Child welfare workers satisfaction and wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic: Perspectives of agency staff in Ohio

Abstract

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the lives of children and families, created additional stressors, and increased risks for maltreatment. The pandemic has changed the way child welfare agencies operate, requiring changes to policies and practice. Minimal research has considered the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on child welfare workers wellbeing and job satisfaction.

Objective

This mixed-methods research study seeks to understand CPS staff satisfaction, variables impacting satisfaction, and challenges that increased since the pandemic began for child welfare workers in Ohio.

Participants and setting

A sample of staff members (n = 267) from 50 CPS agencies across Ohio participated in the study.

Methods

This mixed-methods study used logistic regression, chi square analyses, and thematic analysis to analyze the data from a survey sent to child welfare agencies in Ohio.

Results

Caring for minor children, primary role at work, and years in child welfare were significantly associated with job satisfaction. Those working in foster care/placement, adoption/permanency, family support/visitation, kinship were 7.57 times more likely than those doing intake/investigation work to be satisfied with their job (p = .007). Thematic analysis of staff issues that increased during the pandemic resulted in six themes: Stress and Anxiety, Feeling Overwhelmed, Burnout, All, Motivation, and Isolation and Disconnection.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic has created additional stressors for child welfare staff. Practice implications are discussed to help increase job satisfaction, staff wellbeing, and mitigate turnover.

1. Introduction

More than 4 million referrals were received by child protective services (CPS) agencies in 2019; approximately 656,000 children in the United States were victims of child maltreatment in the same year (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2021). Within a community, Child Protective Services (CPS) is the primary agency to receive reports of possible child maltreatment (DePanfilis, 2018). These agencies, which include child welfare workers, investigate allegations of maltreatment to establish if a child was abused or neglected and if services are warranted. Depending on the identified risks assessed by child welfare workers, children may remain in the home or enter placement, while the family receives services to build on existing strengths and minimize threats to safety and wellbeing. The focus for CPS agencies is attaining results for children related to safety, permanency, and wellbeing (DePanfilis, 2018). Approximately 23 % of child victims are removed from their home (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2021) when it has been determined by child welfare workers that parents are unable to protect their children. In these instances, children may be placed with extended family (kinship) or in foster care. When children are placed in foster care, policies guide agency staff to work toward the goal of family reunification (Haight et al., 2003; Singer & Brodzinsky, 2020) whenever possible. While child welfare workers often work with families to ensure the protection of children and reunification efforts, less is known about how the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced child welfare workers' well-being and satisfaction with their jobs. To further the research in this area, this article focuses on a mixed methods research study examining child welfare workers' satisfaction with their jobs and perceived well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. The following sections highlight CPS staff job satisfaction and turnover, the COVID-19 pandemic and child welfare work, and a research study examining these areas in a sample of CPS workers in the State of Ohio.

1.1. CPS staff job satisfaction and turnover

The work of CPS is complex and demanding (Phillips et al., 2022), with child welfare workers making important decisions about the safety and wellbeing of children and families. However, working in child welfare has been identified as one of the most stressful professions (Hermon & Chahla, 2019). High caseloads and workloads can make it challenging to successfully serve families (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2016) and can leave staff feeling overwhelmed with their responsibilities. Motivation is relevant to the work of child welfare staff as their work involves challenging and fast paced cases. Motivation influences the focus, effort, and perseverance on work related tasks (Latham, 2007) and has been operationalized as “positive work affect” (Preston, 2013, p. 2007).

Burnout is considered a prolonged response to stress and includes three elements: a sense of ineffectiveness and diminished accomplishment, experiencing cynicism and detachment from the work, and emotional exhaustion (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). Research suggests many helping professionals experience high levels of burnout, with CPS staff thought to be one of the professions at highest risk for burnout (Leake et al., 2017). The pressures of job stress and time constraints have been associated with job burnout, regardless of length of time on the job (Phillips et al., 2020).

Job satisfaction has been identified as an important predictor of turnover for child welfare workers (Kim & Kao, 2014). Previous research indicates that individual and organizational factors impact social worker satisfaction and retention (Kothari et al., 2021). Shier et al. (2012) found that personal life, work, and profession impact social worker satisfaction and the intent to leave their job. Among child welfare workers who left their positions, a high rate of dissatisfaction was reported with workloads (Griffiths & Royse, 2017).

Child welfare agencies often experience high rates of turnover. Annual turnover rates of child welfare staff are high and estimated at between 20 and 40 % (Casey Foundation, 2017; United States Government Accountability Office, 2021b). Turnover can be costly to the agency, negatively impact workflow, overextend staff, and have negative repercussions for families being served by the agency (Hermon & Chahla, 2019). Recent research suggests coworker support, supervision, self-efficacy, and organizational support were factors that predicted retention of child welfare staff (de Guzman et al., 2020). Understanding and addressing job satisfaction is important to curbing turnover and its resulting negative impact.

1.2. Influence of COVID-19 pandemic on child welfare work

Most of the aforementioned statistics and content highlights a time prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, yet the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the lives of children and families across the United States. It has impacted jobs, schools, unemployment, and the day-to-day lives for many and due to the pandemic, individuals have experienced stressors related to health and finances (Brown et al., 2020). Children have spent more time at home and parents were frequently balancing their own work with helping their children with virtual schooling. In other cases, parents lost jobs and experienced financial and emotional stressors as a result. Research suggests that children living in homes experiencing economic insecurity or with parental mental health issues are more likely to experience child maltreatment (Conrad-Hiebner & Byram, 2020). The pandemic presented additional stressors for families and poses increased risk for child maltreatment (Lawson et al., 2020). The potential for increased risk of child maltreatment in homes during COVID-19 has implications for child welfare workers as these individuals are likely the ones to assess and address instances of child maltreatment.

The pandemic has changed the way child welfare agencies operate. On March 9, 2020, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine declared a state of emergency for Ohio, and on March 22, 2020, the Ohio Department of Health issued a stay-at-home order. Even after the initial lockdown, child welfare agency operations were altered. Agencies enacted distancing guidelines and policies regarding staff working from home to minimize risks. The need for social distancing required shifts in most aspects of operations for CPS agencies, including how agency staff interact with families, how families have visitation with their children, and how agency staff hold meetings.

Given government restrictions in response to the pandemic regarding in-person gatherings, the need to minimize contact between individuals living in different households, and sheltering in place guidelines, in-person visitations were minimized or eliminated in most child welfare agencies. This impacted the frequency with which staff went into the office, the ways they interacted with other staff members, the frequency and types of visits to client homes, and the ability to supervise visits between biological parents and their children in foster care. In the U.S., the Children's Bureau (2020) provided recommendations for child welfare agencies regarding in-person visits with families, safety practices for face-to-face meetings, and practices to help agencies keep their workforce safe and meet the needs of the families they serve.

Policies developed in response to COVID-19 regarding parent-child visitation impacted child welfare involved families. Limits on in-person gatherings generally meant that visitation between parents and children in care would need to occur virtually (Neil et al., 2020; Singer & Brodzinsky, 2020). This also impacted how often staff went into the office and necessitated that all or most staff work from home. Agencies within Ohio and across the country varied on how long staff were expected to work remotely.

In addition to impacting the way child welfare agencies operated, the stay at home orders and limits on in person attendance at schools and daycares created concerns for child welfare staff about the safety of children. Children were spending more time at home, often with parents who were under considerable stress due to caretaking responsibilities and finances. School and daycare closures meant that children were less likely to have contact with teachers, doctors, social workers, and other mandated reporters, leading to concerns that child maltreatment would go undetected or unreported (United States Government Accountability Office, 2021a). This is especially concerning given that poverty and stress are risk factors for child maltreatment (Conrad-Hiebner & Byram, 2020; Yang, 2015). During the first several months of the pandemic, calls to CPS hotlines decreased while hospitals were seeing more children with child maltreatment diagnoses (Negriff et al., 2022) and children with more severe child abuse injuries (Woodall, 2020).

Minimal research, however, has considered the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on child welfare workers. In one study including front line workers, including child protection workers, Roberts et al. (2021) found not only did participants have higher anxiety and depression scores compared to the general population, but that psychological distress was associated with one's workload as well as perceptions of their organization's training and communication. Furthermore, many participants in this study noted a desire to leave their job and look for employment elsewhere. Similarly, in sample of child welfare workers, Julien-Chinn et al. (2021), found approximately 11 % of planned to leave their agency during COVID-19 and roughly 20 % noted they were not “not committed to continuing to work in child welfare” during COVID-19 (p.5). These studies highlight that COVID-19 did impact some child welfare workers regarding their thoughts toward the work they were doing and consideration of leaving their places of employment due to lower job satisfaction.

This mixed-methods research study seeks to understand CPS staff satisfaction and wellbeing during the pandemic from a sample of child welfare workers in Ohio. The study described here is part of a larger research project that involved a survey to staff at CPS agencies across Ohio. CPS agencies are referred to as children services agencies in Ohio and these two terms are used synonymously throughout this paper. Gaining information from staff is important in understanding child welfare workers' experiences and learning more about the positive and negative changes that took place. This information will be useful to agencies trying to determine how to shift practices moving forward. Given that recency of the pandemic, there is limited research on how child welfare staff have been impacted. This study seeks to answer:

1) How satisfied are CPS staff with their job during the pandemic? Which variables impact job satisfaction?

2) Which challenges (motivation, stress, burnout, feeling overwhelmed, other) have increased since the pandemic began?

This study seeks to increase the knowledge of how CPS staff have coped during the pandemic. Learning about the job satisfaction of staff and the issues that have increased for them during the pandemic can inform policies and practices to help support and maintain staff in their roles.

2. Methods

2.1. Data collection

For this study, child welfare workers were asked about their experiences during the pandemic and how changes in the way they practice have impacted staff and the families they serve. An anonymous survey was distributed to all 85 CPS agencies in Ohio. Ohio is one of only nine states with a child welfare system administered at the county level versus a centralized administrative system or hybrid system (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2018). Therefore, Ohio follows Federal and State requirements, yet is likely to have greater variation in funding and policies between counties.

To recruit participants, in May of 2021, the Public Children Services Association of Ohio (PCSAO) sent an email and shared recruitment information in their newsletter that reaches the directors and senior leaders of the 85 children services agencies in Ohio. Some of the CPS agencies are consolidated and serve more than one county. The email and newsletter announcement included basic information on the study and a link for more information on the study and the link to the survey. The email and newsletter received by executive directors (ED) requested that they distribute the email with the description and survey link to their staff. Two weeks after the email/newsletter was sent from PCSAO, a follow up email was sent to the EDs of all 85 CPS agencies in Ohio with a request that the share the link with their staff members. Inclusion criteria for the study included adults (aged 18 or older) working in a CPS agency in Ohio for at least one year.

The link connected participants to the survey via the REDCap platform, allowing respondents to answer anonymously. The survey included demographic questions and asked about the ways practices have changed, what has worked well, and what has been more challenging during the pandemic. The survey included a combination of dichotomous questions, rating scales, and open-ended questions. The survey took approximately 10–15 min to complete. At the end of the survey, respondents could choose to enter a gift card lottery; they were provided a link to access another REDCap project where they could provide their contact information to be entered in a lottery to win one of ten $70 electronic Amazon gift cards. This allowed the researchers to contact those who received a gift card while keeping their survey responses separate from their contact information. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the first author's university. At the time of the study, the first author served on the Board for one county agency; however, there was no financial benefit, or any improper advantages conveyed to the first author. Informed consent was attained through use of a consent form before participants began the survey. As the survey was conducted electronically, consent was approved without signature.

2.2. Sample

Staff members (n = 267) from 50 children services agencies across Ohio participated in the study. Ten additional respondents did not meet study criteria or answered only demographic questions and their data were removed. The sample largely identified as female (81.3 %) and White/Caucasian (79.4 %). Staff had worked in child welfare for a mean of 14 years, with a range of 1.5 to 37 years. Most staff were married (60.3 %), single (22.6 %), or divorced (13.0 %).

2.3. Measures

In preparing this study, the first author consulted with CPS workers from two different agencies in Ohio. These individuals provided insight on observed changes during the pandemic, phrasing of job titles, ideas for compensation, and recruitment strategies. Their insight helped guide key materials within the study.

2.3.1. Demographic variables

Participants were asked to respond to items regarding their gender (female, non-binary, male, prefer to self-describe); age (25 or under, 26–34, 35–44, 45–54, 55–64, 65 or older); ethnicity/race (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black/African American, Hispanic or Latinx, Multiracial, White/Caucasian, prefer not to answer, other); undergraduate degree (social work, psychology, sociology, counseling, child and family studies, criminal justice, public health, other); and whether they cared for minor children (yes or no) or elderly parents (yes or no). Due to counts, age was regrouped into “34 and under,” “35–44,” “45–54,” and “55 and older.” Similarly, undergraduate degree was regrouped into “social work,” “psychology,” “sociology/criminal justice,” and “counseling/child and family studies/public health/other.” It should be noted here that gender and ethnicity were not included in the bivariate or multivariate analysis given the number of participants identifying as female and White/Caucasian.

2.3.2. Work related variables

Participants were also asked to respond to items regarding work related variables including primary role at work (intake/investigation, family services/ongoing, foster care/placement, adoption permanency, family support/visitation, supervision/administration, kinship, school outreach/prevention, other); number of years in child welfare, and the number of staff issues experienced during the pandemic. The authors used agency zip code data provided by participants to determine size and rurality of agency. For the number of staff issues experienced during the pandemic, participants were asked whether they had experienced issues with motivation (yes/no), stress (yes/no), burnout (yes/no), or feeling overwhelmed (yes/no). Participants were given the option of specifying “other” issues they had experienced; these were not included in the model due to the small number of responses. Responses to the staff issues items (motivation, stress, burnout, and feeling overwhelmed) were then summed to create a total staff issue score which was used in the analysis for this study. Based on the responses, years in child welfare was grouped into “1–5”, “5.5–10”, “10.5–20”, and “20.5 + .” Agency size was regrouped into “small/medium” and “large.” Finally, given discrepancy in counts regarding one's primary role at work, values were regrouped into “family services/ongoing”, “foster care/placement, adoption/permanency, family support/visitation, kinship”, “intake/ investigation”, “school outreach/prevention, other”, and “supervision/administration.”

2.3.3. Dependent variable

Participants were asked to indicate their satisfaction with their current position on a scale from “0 = very unsatisfied” to “100 = very satisfied” with “50 = neutral.” Given the variation in how participants responded with responses not being normally distributed, responses were grouped into “0–50 = Not Satisfied/Neutral” or “51–100 = Satisfied.”

2.4. Quantitative data analysis

Three phases of data analysis were conducted to address the research question regarding participant job satisfaction during the pandemic. First, frequencies and descriptives were run on the demographic, work related and dependent variables. Second, a series of bivariate analysis were run to examine associations between job satisfaction and agency size, community type, caring for minor children, caring for elderly parents, age, undergraduate degree, primary role at work, years in child welfare, and number of staff issues. Finally, logistic regression was run to assess the influence of agency size, community type, caring for minor children, caring for elderly parents, age, undergraduate degree, primary role at work, years in child welfare, and number of staff issues on job satisfaction. All data was run in SPSS 27.

2.5. Qualitative data analysis

Participants were asked several open-ended questions related to job satisfaction and how the pandemic had impacted them. For this study, we focused on two of these questions. After being asked about issues they had experienced while working in child welfare (e.g., motivation, stress, burnout, feeling overwhelmed, other), they were able to specify responses for “other.” They were then asked, “which of these issues (if any) have increased since the pandemic began?”

Thematic analysis was used to examine responses to these open-ended questions, using guidelines from Braun and Clarke (2006), which include becoming familiar with the data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and producing the report. We used an inductive analytic approach; NVivo 12 software was used to assist with coding and analyzing data. The first author read through all data multiple times to become familiar with content, then began generating initial codes. After initial coding, the data was sorted and recoded to combine codes into potential themes. At this point, another team member reviewed the themes and subthemes. Where there were areas of discrepancy, these were discussed and resolved before themes were finalized. At that point, final themes were reviewed, names were finalized, and final analysis and write up occurred.

3. Results

3.1. Quantitative results

3.1.1. Frequencies of demographics and study variables

Of the sample, 81.3 % identified as female, 77.5 % were under the age of 55, and approximately 80 % were White/Caucasian (Table 1 ). Roughly 45.6 % of the sample had either an undergraduate degree in social work or psychology and 44.9 % were caring for minor children with only 9.4 % caring for elderly parents. Regarding work related variables, 41.6 % had worked in child welfare between 1 and 10 years, 26.2 % were in supervision or administrative roles, 52.1 % of the agencies were in urban areas and 45.3 % of the agencies were large in size. Finally, 63.7 noted being satisfied with their job with a mean number of staff issues being 2.27 with a range from 0 to 4.

Table 1.

Frequencies of demographic and study variables.

	Frequency (percent)		Frequency (percent)
Gender		Primary role at work
Female	217 (81.3)	Family Services/Ongoing	47 (17.6)
Male	23 (8.6)	Foster Care/Placement, Adoption/Permanency, Family Support/Visitation, Kinship	53 (19.9)
Non-binary	1 (0.4)	Intake/Investigation	49 (18.4)
Missing	26 (9.7)	School Outreach/Prevention, Other	24 (9)
		Supervision/Administration	70 (26.2)
Age		Missing	24 (9)
34 and under	58 (21.7)
35–44	73 (27.3)	Years in child welfare
45–54	76 (28.5)	1–5	68 (25.5)
55 and older	36 (13.5)	5.5–10	43 (16.1)
Missing	24 (9)	10.5–20	69 (25.8)
		20.5+	63 (23.6)
Ethnicity/race		Missing	24 (9)
American Indian or Alaska Native	1 (0.4)
Black/African American	27 (10.1)	Care for minor children
Hispanic or Latinx	4 (1.5)	Yes	120 (44.9)
Multiracial	1 (0.4)	No	121 (45.3)
White/Caucasian	212 (79.4)	Missing	26 (9.7)
Prefer not to answer	1 (0.4)
Missing	21 (7.9)	Care for elderly parents
		Yes	25 (9.4)
Undergraduate degree		No	218 (81.6)
Social Work	57 (21.3)	Missing	24 (9)
Psychology	65 (24.3)
Sociology, Criminal Justice	59 (22.1)	Community type
Counseling, Child and Family Studies, Public Health, Other	52 (19.5)	Rural	61 (22.8)
Missing	34 (12.7)	Urban	139 (52.1)
		Missing	67 (25.1)
Job satisfaction
Not Satisfied/Neutral	60 (22.5)	Agency size
Satisfied	170 (63.7)	Small/Medium	81 (30.3)
Missing	37 (13.9)	Large	121 (45.3)
		Missing	65 (24.3)
Staff Issues
Range	0–4
Mean (Standard Deviation)	2.27 (1.36)
Missing	24

3.1.2. Bivariate analyses with job satisfaction

Table 2 presents results of the chi square analyses between job satisfaction and agency size, community type, caring for minor children, caring for elderly parents, age, undergraduate degree, primary role at work, and years in child welfare. Of the variables, only caring for minor children, primary role at work, and years in child welfare were significantly associated with job satisfaction (see Table 2 for statistics).

Table 2.

Chi Squares Analysis of Study Variables with Job Satisfaction.

	Job satisfaction
	Not satisfied/neutral	Satisfied
Agency size
Small/medium	15 (32.6)	59 (41)
Large	31 (67.4)	85 (59)
Chi Square Test	Χ2(1) = 1.03 p = .31 φ = 0.07 n = 190
Community type
Rural	10 (22.2)	46 (32.2)
Urban	35 (77.8)	97 (67.8)
Chi Square Test	Χ2(1) = 1.62 p = .20 φ = 0.09 n = 188
Care for minor children
Yes	36 (61)	78 (46.2)
No	23 (39)	91 (53.8)
Chi Square Test	Χ2(1) = 3.86 p = .05 φ = 0.13 n = 228
Care for elderly parents
Yes	9 (15)	15 (8.8)
No	51 (85)	155 (91.2)
Chi Square Test	Χ2(1) = 1.81 p = .18 φ = 0.09 n = 230
Age
34 and under	18 (30)	36 (21.2)
35–44	17 (28.3)	54 (31.8)
45–54	18 (30)	53 (31.2)
55 and older	7 (11.7)	27 (15.9)
Chi Square Test	Χ2(3) = 2.19 p = .53 φ = 0.10 n = 230
Undergraduate degree
Social Work	14 (23.7)	37 (23)
Psychology	12 (20.3)	50 (31.1)
Sociology, Criminal Justice	18 (30.5)	38 (23.6)
Counseling, Child and Family Studies, Public Health, Other	15 (25.4)	36 (22.4)
Chi Square Test	Χ2(3) = 2.75 p = .43 φ = 0.11 n = 220
Primary role at work
Family Services/Ongoing	14 (23.3)	31 (18.2)
Foster Care/Placement, Adoption/Permanency, Family Support/Visitation, Kinship	6 (10)	43 (25.3)
Intake/ Investigation	21 (35)	24 (14.1)
School Outreach/Prevention, Other	7 (11.7)	16 (9.4)
Supervision/Administration	12 (20)	56 (32.9)
Chi Square Test	Χ2(4) = 18.08 p = .001 φ = 0.28 n = 230
Years in child welfare
1–5	15 (25)	52 (30.6)
5.5–10	18 (30)	21 (12.4)
10.5–50	20 (33.3)	45 (26.5)
20.5+	7 (11.7)	52 (30.6)
Chi Square Test	Χ2(3) = 15.55 p = .001 φ = 0.26 n = 230

Given the count variable of number of staff issues, an independent t-test was run to examine if there were any differences between job satisfaction group on number of staff issues. Results found a statistically significant difference (t(228) = 4.31, p < .001) in the mean number of staff issues between those that were not satisfied/neutral (M = 2.92) and satisfied (M = 2.08).

3.1.3. Regression on job satisfaction

Finally, logistic regression was run to examine factors influencing participants' job satisfaction (Table 3 ). All variables were put into the model simultaneously as control variables. The model was significant (χ ²(18) = 39.72, p = .002) and explained 29.5 % (Nagelkerke R ²) of the variance in job satisfaction and correctly classified 75.6 % of cases. Only two variables, staff issues, and primary role of work as “foster care/placement, adoption/permanency, family support/visitation, kinship” were significant. For staff issues, participants were 36 % less likely to be in the “Satisfied” group the more issues respondents noted experiencing (p = .009). Those working in “foster care/placement, adoption/permanency, family support/visitation, kinship” were 7.57 times more likely than those doing “intake/investigation” work to be satisfied with their job (p = .007). While not technically significant, it is also important to note those who had 5.5–10 years in child welfare were 70 % less likely to be satisfied with their job compared to those with 1–5 years in child welfare (p = .051).

Table 3.

Logistic regression of demographic and workplace variables on job satisfaction.

Variables	B	SE B	Exp(B)
Staff issues	−0.45	0.17	0.64**
Agency size
Small/Mediumt
Large	−0.25	0.53	0.78
Community type
Ruralt
Urban	−0.19	0.57	0.83
Care for minor children
Not
Yes	−0.70	0.49	0.50
Care for elderly parents
Not
Yes	−0.97	0.67	0.38
Age
34 and undert
35–44	0.91	0.66	2.49
45–54	−0.17	0.67	0.84
55 and older	−0.07	1.00	0.93
Undergraduate degree
Social Workt
Psychology	0.17	0.61	1.19
Sociology, Criminal Justice	−0.66	0.60	0.51
Counseling, Child and Family Studies, Public Health, Other	−0.23	0.62	0.79
Primary role at work
Intake/Investigationt
Family Services/Ongoing	0.55	0.58	1.73
Foster Care/Placement, Adoption/Permanency, Family Support/Visitation, Kinship	2.02	0.75	7.57**
Supervision/Administration	1.07	0.58	2.91
School Outreach/Prevention, Other	0.90	0.73	2.46
Years in child welfare
1–5t
5.5–10	−1.20	0.62	0.30
10.5–50	−0.54	0.69	0.58
20.5+	0.69	0.85	1.99

Note. ^t delineates reference category.

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

3.2. Qualitative results

3.2.1. Analysis of “other” issues

Within the survey, participants were asked, “As a staff person working in child welfare, I have personally had issues with (select as many as apply): Motivation, Stress, Burnout, Feeling overwhelmed, and Other.” If the participant selected “Other” a text box appeared where they could specify which other issues they had experienced. The first four issues, Motivation, Stress, Burnout, and Feeling overwhelmed, were analyzed within the quantitative section. Due to the small number of responses to this question, the “other” responses were not included in the quantitative analysis and will be discussed here.

Twenty-one participants responded regarding which “Other” issues they had experienced, resulting in 26 codes. These responses were analyzed and resulted in 2 overarching themes, each with subthemes. These themes were Staff Wellbeing (n = 16) and Agency Related Challenges (n = 10). The first theme centered on issues the staff members struggled with that negatively impacted their wellbeing, with responses focused on feeling isolated and disconnected, experiencing emotional challenges, turnover and lack of staff, and health and safety concerns. The second theme was Agency Related Challenges. These responses focused on staff members not feeling valued or trusted by supervisors or agency leadership, as well as managing challenges related to changes in policy and practice.

3.2.2. Analysis of issues that increased since pandemic began

Directly after being asked which staff issues they had experienced while working in child welfare (Motivation, Stress, Burnout, Feeling overwhelmed, and Other), participants were asked to identify which of these issues had increased for them since the pandemic began. A total of 243 participants responded to this question, resulting in 291 codes. Responses were analyzed and resulted in six themes. In order of decreasing frequency, these included Stress and Anxiety (n = 85), Feeling Overwhelmed (n = 63), Burnout (n = 30), All (n = 29), Motivation (n = 24), and Isolation and Disconnection (n = 6). Fifty participants indicated that they had not experienced any increases in the identified issues or that they had improved. There were four miscellaneous responses.

Stress and Anxiety. The most frequently discussed theme involved feelings of stress and anxiety. Sixty percent of responses provided a general statement related to increases in stress, with statements such as, “Stress definitely increased.” In more than a quarter of responses, participants included stress or anxiety and at least one other factor such as feeling overwhelmed or burnout. Specific answers within the theme of stress and anxiety ranged from concern for clients, changes to policies and protocol, health and safety worries, workload and scheduling issues, challenges with technology and resources, members of their own family struggling, and not seeing coworkers. Participant responses indicated a variety of ways the pandemic impacted stress levels in their personal and professional lives.

Respondents reported that concern for their clients caused increased stress and anxiety. One participant noted, “Feeling overwhelmed and stressed has increased as I feel the pandemic has put stress on our famil(ies).” Students who were unable to attend daycare or school in person, were a concern for some staff, “It is difficult to know there are many mandated reporters who did not see children for long periods of time, and they had no other way to come to the attention of public child welfare.” Another stated, “Stress has increased due to concern for children and families we are unable to see face to face with our own eyes. Some families we were completely unable to reach.” Changes in protocol and policies negatively impacted stress levels for some respondents. For some this was primarily a concern early in the pandemic, with one stating, “Initially it was stressful to coordinate the pandemic plan for the agency as it was a big job in a very short amount of time.” Others indicated experiencing, “Stress with the unknown and constant changes in how things were done.”

Concern for the health and safety of staff and clients resulted in increased stress for some respondents. One reported experiencing, “increased stress regarding safety of workforce,” and another noted, “Stress has increased due to increased safety concerns about staff and families we serve. Having to do ‘covid math’ to figure out quarantine times for staff who came into contact with positive clients or family members.” Changes to workload and schedule were additional sources of stress. One participant noted increased “stress due to schedule juggling.” Another commented that stress had increased but observed an initial decrease at the beginning of lockdown, “Stress. But I will say that at the beginning of the pandemic when less reports were coming into the agency it actually was a nice break for my staff. The reduced number of cases gave them some breathing room.”

Less commonly mentioned, though still relevant to increased levels of stress were issues with technology and resources, having members of one's own family struggle, and not seeing coworkers. One participant noted, “Technology issues-tech is great when it works but terrible when it's not.” Another stated, “Stress. Working from home every day for an extended period of time was overwhelming at times and things got missed, we didn't have access to what we needed, and the agency administration didn't supply it.” In addition to issues with needed resources, some participants acknowledged challenges for their children or parents increased their stress level. One comment focused on the staff person's children, “I think the pandemic had a major impact on me and my family. My own children have suffered greatly from it which has impacted my own stress level at home and at work,” and another focused on the staff member's parents, “I care for my elderly parents and my father recently passed away, which has been more stressful than one would think.” Finally, one participant experienced the lack of contact with coworkers as stressful, “I think not seeing coworkers or having face to face contact with coworkers and or supervisors was more stressful.”

Overwhelmed. Many staff reported feeling overwhelmed. These concerns were often related to increased caseloads, needs of families, staffing issues, training newer staff, and adjusting to new procedures. Many responses simply indicated that the participant was overwhelmed. Others provided more detailed responses.

A major concern identified was related to caseload issues. One participant noted, “Feeling overwhelmed. The case load is waaaay too high.” Another indicated they were overwhelmed and added, “I feel the pandemic has put stress on our families, thus increasing the amount of kinship families we have that ask for children to be moved from their home. Which results in more home studies and more placements.” A participant noted, “The amount of educational neglect referrals tripled. It has been frustrating that school districts have not done more to assist families before placing more on their plates with CPS involvement.”

Other participants reflected on how the needs of families had increased which contributed to them feeling overwhelmed. One stated, “The pandemic caused more hardships on families resulting in a more demanding workload.” Another stated, “(I'm) feeling a little overwhelmed due to the fact there is such a need for furniture, specifically beds for our clients. And there not being enough resources to go around.” Another noted they were overwhelmed, adding, “Our screened in referrals have increased significantly since the pandemic. We're dealing with increased mental illness and drug use by parents…More children are being placed in foster care. More court involvement being required.”

Staffing issues and turnover were noted as an important concern. One stated, “turnover in the field as staff are seeking employment that pays more and has less interaction with the public.” Another noted, “We do continue to struggle with staffing. We cannot get quality applicants!” One staff member noted how staffing issues had added to their caseload, “We are very short staffed currently and I'm doing my normal full-time job and the job (of) another worker for some of my youth.”

Adjusting to new procedures and remote work was overwhelming for some of the staff. Some staff had been with the agency for years yet had recently moved into a new role or were responsible for training new staff. A staff member who had transitioned to a new role stated:

I was a newer supervisor before the pandemic started and this certainly threw a curve ball at me that I didn't see coming. As I was learning my new role, I also had to adapt as the pandemic progressed. It was tough!

A supervisor wrote, “I have had new staff during this time. I often feel overwhelmed just making sure they have what they need and communicate with me.” One person stated, “Initially it (overwhelm) was due to working outside of my element and not feeling as sure and confident of myself completing the proper steps in the process.” Some participants also recognized the transition to working from home as overwhelming. One stated, “It was overwhelming to start working from home because I have never done that.” Another noted, “The feeling of being overwhelmed. Working at home was very difficult for me. It has reduced some since being in the office full time.”

Burnout. Several staff members identified experiencing burnout in conjunction with stress while other responses focused only on burnout. For those that provided details on this experience, it was generally related to intensity of cases, the agency being short staffed, and separating work and home life. One participant responded, “This is the most burnt out I have felt in the last 4 years of being in children services.” Another stated, “I feel like the issues with being in child welfare come in waves. The intensity of abuse/neglect cases increased causing more burnout.” From their perspective as a supervisor, one noted the prevalence of burnout for their staff, stating, “I supervised during the beginning of the pandemic. I would say burnout was #1 for my staff. We are a small agency and short staffed a lot which then put more work on the staff.” Another noted the challenge of balancing their work and home life while working from home, “I live in an apartment and do not have the space or ability to have an office/desk, so I began to struggle with separating work from personal life and that led me to feel burnt out and not motivated.”

All. When asked to specify which areas they had observed increases in since the pandemic began, some noted increases in all areas included on the survey (stress, motivation, burnout, and feeling overwhelmed). Some responses simply stated “all” or “all of the above.” Others indicated increased workloads, isolation from other staff, and policy changes contributed to increased challenges since the pandemic began. One respondent stated, “All of the above increased - I believe due to being more isolated from your team, less engagement with your supervisor, and just the general stress of working with the public during a pandemic.” A staff member commented on the impact of changing information and the resulting policies, “All of these, I feel the constant changes related to pandemic information and planning necessary from administration to ensure that we were meeting needs of community while also balancing needs of staff personal health was draining!” Another participant focused on the challenges related to client needs and decreased services provided by other agencies:

All of them. CPS is practically the only agency still going into homes as a result of the pandemic. We are finding very ill families who do not have access to needed services such as parenting, mental health, substance abuse other than a phone call or virtual meeting which is not helpful. We seemed to be out on our own. Our caseloads have soared.

Another participant viewed the increase in all areas as related to larger issues in child welfare, stating, “everything increased with the ‘pandemic’ .... I think the bigger questions is, what real problems did the ‘pandemic’ expose.”

Motivation. Challenges related to motivation varied. These related to difficulties with focus, being in a comfortable environment, lack of equipment, micromanagement, and concern that others were not fulfilling their duties. A participant observed that focus could be an issue when working from home, stating, “When I was teleworking, I was not as motivated. Something else would always grab my attention.” One participant noted that some issues improved, while motivation became a struggle, “I have less stress working from home. I'm in a more comfortable environment with less distractions. Although at times it can be hard to stay motivated.” Another observed that not having necessary equipment contributed to challenges with feeling motivated, “Lack of motivation while working from home as it is hard to stay focused and not have all equipment readily available.” Another participant disliked the feeling of extensive oversight stating, “Micro-management, which leads to a decrease in motivation, etc...” Another perspective focused on increased workloads due to peers not fulfilling their duties. This participant noted:

There is evidence that a lot of work on cases has not been getting done and services not provided to families. That increases the workload on those who are continuing to actually do their job. This effects your motivation to continue doing your job well, if that is your expectation. Not everyone sets a high standard for themselves.

Isolation and Disconnection. While discussed less frequently than the previous themes, feelings of isolation and disconnection were noted by six participants. Responses centered on how interaction and discussion with colleagues is beneficial, both emotionally and professionally. One stated, “Feeling disconnected from the other staff members had increased dramatically. The connections with my fellow staff members really help support my emotional well-being in a challenging role.” Another participant noted, “It was difficult not having colleagues close by in person to discuss cases and ask for advice or help when I felt overwhelmed.” Another staff member echoed this comment stating, “Not having this support on the same level has been very challenging.” In one agency where the staff was back in the office full time, a participant noted, “We are back in the office, so the feeling of camaraderie has returned.” These participants observed the benefits of support from their colleagues that were missed when working from home.

4. Discussion

Our study aimed to examine CPS staff satisfaction and wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used quantitative and qualitative data to explore elements impacting satisfaction and explored which issues increased during the pandemic. Study results fill a gap in the research focused on child welfare staff satisfaction and wellbeing during the pandemic. Analysis of quantitative data highlight that caring for minor children, primary work role, and years in child welfare were significantly associated with job satisfaction. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data indicates that the pandemic impacted child welfare staff wellbeing in multiple ways including increases in stress and anxiety, feeling overwhelmed, experiencing burnout, and challenges with motivation.

In the chi squares analyses, caring for minor children, primary role at work, and years in child welfare were related to job satisfaction. Those who were caring for minor children reported being less satisfied with their jobs compared to those not caring for children. It is possible that workers who had children at home had an extra factor to worry about during the pandemic which influenced how satisfied they were with their job. Workers were likely impacted by the challenge of trying to do their work while simultaneously being concerned about their children doing their own schoolwork (Adams et al., 2021).

Those whose primary role within the agency was to do intake/investigation were the least satisfied with their jobs whereas those in supervision/administration were the most satisfied with their jobs. It is possible that those doing the work of intakes and investigation of child maltreatment were experiencing challenges to their role, such as virtual investigations, or fear of becoming sick by conducting in person investigations. Renov et al. (2022) found challenges for staff conducting investigations during the pandemic, whether in person or virtually, as well as reduced numbers of investigators since the pandemic began. Additionally, the issues within families were likely exacerbated due to stresses of the pandemic thereby increasing stress for those working with these families and subsequently impacting job satisfaction. Given that job satisfaction is considered a crucial factor in turnover (Kim & Kao, 2014), understanding staff satisfaction is important to retaining child welfare staff.

Interestingly, those with 20+ years and those with 1–5 years of working in child welfare were more likely to be satisfied with their jobs than those with 5.5–10 or 10.5–20 years. This provides partial support to the work of Augsberger et al. (2012), who found that younger child welfare workers are more likely to leave their job than older workers. If older workers are more satisfied, they are less likely to leave. One potential explanation for this is that those with more years of experience know what to expect when doing child welfare work and therefore are less reactive to instances of increased stress in families and work as they have likely experienced a considerable amount. Furthermore, these individuals are more likely to be in supervision/administration roles which distances them from direct contact with children and families receiving services for child maltreatment. For those with 1–5 years' experience, it may be that this group of individuals has not yet experienced all the dynamics this area of work can entail. It is also possible that those with 1–5 years of experience view the COVID-19 as a factor impacting families just like many other factors that impact families thereby not being overly sensitized to impact the pandemic not only had on families, but also not substantially impacting how they view their work.

As would be expected, in the regression model, those staff reporting more issues were less likely to be satisfied than those reporting fewer staff issues. The more problems one has in doing their work (i.e., motivation, stress, burnout, or feeling overwhelmed), the less satisfied they will be with their job. Interestingly, however, those whose work entailed foster care/placement, adoption/permanency, family support/visitation, kinship were 7.57 times more likely to be satisfied with their job than those doing intake/investigation. Font (2012) found that specific job roles such as intake workers experience more burnout than adoption workers. Given that burnout is associated with job satisfaction, this is an important consideration. CPS staff working with children and families to make their situations better during the pandemic may have experienced more satisfaction for two reasons: first, it is likely those doing foster care/placement, adoption/permanency, family support/visitation, kinship could see the benefits to families based on the work they were doing regardless of whether that work was in person or virtual and second, the help they were providing was potentially viewed as even more substantial given the added stresses of COVID-19 to families. Not only were these workers helping children and families dealing with child maltreatment, but they were helping during a contextually and environmentally chaotic time thereby potentially increasing their job satisfaction.

Child welfare workers were not the only staff to experience challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies examining the impact of the pandemic on staff wellbeing and satisfaction have included healthcare staff, nursing home employees, school employees, and behavioral health staff. Interviews with school staff preparing for school reopening after initial closures due to COVID-19, revealed concerns with staff stress and anxiety (Hoke et al., 2022). Some research suggests that hospital staff in urban areas experienced higher rates of burnout than those in rural areas (Kelly et al., 2022). Morse and Dell (2021) interviewed behavioral health staff during the pandemic; qualitative results revealed a primary theme that work felt stressful and overwhelming. Higher levels of pandemic related stress among nursing home staff were correlated with lower levels of job satisfaction (Cimarolli et al., 2022). It is evident that stress, burnout, feeling overwhelmed, and low levels of job satisfaction were experienced by those in other helping professions and future research should continue to evaluate the impact of global catastrophes on these professionals, including child welfare workers.

4.1. Strengths and limitations

Study findings should be considered within the context of its limitations. This study is cross-sectional; the staff who participated all self-selected into the study, raising the concern that their responses may differ from those who chose not to participate. Participants were asked dichotomous questions regarding experiencing challenges with motivation, stress, burnout, or feeling overwhelmed. This was done to capture participants' experiences while keeping the survey short enough for a workforce already experiencing significant challenges but using standardized measures may have provided more accurate results. The sample included an overrepresentation of female and those identifying as White/Caucasian; it would be helpful to have the perspectives of males and those of other racial and ethnic groups. However, given the national demographic statistics of child welfare staff (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2021; National Child Welfare Workforce Institute, 2011), the sample composition is not surprising. While the sample included responses from staff at 50 agencies (59 % of county agencies), it does not include staff from all agencies within the state. Lastly, the sample presents data and perspectives from only one midwestern state, raising the possibility that staff in other states experienced the pandemic differently and would provide different perspectives, thus limiting the ability to generalize to a wider body of staff. The study also has some notable strengths. This study also includes perspectives of staff at both urban and rural CPS agencies. An important strength of this study is the inclusion of the perspectives and direct quotes from a range of CPS staff members in the midst of the pandemic.

4.2. Practice implications

Fifty staff indicated none of the issues on the survey had increased since the pandemic began. These participants stated things had either stayed the same or improved. This may be related to the initial decrease in CPS reports early in the pandemic, which provided a temporary reprieve from new cases. This may also be true for those who preferred working from home. It is possible that some staff may be more productive when working from home and suggests that supervisors consider more flexibility and autonomy for staff regarding work locations. Additionally, the increased use of virtual services provided more interactions with families in some cases and reduced time traveling to appointments. Finding ways to support staff and honor individual preferences regarding work location, even if it involves a hybrid schedule may be a way to demonstrate respect for staff and improve retention. Future studies examining the effectiveness of flexibility regarding preferences for work location are needed.

Given that child welfare staff has historically experienced burnout at greater rates than those in other helping professions (National Child Welfare Workforce Institute, n.d.), it is particularly concerning that more than half of the responses indicated experiencing burnout, with some staff reporting that burnout has increased since the pandemic began. Providing consistent support at the agency, supervisor, and peer level may be beneficial in addressing high rates of burnout. This might include formalizing peer support groups, encouraging wellness breaks, and regularly checking in regarding staff wellbeing. The results of this study suggest that those in different agency roles may have differing needs. While these practices require time and agency buy in, there may be an important pay off in terms of the health and wellbeing of staff and higher retention rates, both of which are likely to improve staff effectiveness with clients.

5. Conclusion

Child welfare staff provide an important role in responding to suspected cases of child maltreatment and providing services to strengthen families. Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, they have been performing their duties, adapting to policy changes, and increasing virtual services. Staff have experienced multiple challenges to their wellbeing. Better understanding their job satisfaction and providing insight into challenges that increased during the pandemic can help inform policies and practices at the agency and state levels.

Data availability

The authors do not have permission to share data.