Policy & Practice August 2018

The Human Services Value Curve

Ef ciency in Achieving Outcomes

As training systems advance to this more holistic set of priorities, they can become truly Generative partners within their agency’s leadership team, helping them to focus on an even broader set of challenges and oppor- tunities and earning their seat at the table:  Knowledge management programs and policies, especially in light of an aging workforce and an incoming workforce with different orientations to technology  A truly strategic staff talent recruit- ment and retention program that systematically and proactively addresses the turnover challenges we noted at the beginning of this article  The use of continuous improvement and critical thinking methods and tools at each organizational level, ensuring investments in development “stick” within the broader culture  Outcome and performance measures that clearly link workforce improve- ments to service improvements and Regulative Business Model: The focus is on serving constituents who are eligible for particular services while complying with categorical policy and program regulations. Collaborative Business Model: The focus is on supporting constituents in receiving all services for which they’re eligible by working across agency and programmatic borders. Integrative Business Model: The focus is on addressing the root causes of client needs and problems by coordinating and integrating services at an optimum level. Generative Business Model: The focus is on generating healthy communities by co-creating solutions for multi-dimensional family and socioeconomic challenges and opportunities.

Generative Business Model

Integrative Business Model

Collaborative Business Model

Outcome Frontiers

Regulative Business Model

Effectiveness in Achieving Outcomes

© The Human Services Value Curve by Antonio M. Oftelie & Leadership for a Networked World is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Based on a work at lnwprogram.org/hsvc. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at lnwprogram.org.

Virginia realized from the report that their efforts could not just be focused on training, but instead must embrace a holistic workforce devel- opment model. Guided by the study findings, Virginia is moving forward with a cross-agency implementation team to begin transforming their approach to workforce development and, specifically, training. Practical strategies will include:  Employing a comprehensive work- force development model  Using an academy approach to training  Integrating a practice model and race equity lens into all training modules  Employing hybrid training approaches  Recruiting trainers with recent or current field or subject matter expertise  Increasing frequency and depth of ongoing/refresher/booster training  Conducting worker and supervisor certification  Implementing practical, doable, and meaningful transfer of learning strategies  Evaluating for outcomes

staff carry caseloads while attending training.  For new workers, the average number of training days for child welfare is 34 while for adult services workers it is 7. For new supervisors, the average training days for child welfare is 27 and for adult services it is 7. Required training for middle management is mixed.  State child welfare systems have high regard for their university partnerships.  About 75 percent of child welfare agencies and 39 percent of adult services agencies employ an academy approach.  Approaches to trainer preparation vary widely—from none at all to a trainer academy. The study found many opportuni- ties for states to improve their training systems (and ultimately their work- force) and that significant differences exist between child welfare and adult services training systems. See the box (page 40) for a sample of best practices in training gathered by the study.

See Igniting the Potential on page 40

11

August 2018 Policy&Practice