3 Instructions

3.1 Overview

This chapter provides instructions to complete the SACWIS Overview, Process, and New Initiatives Sections of the Guide (Appendices A, B, and C). As previously indicated in chapter 2.2.1, the State must send the completed SACWIS Assessment Review Guide to ACF. By organizing the review material as a set of questions supported by citations and narrative explanation, the processes of documenting and creating a "report" are combined in a single electronic document. This should greatly reduce the time required of State and Federal reviewers.

The Guide is divided into three segments:

• Appendix A - an Overview Section that describes characteristics of the SACWIS system, including the objectives, applications, and architecture;

• Appendix B - a Process Section that describes the system's conformance with mandatory program requirements derived from statute and regulation; and

• Appendix C - a New Initiatives Section that describes how the system supports new State and Federal initiatives and demonstration waivers.

States MAY provide the information requested in the SACWIS Assessment Review Guide in an alternative form to the extent that the State already has it available.

Back to Table of Contents

3.2 State Completion of the Guide

Appendix A: Overview Section

This part of the SACWIS Assessment Review Guide provides an overview of the SACWIS system, including the objectives, applications, and architecture. The following section provides guidance and describes the purpose of requesting the information.

All State responses should be typed in the text boxes provided in the instrument.

A. I: covers general identifying information as well as information that will help other States understand the overall size, cost, and programmatic functionality of the system.

Questions 3 and 4 are included for the following reasons:

Question 3. This question on system support staff is primarily intended to help other States assess the suitability of the system for transfer. By understanding the numbers and types of people who operate and maintain the system, other States may be able to make a preliminary assessment about transfer potential. This question is geared to normal support staff, not staff available for major system modifications. If this information is not available because a contractor maintains the system and the information is considered proprietary, please provide the available information and note the exception.

Question 4. The question on the number of system users is also intended to help other States assess suitability for transfer. The State should specify the number of current on-line users.

A. II is for summary technical information. A paragraph or two for each question should be sufficient.

A. III is for identification of each of the contractors that participated in the planning, development, implementation, and operation of the SACWIS system. Please identify contractor by project phase and role within that phase.

A. IV is for financial information. This information should identify all developmental costs (Planning, Design, Development, and Implementation) and should correspond to the information in the approved APD.

A. V is for "lessons learned." Because of the value of this section to other States, ACF strongly encourages States to spend some time completing this section. The section is for information only, and States will not be penalized for the content.

A. VI lists required enclosures to be submitted with the completed Guide. Note that the information provided will be cross-referenced to responses in Appendix B.

Appendix B - SUMMARY TABLE

The Summary Table located in Appendix B is updated by ACF as the report is finalized and reflects the findings recorded in the questionnaire by the Federal review team. As findings are resolved by the State, this table will display the status of each functional component, whether the component has an Action Plan associated with it, and the page number where the component is discussed. This table will allow the reader to focus on unresolved findings, as well as identify those components with an approved Action Plan, which requires tracking in the State's Advance Planning Document.

The table makes use of the "bookmark" functionality in Word. The State should not type in this table. As the State completes the questionnaire, the page reference numbers in the table will not match the actual pages in the questionnaire. If the State wishes to update the page number on the Summary Table, the writer may type "Control A" (the "Ctrl" key and the "A" key) and then push the "F9" key. This will refresh the page reference numbers on the table. The State does not need to refresh the page numbers.

The Table will appear as follows when the State initially completes the questionnaire.

After ACF completes its part of the draft report, the table will be refreshed and will appear as follows.

Once the report is finalized, the table will appear as follows.

This table indicates that SACWIS requirements have been satisfied for the identified requirements. Component number two has been totally resolved, while component number three has an approved Action Plan that will be followed though the State's Advance Planning Document.

Summary table definitions:

• Requirement Number refers to the sequential numbering of each of the SACWIS requirements.

• Conforms indicates if the component conforms to the specified SACWIS requirement.

• Action Plan indicates if ACF has approved the State's plans for bringing the specific SACWIS component into compliance at some point in the future. A "Y" in this column indicates that an Action Plan has been provided to ACF and has subsequently been approved. An "N" indicates that a compliance issue was resolved without an Action Plan (e.g., the State clarified existing functionality or completed an enhancement that resolved the identified issue). An "NA" or blank in this column would indicate that the component was found to be compliant at the time of the initial review and an Action Plan was not necessary.

• Page Reference # identifies the page number of the report where the finding is discussed. The "#" symbol represents an integer. Page reference numbers, as do all "bookmarked" items, must be periodically refreshed. ACF is responsible for this task.

Appendix B: Process Section

The Process Section is intended to establish the conformance of the State's SACWIS system to the functional requirements established in the SACWIS Action Transmittals, Program Instructions, program regulations and State contract documentation. The section numbering corresponds to the sections in the February 24, 1995 SACWIS Action Transmittal (number ACF-OISM-001). The sequential numbering is used for ease of discussion. Note that the functional requirements are stated as open-ended questions. In response to each, the State will describe (in the State Response section) how the functionality is met.

In the State Response section, the State will provide a brief, but complete narrative description of how the SACWIS supports the required and optional functional components approved in the APD. Each response should include a self-assessment describing the extent to which the State's SACWIS system fulfills the functionality. If the State determines that a requirement is incomplete, the State should describe:

• the differences or "gaps" between what is required and what has been implemented;

• the reasons for the gaps;

• actual or potential effect on the State's child welfare program; and

• planned actions for closing the gaps to meet all requirements.

Required functional components are identified with an asterisk (*) after the title. Optional functional components are followed by a question that asks if the State elected to include the functionality in the SACWIS system ("Was this Function selected as an Option in the State's Approved APD? Yes or No"). The State indicates whether the optional functionality was a "State Selected Option" by checking the appropriate box. Optional functional components, for which the State was approved funding, become mandatory with APD approval.

The Guide uses a table to cross-reference the system functionality to the documentation provided by the State in response to Appendix A - VI: Enclosures. The cross-reference tables are completed for each of the functional sub-components (e.g., Intake & Screening).

The following Cross-Reference table is used for all functional sub-components:

Cross-reference table definitions:

• The Reference Sources is used to list the titles and page numbers of the enclosed documents (such as a User Manual) that provide supporting evidence or additional detail on how the system meets the functional requirements.

• The Screen Identifier is used to identify the screen(s) utilized to meet the functional requirement. This can either be cross-referenced by number to a "screen print" included as an attachment or to another resource (such as a User Manual) provided by the State that identifies the use of the screen(s).

• The Alert Identifier, Notice Identifier, and Report Identifier are for identifying (as applicable) the alerts/ticklers, notices, or reports that support a functional sub-component. The response should be cross-referenced by number (such as Alert No. 1) to the lists of alerts, notices, and reports provided by the State (Appendix A. VII: Enclosures).

  The term "Alert" is used in the Review Guide. It refers to an automated or worker generated tickler (reminder) of the need to complete an important task.

  A Notice can refer to system-generated correspondence, task lists, reports or word processing templates that are integrated into the SACWIS application.

Appendix C: New Initiatives Section

The New Initiatives Section examines how the State's SACWIS system supports new Federal and State initiatives in the Child Welfare program. The State should describe how its SACWIS supports the program areas identified in Appendix C. If the system does not currently support one or more of the identified program initiatives, the State should describe its plans for modifying the system to support the applicable initiatives. Whether or not the system supports a new initiative, the response should describe the processes used by the State to satisfy the requirement.

Back to Table of Contents

3.3 Example for Completing the Process Section of the Guide

The following is provided as an example of how a State should complete the Process Section of the Guide. The information presented in this example is for illustration only. The State's narrative (State Response) should be brief, but complete, and rely on the Documentation References for the supporting details. The Documentation References should correspond to the numbering sequence of the Reference Lists provided by the State at the time the Guide was submitted to ACF (see section 2.2.1).

Appendixes A, B, and C are WORD templates that will enable you to complete them on your computer screen. The answer fields will expand to accommodate the State response.

The "answer fields" appear as rectangles . Please contact ACF staff if you have questions about using the form.

As previously described, the State would use the selected word processing program to add text to the appropriate sections. The word wrapping capabilities of the word processing program will expand the document to fit the need.

Example -

A: Intake

Goal: To provide an automated entry point into the child welfare services agency for children and families who seek services, are referred for services, and/or who are reported to the agency.

1 - Intake Management - Section A: Intake

1. (1) Record contact/referral * - Describe how the automated system

1. records initial contacts regarding allegations of abuse or neglect, and/or
2. provides for the input of a formal referral for protective services, voluntary placement services, juvenile corrections, and other services.
3. The State response should also indicate when the "Intake Report" is frozen in the system.

State Response:

2. (2) Collect intake/referral information * — Describe how the automated system

1. allows for the input of available situation and demographic information,
2. including the cross-referencing of relationships among participants and
3. the reason for referral.

State Response:

4. (4) Record "information only" requests - Describe how the automated system records calls or contacts which do not involve a specific allegation or a referral concerning abuse and/or neglect.

Was this Function selected as an Option in the State's Approved APD? YES NO .

If Yes - State Response:

Note to the reader: This is an example of how a State would respond to a question about an optional component that was not included in the State's approved APD.

1 - Intake Management - Section B: Screening

2. (6) Record the results of the screening evaluation * — Describe how the automated system provides for the recording of the determination resulting from the screening process.

State Response:

Note to the reader: This example is intended to show that some of the responses can be very brief. The purpose of the narrative is to briefly answer the questions and to provide a framework for evaluating the cross-referenced material.

Back to Table of Contents

3.4 ACF Comments

Specific ACF comments will be documented in the space provided after the "State Response" section.

Table definitions:

• Conforms? Y/C/N - The Federal team records the results of the functional review on the ACF portion of the Guide. For each mandatory functional requirement and each funded optional requirement, the team notes whether the system conforms (Y), conditionally conforms (C), or does not conform (N). See section 2.4.3 for additional information. This field is "bookmarked" to the Summary table found on page two of Appendix B.

• Action Plan? Y/N/Blank - The Federal team will use this area of the report to indicate if it has approved the State's plans to bring the system into conformance at some point in future (Y). An "N" in this field indicates that the initial issue has already been resolved and that the system is SACWIS compliant in this area (an Action Plan is not necessary). A "blank" field indicates that the component was found SACWIS compliant in the initial assessment. Approved Action Plans are tracked in the Advance Planning Document through their completion. This field is "bookmarked" to the Summary table found on page two of Appendix B.

• Finding Summary Worksheet Completed? Yes or Blank - The Finding Summary Worksheet (see Exhibit 2-1 on page 2-9) should be completed if there are significant deficiencies that must be corrected in order for the system to meet the requirements established in the SACWIS AT or the State's approved APD. Use of the Finding Summary Worksheet ordinarily will only be necessary when State and Federal staff cannot reach agreement on a finding. The Finding Summary Worksheet will be prepared after the on-site review is completed and the draft report has been given to the State. This section is used to indicate that a Finding Summary Worksheet was completed.

• Resolution Date - Used to record the date that an issue was resolved or an action plan proposed by the State was accepted by ACF.

• ACF Comments - ACF draft and final comments regarding the system.

Back to Table of Contents

3.5 State Response to ACF Comments

The State should use the version of the draft SACWIS Assessment Review (SAR) report provided by ACF to respond to the identified concerns. If the State believes that it is necessary to update one of its original responses, it should do so by adding additional text separated by a header-line that indicates the date when the new text was added. The project staff should call the ACF Team Leader if there are any questions about responding to the draft report.

As an example:

State Response:

Back to Table of Contents

3.6 Lessons Learned from Previous Reviews

Following is a list of "lessons learned" from previous SARs. This information is intended to help States prepare for their review. The guidance is organized into three categories: preparing for the review, completing the Guide, and suggestions for the on-site review. Preparing for the Review:

Careful preparation for the assessment review will save time, help all parties understand the critical issues for the review, and ensure that all have a common understanding of the purpose and goals of the review.

• Ensure that the approved Implementation APD is complete and accurate. ACF uses the approved APD, contract documents, and requirements listed in program regulations, Action Transmittals, and Program Instructions to measure the system's scope and determine compliance. It is therefore critical that the approved Implementation APD accurately reflects system functionality, including optional functions the State has chosen to implement. ACF recommends that States regularly review the approved APD to ensure it accurately reflects the intended system design and functionality. If the scope of the system's functionality is not reflected in the approved APD, including optional functions originally planned for the system design, submit an APD Update to explain the variations and changes in system functionality. Submit the APD Update before the review.

• Communicate frequently with the Federal team leader. Use conference calls, telephone calls, and e-mail to answer documentation questions, understand and define on-site review expectations, finalize the agenda, and complete site visit logistics. Use the opportunity to ask ACF questions posed by staff who will be participating in the review. This preparation will help the State further understand the review scope and help identify critical issues well in advance of the on-site visit.

• Keep State staff informed. The project manager should regularly share what is learned from communications with ACF with the management and line staff who will be involved in the review. Clearly define the roles staff will play during the review so they know what to expect and are prepared.

• Learn from other States. The project manager should contact other States that have had an assessment review to benefit from their insights. ACF can provide a list of States that have had an assessment review. ACF User Group Meetings also provide opportunities to network with States and hear their perspective on the assessment process.

• Understand ACF goals for the assessment review. In general, ACF's goals for the review are: to determine State compliance with the State APD, contract documents, and federal requirements; assist the State in correcting any deficient areas; identify "best practices" which can be shared with other States' SACWIS efforts; and identify areas for future technical assistance to States.

Completing the Guide:

Appendices A, B, and C of the Guide and the supporting documentation (please see Section B.1. in Chapter Two of these instructions) supplied by the State are essential to the final assessment review report. These materials are critical to understanding the SACWIS and assessing compliance. If any of the supporting documentation cannot be provided, include a brief explanation why it was not available; do not create new documentation solely for this review. States are encouraged to consult with ACF about supplying the requested information in existing or alternative formats.

When responding to questions in the Guide, the State should consider the following:

• Completely answer the entire question that is posed in each section of the Guide. Several of the original requirements were defined by a ten-State workgroup, and have multiple parts; please answer each part of the question.

• Ensure responses are complete, clear, and concise. Each answer should stand on its own, without reference to responses in other parts of the Guide.

• Fully explain potential or existing system related problems and incomplete functionality. ACF will work with the State to develop action plans to bring the system into compliance. This action plan will be incorporated into the report so it is clear how each problem is addressed.

• Cross-reference responses to documentation provided in support of the review. The cross-referenced documentation will enrich ACF's understanding of the system by supplementing the written response.

• Use State and county staff with a detailed knowledge of the system. Such staff will be able to write concrete, precise, and knowledgeable responses and show how the system meets the needs of end users.

• Work on the document in Sections, but edit it for overall consistency. As many staff will contribute to the document, the project manager should review if for unnecessary repetition and statements that may appear contradictory and require clarification.

• Remember that these documents could eventually become public. Responses should provide sufficient detail to address the questions and be clear to readers lacking detailed knowledge of the SACWIS system.

By following the above guidance, States will obviate the need to revise and re-submit responses.

The State is reminded to submit copies of the documentation to both the Regional and Central ACF Offices.

Suggestions for the On-Site Review:

• Focus the on-site system demonstration on functional areas that reflect the processing of a typical child welfare case. It is very helpful for the Federal team to understand how the system is used to support local and State offices business processes, and see it used as it is in day-to-day operations. Clearly outline the steps and processes that will be demonstrated and how they interrelate. As the demonstration proceeds, specify the functional area being demonstrated to the Federal team.

• Use State and county staff with a detailed knowledge and experience with the system to demonstrate the system. Experienced staff will convey to the Federal team a sense of how the system is used in the field and can quickly navigate between different interfaces, reports, and ticklers.

• The Federal team will ask questions during the demonstration. Although the demonstration is a presentation of the system's functionality, it is an interactive presentation. The Federal team will ask questions of the presenters throughout the demonstration and refer to the Guide responses and supporting documentation. The questions are to help clarify understanding and do not mean something is "wrong" with the system.

• Child welfare programmatic staff and information systems staff should be present during the demonstration. As the demonstration covers the system broadly, questions will arise on a wide variety of child welfare and technical issues such as: State policy, eligibility determination, work flow processes, case management supervision, system security, edit checks, and database design. The presentation should be attended by State staff knowledgeable of the systems technical details as well as representatives familiar with how work is done in the field and how reports and ticklers are used.

• The local and State office interviews should not be pre-scheduled; interviews will be conducted at the caseworker's desk. In order not to impede normal daily operations and to provide maximum flexibility for interviews, the review team will interview local office staff as they are available over the course of the day. Caseworkers will be interviewed at their desks so that the Federal team can observe how they use the system. The State project team member accompanying the Federal review team should help coordinate the interviews by determining when individuals are available for interviews (i.e., who will be in the office at what time).

• The local office interviews require logistical coordination by the State. The local office interviews typically take an entire business day and require visits to between two and ten of the various types of offices that use the system. The time and distance involved requires careful advance planning by the State. The selection of offices to visit will be made during pre-visit conference calls.

• The Federal team may need to interview private provider's staff. If the State requires private providers to use the SACWIS, the Federal review team will interview the private providers' staff at one or more of their offices. The State will coordinate the logistics of these interviews.

In summary, SARs are a cooperative process between the State and Federal teams. ACF encourages the State to ask questions and seek clarification on any issues before, during, or after the review.

Back to Table of Contents