Child Welfare Workers’ Perceptions of the Influence of the Organizational Environment on Permanency Decisions for Families

The findings of this study suggest that while child welfare workers are consistently distracted by competing priorities from unexpected events, most are committed, and to understand perspectives is more inclusive and may improve retention rates. Notably, while it is recognized that permanency decisions are not made in an intellectual, legal or clinical vacuum and certain traditional aspects of the bureaucratic structure do not impact decision making, this study advances the body of knowledge on child welfare decision making. Examined in this study are child welfare case workers’ perceptions of the extent to which the organizational environment influences the permanency decisions they make to reunify or terminate parental rights of children placed out-of-home. This study includes a sample of 95 child welfare social workers employed in three public child welfare agencies in the Baltimore and Washington, DC metropolitan area. It used a cross-sectional research design, employing a survey instrument to examine bureaucratic distraction, role conflict, and supervisory adequacy as contextual factors in the organizational environment's influence on permanency outcome decisions. Implications are made for child welfare policy, practice, and research.

Booster Breaks in the workplace: Effects on employee stress

The current study examined the effects of a 15-minute daily physical activity break on the stress levels of white collar employees. An innovative group physical activity program, the Booster Break, was implemented in two worksites, both located in a large metropolitan area. One hundred sixteen participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions; 43 participants were assigned to the Booster Break condition, 40 participants were assigned to an individual, computer-based physical activity condition, and 32 were assigned to a no-physical activity control condition. Self-report and objective measures were taken at baseline and after the completion of the intervention. There were no significant differences among conditions in perceived stress or blood pressure after the intervention. However, the data showed trends in the direction predicted with a decrease in perceived stress among Booster Break (change in perceived stress = -0.1) and computer prompt participants (change in perceived stress = -0.2) and an increase in perceived stress among the control group (change in perceived stress = 0.2). More research is recommended to fully understand the effects of worksite physical activity on stress.^