Supervision Training for Field Instructors

1. Supervision Training for Field Instructors California State University, Chico 2009- 2013 Kathy Cox, Ph.D., LCSW Meka Klungtvet-Morano, MSW

2. Problem Statement and Program Components • Identified Need: Enhanced Supervision for IV-E BSW and MSW students • Basic Program Components: • Initial day-long training for field instructors • On-going supervisory support via monthly process groups • Monthly supervision group for students co-led by local department and university • Tracking of learning activities provided students

3. Practice Model Solution-Focused Supervision • Supervisors avoid telling students what to do • Build critical thinking skills in students • Identify and develop student strengths • Enhance student skills in solution-oriented practice with youth and families

4. Collaboration • Need assessment involving school and county department • Commitment of resources on the part of CSD • Back-up was provided for Field Instructors • Signed a commitment to attend on-going training • Quarterly meetings with school and CSD administration • CSD Staff Development Officer worked closely with IV-E Coordinator

5. Initial Supervision Training • Establishing a supervisory alliance • Identifying personality types • Identifying student learning style • Process of supervision • Supervisory contract • Integrating a clinical perspective • Solution-focused interviewing • Solution-focused supervision • Stress reactions & modeling self-care • Evaluating supervision

6. Monthly Process Group for Field Instructors • Co-facilitated by IV-Coordinator & CSD Staff Development Officer • Initial focus on developing group purpose, agreements, and goals • On-going focus: getting present, solution-focused questions of the day, personal goals/actions steps, and gratitudes • Additional covered areas: learning contracts, consistency in internship, stages of an internship, creating a common understanding of the internship process, supervision process, building relationships among field instructors

7. Group Supervision for Students • Co-facilitated by IV-Coordinator & CSD Staff Development Officer • Initial focus on developing group purpose, agreements, and goals • On-going focus: getting present, solution-focused questions of the day, personal goals/actions steps, and gratitudes • Additional covered areas: learning contracts, consistency in internship, stages of an internship, creating a common understanding of the internship process, supervision process, building relationships among students

8. Evaluation Measures and Results • Supervisory Self-Efficacy Scale-administered pre-post; mixed results • Areas in which AFI’s felt strongest post training: • establishing a collegial relationship with student • enhancing student empathy toward clients • identifying their strengths • exploring their personal reactions

9. Child Welfare Competencies • Incorporated IV-E Advanced Practice Indicators into final Field Evaluation • Based on those, obtained score for each EPAS competency for all Advanced MSW students • Mean total score across all EPAS competencies was slightly higher for Butte County students versus those placed in other counties

10. Focus Group • Supervision worked well for them when consistent, focused on case planning and learning outcomes AND when held outside the office • Supervision group provided good role modeling, promoted strength-based and solution focused perspective, and buffered them from stress • Learning activities checklist was helpful

11. Learning Activities Inventory • Assessed extent of exposure to 29 learning activities by Advanced Year MSW students • Used a 10 point rating scale • Assessed satisfaction with internship using a 3 point scale (not at all, somewhat, very much) • Open ended questions: asking about learning activities they would have liked exposure to and didn’t or had too much of

12. Learning Activities • Student satisfaction with their internship was significant associated with their total exposure score on the inventory (F = 5.78; p = .013) • Individual item scores ranged from 2.07 to 9.13

13. High Exposure Activities • Documenting contacts in CWS • Attending family, team, placement, case planning, and/or safety meetings • Attending court hearings • Meeting with parent/child in reunification/maintenance capacity on one’s own • Speaking to service providers on one’s own • Writing court reports

14. Low Exposure Activities • Doing pre-adoption or adoption work on one’s own • Shadowing worker doing pre-adoption or adoption work • Observing a forensic interview • Participating in an ICWA inquiry and follow-up • Conducting an intake on one’s own • Conducting an investigation on one’s own • Shadowing workers serving a transition age youth • Discussing W & I codes with AFI

15. Project Successes • “The pilot project has been an extremely positive project in Butte County. The benefits are numerous to the department, students, employees, and community.  We have solidified our intern program in collaboration with CSU Chico and provided a more consistent, thorough internship experience for students interning with Butte County, and have provided the department employees with excellent career development opportunities.” (Shelby Boston, Assistant Director, Butte County Children’s Services) • “The last few years of participation in the Solution Focused Supervision Training project has allowed our department( Butte County Children’s Services) to expand the already excellent intern program we have in partnership with Chico State University, Chico.  The connection with CSUC has been strengthened and is truly a partnership.  The support group process has increased the level of quality supervision for our field instructors.  The support group process for the interns has provided an environment where they can address issues and form connections with fellow interns that can support them in their professional lives.” (Karen Ely, Program Manager, Butte County Children’s Services) • “The field instruction initiative has been a huge success…[It] has greatly improved our agency field program over the past few years through regular collaboration, support, and mentoring.” (Tami McArthur, Intern Coordinator/Analyst, Butte County Children’s Services)

16. Project Successes Continued… FROM FIELD INSTRUCTORS: • “The group provided me with tons of support, guidance and opportunity for growth.” • “Allowed me to evaluate myself as a mentor and to ensure I was staying on the correct course…of providing the best educational opportunity for the intern.” • “My intern probably got the best supervision I’ve ever provided because I had the support and education of the process group…Trainings were also great.” FROM INTERNS: • “Group provided a safe space to discuss challenges encountered…The facilitators…helped to move the discussion towards finding solutions.” • “Both years provided me with tremendous insight and knowledge into families, children, and work in the child welfare.” • “I always enjoyed attending the intern process groups and looked forward to them each month.”

17. Lessons Learned • Collaboration between school and local department is key • Sustainability efforts are on-going • Supervision training is on-going • Group supervision is viable modality • Exposure to a range of leaning activities enhances student internships