcome measures 90.0%
 Why: Mandated by government 88.7%
  Required for reimbursement 69.6%
  Used for treatment planning 61.0%
  Used for clinical supervision 47.9%
  Used for agency management 81.0%
  Used for quality improvement 99.8%
Collect child functioning measures 30.9%
Agency involved in Child and Family Services Review (CFSR): Yes 58.8%
Did CFSR recommend a specific program: Yes 28.5%
Types of technical assistance
 Annie E. Casey Foundation 36.3%
 Casey Family Services 41.1%
 Regional Technical Assistance Sponsored by the Children's Bureau 25.3%
 State Technical Assistance 21.4%
 Chapin Hall 17.7%
 Walter R MacDonald 0.6%
 NAPCWA 5.3%
 American Humane Association 23.9%
 CWLA 25.9%
Heard of California Evidence-based Clearing House for Child Welfare 14.0%
 Visited the website 86.9%