Appendix I

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT A
Family Connection Grant Program Legislative Authorization
(Section 427, Subpart 1, Title IV-B, of the Social Security Act) (42 U.S.C. 627), as amended
by the Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act (Pub. L. 113-183, § 221)
----------------------------H.R. 6893 [110th]:
Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008
SEC. 102. FAMILY CONNECTION GRANTS.
(a) In General- Part B of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620-629i) is amended by
inserting after section 426 the following:
‘SEC. 427. FAMILY CONNECTION GRANTS.
‘(a) In General- The Secretary of Health and Human Services may make matching grants to
State, local, or tribal child welfare agencies, and private nonprofit organizations that have
experience in working with foster children or children in kinship care arrangements, for the
purpose of helping children who are in, or at risk of entering, foster care reconnect with family
members through the implementation of-‘(1) a kinship navigator program to assist kinship caregivers in learning about, finding,
and using programs and services to meet the needs of the children they are raising
and their own needs, and to promote effective partnerships among public and private
agencies to ensure kinship caregiver families are served, which program-‘(A) shall be coordinated with other State or local agencies that promote
service coordination or provide information and referral services, including the
entities that provide 2-1-1 or 3-1-1 information systems where available, to
avoid duplication or fragmentation of services to kinship care families;
‘(B) shall be planned and operated in consultation with kinship caregivers and
organizations representing them, youth raised by kinship caregivers, relevant
government agencies, and relevant community-based or faith-based
organizations;
‘(C) shall establish information and referral systems that link (via toll-free
access) kinship caregivers, kinship support group facilitators, and kinship
service providers to-‘(i) each other;
‘(ii) eligibility and enrollment information for Federal, State, and local
benefits;

1

‘(iii) relevant training to assist kinship caregivers in caregiving and in
obtaining benefits and services; and
‘(iv) relevant legal assistance and help in obtaining legal services;
‘(D) shall provide outreach to kinship care families, including by establishing,
distributing, and updating a kinship care website, or other relevant guides or
outreach materials;
‘(E) shall promote partnerships between public and private agencies, including
schools, community based or faith-based organizations, and relevant
government agencies, to increase their knowledge of the needs of kinship care
families to promote better services for those families;
‘(F) may establish and support a kinship care ombudsman with authority to
intervene and help kinship caregivers access services; and
‘(G) may support any other activities designed to assist kinship caregivers in
obtaining benefits and services to improve their caregiving;
‘(2) intensive family-finding efforts that utilize search technology to find biological
family members for children in the child welfare system, and once identified, work to
reestablish relationships and explore ways to find a permanent family placement for
the children;
‘(3) family group decision-making meetings for children in the child welfare system,
that-‘(A) enable families to make decisions and develop plans that nurture children
and protect them from abuse and neglect, and
‘(B) when appropriate, shall address domestic violence issues in a safe manner
and facilitate connecting children exposed to domestic violence to appropriate
services, including reconnection with the abused parent when appropriate; or
‘(4) residential family treatment programs that-‘(A) enable parents and their children to live in a safe environment for a period
of not less than 6 months; and
‘(B) provide, on-site or by referral, substance abuse treatment services,
children’s early intervention services, family counseling, medical, and mental
health services, nursery and pre-school, and other services that are designed
to provide comprehensive treatment
that supports the family.
‘(b) Applications- An entity desiring to receive a matching grant under this section shall submit
to the Secretary an application, at such time, in such manner, and containing such information
as the Secretary may require, including-‘(1) a description of how the grant will be used to implement 1 or more of the
activities described in subsection (a);
‘(2) a description of the types of children and families to be served, including how the
children and families will be identified and recruited, and an initial projection of the
number of children and families to be served;
‘(3) if the entity is a private organization--

2

‘(A) documentation of support from the relevant local or State child welfare
agency; or
‘(B) a description of how the organization plans to coordinate its services and
activities with those offered by the relevant local or State child welfare
agency; and
‘(4) an assurance that the entity will cooperate fully with any evaluation provided for
by the Secretary under this section.
‘(c) Limitations‘(1) GRANT DURATION- The Secretary may award a grant under this section for a
period of not less than 1 year and not more than 3 years.
‘(2) NUMBER OF NEW GRANTEES PER YEAR- The Secretary may not award a grant
under this section to more than 30 new grantees each fiscal year.
‘(d) Federal Contribution- The amount of a grant payment to be made to a grantee under this
section during each year in the grant period shall be the following percentage of the total
expenditures proposed to be made by the grantee in the application approved by the
Secretary under this section:
‘(1) 75 percent, if the payment is for the 1st or 2nd year of the grant period.
‘(2) 50 percent, if the payment is for the 3rd year of the grant period.
‘(e) Form of Grantee Contribution- A grantee under this section may provide not more than 50
percent of the amount which the grantee is required to expend to carry out the activities for
which a grant is awarded under this section in kind, fairly evaluated, including plant,
equipment, or services.
‘(f) Use of Grant- A grantee under this section shall use the grant in accordance with the
approved application for the grant.
‘(g) Reservations of Funds‘(1) KINSHIP NAVIGATOR PROGRAMS- The Secretary shall reserve $5,000,000 of the
funds made available under subsection (h) for each fiscal year for grants to implement
kinship navigator programs described in subsection (a)(1).
‘(2) EVALUATION- The Secretary shall reserve 3 percent of the funds made available
under subsection (h) for each fiscal year for the conduct of a rigorous evaluation of the
activities funded with grants under this section.
‘(3) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE- The Secretary may reserve 2 percent of the funds made
available under subsection (h) for each fiscal year to provide technical assistance to
recipients of grants under this section.
‘(h) Appropriation- Out of any money in the Treasury of the United States not otherwise
appropriated, there are appropriated to the Secretary for purposes of making grants under
this section $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.’.

-----------------------------

3

H. R. 4980
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act’’.

-------------------------------TITLE II—IMPROVING ADOPTION INCENTIVES AND EXTENDING
FAMILY CONNECTION GRANTS
Subtitle B—Extending the Family Connection Grant Program
SEC. 221. EXTENSION OF FAMILY CONNECTION GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 427(h) (42 U.S.C. 627(h)) is amended by striking ‘‘2013’’ and
inserting ‘‘2014’’.
(b) ELIGIBILITY OF UNIVERSITIES FOR MATCHING GRANTS.—Section 427(a) (42
U.S.C. 627(a)) is amended, in the matter preceding paragraph (1)—H. R. 4980—25
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ before ‘‘private’’; and
(2) by inserting ‘‘and institutions of higher education (as defined under section 101 of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001)),’’ after ‘‘arrangements,’’.
(c) FINDING FAMILIES FOR FOSTER CHILDREN WHO ARE PARENTS.—
Section 427(a)(1)(E) (42 U.S.C. 627(a)(1)(E)) is amended by inserting ‘‘and other individuals
who are willing and able to be foster parents for children in foster care under the responsibility
of the State who are themselves parents’’ after ‘‘kinship care families
(d) RESERVATION OF FUNDS.—Section 427(g) (42 U.S.C. 627(g)) is amended—
(1) by striking paragraph (1); and
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively.
(e) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall take effect as if enacted
on October 1, 2013.

4

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT B

Contract Excerpt
HHSP233201100391G
Effective date: 9/29/201
STATEMENT OF WORK
TITLE: Technical Assistance on Evaluation for Discretionary Grant Programs
(EXCERPT)
Task 5: Provide Evaluation TA for Family Connection Grantees and Conduct a Cross-Site
Evaluation of Family Connection Grants Clusters
As authorized under the funding legislation, evaluation TA will be provided and cross-site
evaluation will be conducted for the Family Connection grantees. CB is interested in
determining the impact of kinship navigator programs, intensive family-finding efforts, family
group decision-making meetings and residential family treatment programs on improving
children’s outcomes in the areas of safety, permanency and well-being.
CB expects grantees to engage in rigorous evaluations of Family Connection initiatives and
disseminate findings to the child welfare field. Evaluation TA will assist grantees in planning
and implementing strong, site-specific evaluations, and will support effective dissemination of
findings. Under this contract, evaluation TA shall be provided to all current, new and future
Family Connection grantees (a total of approximately 30 grants/fiscal year).
In accordance with the funding legislation, Family Connection grantees must participate fully in
any applicable national evaluation effort that relates to the Family Connection FOA. Under this
contract, the contractor shall conduct cross-site evaluations of all the Family Connection grants
that are awarded during the period of authorization of the legislation. The cross-site evaluation
will examine the effectiveness of projects in these program areas, and identify program models
that have potential for replication.
Continuation Family Connection grantees received individual evaluation TA and participated in
the cross-site evaluation begun under the previous contract. The contractor will continue any
evaluation TA in progress for these individual grantees, as well as the cross-site evaluation work
undertaken by the previous contractor with them. The cross-site evaluation plan developed by
the previous contractor includes both process and outcome components that address areas
specified in the FOA, as well as other areas of interest to CB. The contractor will be provided
with cross-site evaluation materials developed under the previous contract, as well as

1

information about the cross-site activities undertaken and results to date. The contractor will
continue to use the set of logic models developed under the previous contract for each program
area (Kinship Navigator, Family-finding, Family Group Decision-making and Residential
Family Treatment), the Combination Project Group and the cluster as a whole. As necessary, the
contractor will continue to coordinate and to work collaboratively with the continuation Family
Connection grantees to identify common evaluation components that can be utilized in the
national evaluation effort of this discretionary grant cluster. This includes the continuing
development of common definitions for the identified CFSR indicators, other additional common
evaluation components (i.e., methods, collections tools, processes, outputs and/or outcomes) and
corresponding reporting procedures and formats. The contractor will collaborate with CB and the
grantees to determine the optimal data collections strategies and instruments to maximize lessons
learned about program implementation and outcomes without significantly increasing the burden
on grantees (e.g., case record review, focus groups and on-site interviews). The contractor will
prepare reports on the progress and findings of the cross-site evaluation activities, and
recommendations based on these. The contractor will propose a Work Plan and timelines for
completing the cross-site evaluation activities and reports of findings.
The contactor will continue to assist grantees in making project findings available in forms that
can be readily used by the Children’s Bureau Training and Technical (T/TA) Network in its
work with State and Tribal child welfare systems.
The contractor will participate on the team which provides direction and support for Family
Connection grants clusters in start-up, implementation and sustainability activities. This team is
comprised of Federal staff and other content area specialists and T/TA providers.
The contractor will provide a Family Connection evaluation web site or similar web-based
mechanism to that developed by the previous contractor to archive grantees’ evaluations
materials and other helpful evaluation information for grantees, host a calendar of contractor
evaluation TA activities, and facilitate sharing of and collaborative drafting of evaluation
documents.
The contractor will establish and promote an evaluation listserve or similar mode of electronic
communication with groups or clusters of Family Connection grantees to share evaluation
information and resources and facilitate peer-to-peer exchange around evaluation activities and
issues.
Sub-task 5.1 Initial Meetings with Federal Staff for Family Connections Grants
The contractor shall meet with the COTR and the FPOs for the Family Connection grants
clusters to discuss the evaluation TA provided so far to individual grantees and Project Groups,
as well as the work completed so far on the cross-site evaluation and next steps for the
completion of this effort. To prepare for these meetings, the COTR will insure that the
contractor has copies of all Family Connection evaluation TA documents and products
completed thus far, as well as copies of measures, data collection instruments, results of
interviews and other documentation of the work of the previous contractor.

2

Sub-task 5.2 Regular Meetings with the FPO on the Cross-Site Evaluation
The contractor shall meet regularly with the COTR and FPOs, and other CB staff as necessary, to
discuss updates on this effort. The dates will be determined mutually

3

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT C

Description of Cross-Site Evaluation
The cross-site evaluation of the 2012-funded Family Connection Discretionary Grants examines the
effectiveness of 17 grants awarded in September 2012 with funds authorized by the Fostering
Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-351). These three-year
grants support demonstration projects to test the effectiveness of Kinship Navigator-TANF, Familyfinding and Family Group Decision-Making, and Residential Family Treatment projects. In addition to
conducting local evaluations of individual demonstration projects, grantees agreed to participate in the
national cross-site evaluation that focuses on process and outcome questions at the child, parent,
family, organization, and service delivery system levels. The cross-site evaluation addresses key
questions of interest to the Children’s Bureau such as: fidelity of service models and activities;
integration of Family Connection-funded activities into the local child welfare system; public child
welfare agency and other partner collaboration; project sustainability; barriers and facilitators to project
implementation and evaluation; and “lessons learned” by grantees.
Kinship Navigator-TANF projects, awarded to seven private / not-for-profit grantees, are designed to: 1)
Assist kinship caregivers through information and referral systems and other means to learn about, find,
and use existing programs and services to meet their own needs and the needs of the children they are
raising; and 2) Promote effective partnerships between public and private, community and faith-based
agencies to better serve the needs of kinship caregiver families.
Three private / not-for-profit and two public child welfare agency grantees have implemented
combination Family-finding/Family Group Decision-Making projects. Family-finding is the intensive use
of search technology and other strategies to identify, locate, and contact family members; assess their
suitability as potential permanency resources for the child; and engage family members with the child in
a process of Family Group Decision-Making (FGDM) that can lead to a permanent placement or
meaningful relationship. Using trained facilitators, FGDM engages and empowers families involved in or
at risk of entering the child welfare system to take an active and sometimes leadership role in
developing plans and making decisions to promote the safety, well-being, and permanency of their
children.
Residential Family Treatment projects, awarded to seven private / not-for-profit grantees, enable
parents and their children to live in a safe environment for a period of not less than six months. They
provide, on site or by referral, substance abuse treatment services, children’s early intervention
services, family counseling, medical and mental health services, nursery and pre-school, and other
services designed to provide comprehensive treatment that supports the family. Facilities meet all State,
local child care, and residential facility licensing requirements, and have qualified staff and appropriate
supervision.

1

Table 1: Family Connection Grantees and Their Locations
Grantee Organization

Grantee Location

Public or Private/Notfor-Profit

Child Welfare/TANF Collaboration in Kinship Navigation Programs
Arizona's Children Association

Tucson, Arizona

Private / Not-for-Profit

Catholic Charities of Rochester

Rochester, New York

Private / Not-for-Profit

Community Coalition for Substance Abuse
Prevention and Treatment

Tampa, Florida

Private / Not-for-Profit

Homes for Black Children

Los Angeles, California

Private / Not-for-Profit

North Oklahoma County Mental Health Center

Detroit, Michigan

Private / Not-for-Profit

The Children's Home, Inc.

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Private / Not-for-Profit

United Ways of California

South Pasadena, California

Private / Not-for-Profit

Combination Family-finding / Family Group Decision-Making (FGDM) Projects
Children’s Home Society of Washington

Seattle, Washington

Private / Not-for-Profit

Olmsted County Community Services

Rochester, Minnesota

Public

Oregon Department of Human Services

Salem, Oregon

Public

Seneca Family of Agencies

San Leandro, California

Private / Not-for-Profit

Spaulding for Children

Southfield, Michigan

Private / Not-for-Profit

Comprehensive Residential Family Treatment Projects
Amethyst, Inc.

Columbus, Ohio

Private / Not-for-Profit

Meta House, Inc.

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Private / Not-for-Profit

Queen of Peace Center

St. Louis, Missouri

Private / Not-for-Profit

Renewal House, Inc.

Nashville, Tennessee

Private / Not-for-Profit

Susan B. Anthony Center

Pembroke Pines, Florida

Private / Not-for-Profit

2

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT D

Consultants
Representatives from Family Connection grantee organizations
were consulted on survey content and clarity of instructions.
Representatives included:
Ms. Sandi Zaleski
Regional Program Supervisor
The Village Family Service Center
(701) 451-4592
Dr. Lisa Larson
Director of Research and Evaluation
IMPACT Planning Council
(414) 224-3054
Ms. Erin Malcolm
Associate Researcher
IMPACT Planning Council
(414) 224-3053
Ms. Andrea Jehly
Director of Quality Improvement
Meta House, Inc.
(414)-977-5818

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT E

Western IRB Exemption Determination Letter

February 3, 2015

Jennifer Dewey, PhD
James Bell Associates, Inc.
3033 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 350
Arlington, Virginia 22201
Dear Dr. Dewey:
SUBJECT:

REGULATORY OPINION—IRB EXEMPTION
Protocol Title: Technical Assistance on Evaluation, for Discretionary Grant
Programs, 2012 Funded Discretionary Grants
Investigator: Jennifer Dewey, PhD

This letter is in response to your request to Western Institutional Review Board (WIRB) for an
exemption determination for the above-referenced research project. WIRB’s IRB Affairs
Department reviewed the exemption criteria under 45 CFR §46.101(b)(2):
(2) Research involving the use of educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, aptitude,
achievement), survey procedures, interview procedures or observation of public behavior,
unless:
(i) Information obtained is recorded in such a manner that human subjects can be identified,
directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects; and (ii) any disclosure of the human
subjects’ responses outside the research could reasonably place the subjects at risk of
criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subjects’ financial standing, employability, or
reputation.
We believe that the research fits the above exemption criteria. The data will be collected in a
way so that the subjects can be identified, directly or through identifiers linked to the
participants. However, any disclosure of the human subjects’ responses outside the research
will not reasonably place the subjects at risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the
subjects’ financial standing, employability, or reputation. You have also confirmed that the
results of this study will not be submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for
marketing approval.
This exemption determination can apply to multiple sites, but it does not apply to any institution
that has an institutional policy of requiring an entity other than WIRB (such as an internal IRB) to
make exemption determinations. WIRB cannot provide an exemption that overrides the
jurisdiction of a local IRB or other institutional mechanism for determining exemptions. You are
responsible for ensuring that each site to which this exemption applies can and will accept
WIRB’s exemption decision.

Western Institutional Review Board®
1019 39th Avenue SE Suite 120 | Puyallup, WA 98374-2115
Office: (360) 252-2500 | Fax: (360) 252-2498 | www.wirb.com

Jennifer Dewey, PhD

2

February 3, 2015

Please note that any future changes to the project may affect its exempt status, and you may
want to contact WIRB about the effect these changes may have on the exemption status before
implementing them. WIRB does not impose an expiration date on its IRB exemption
determinations.
If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please contact David Gordon
Holt, J.D., C.I.P., at 360-252-2851, or e-mail RegulatoryAffairs@wirb.com.

DGH:dao
B2-Exemption-Dewey (02-03-2015)
cc: WIRB Accounting
WIRB Work Order #1-870231-1

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT F
Data Analysis
Several methods will be used to analyze data by respondent group and
project group. For example, project leadership results will be
analyzed as a total group of respondents and for Family-finding and
Family Group Decision-Making projects, Kinship Navigator-TANF
projects, and Residential Family Treatment projects. Responses to
common questions across two or more respondent groups will be analyzed
together when possible.
Most survey questions are quantitative. Quantitative analysis will
consist of:
 Descriptive statistics such as mean, median, and mode for all
aggregated and disaggregated results with associated distribution
charts and frequency tables.
 Cross-tabulations, a combination of two (or more) frequency
tables to examine combinations of specific values of crosstabulated variables.
 T-tests for independent samples to compare differences in means
by respondent groups.
 Correlations to example relationships between two or more
variables. Correlations will be conducted for those variables
with appropriate scales.
Some survey questions are qualitative, with the opportunity for
respondents to provide detailed, open-ended responses to key issues.
To address these questions, four stages of the analytic approach for
qualitative data – data collection, data organization, data analysis,
and literature comparison – will be adapted from Pandit’s (1996) fivephase diagram of building grounded theory. A two-phase coding process
consisting of assigning a code to each survey question and then coding
responses to each survey question will be used to organize qualitative
responses for each grantee. Coding will be informed and supported by
codebooks developed for qualitative data collected from two earlier
cohorts of grantees. All qualitative responses will be entered and
coded in Atlas.ti, a qualitative software package that supports
organizing data and generating output. Qualitative survey data will
first be analyzed by grantee, providing organized responses by
respondents to each survey question. Project group reports will
provide coded summaries of responses condensed from individual
respondents. Axial coding will identify similarities, themes, and
relationships within and among the three project groups.

1

All survey data will be analyzed and reported in aggregate in a crosssite evaluation report. A draft report will be provided in August
2015, and a final report will be provided in September 2015. Posting
the cross-site report on a public website will be at the discretion of
the Children’s Bureau. Presentations or publications developed from
the report by the contractor will be approved by the Children’s
Bureau. As the contractor will have done the data collection,
analysis, and reporting, it is not anticipated that survey respondents
or other members of grantee organizations will have a role in
subsequent reports, presentations, or publications.
Additional details regarding qualitative analysis techniques were
added to this section on June 17, 2015:
The contractor will take advantage of the organizational and
analytical features of Qualtrics for cleaning, organizing, and
analyzing quantitative data. Data will be exported into SPSS for more
complex analyses.
As also noted in Attachment E, survey data will be exported from the
Qualtrics web-based survey software into ATLAS.ti, qualitative
software designed to organize and facilitate systematic coding and
categorizing of narrative data. Data will be organized further into
ATLAS.ti “family” structures aligning to the constructs addressed in
each survey section/content area. The cluster, grantee organization,
and respondent type embedded in each survey response will be retained
in the ATLAS.ti dataset to facilitate exploring patterns and
relationships in the final stage of analysis. Once the data are
organized in the software, the data will be identified, coded and
categorized by primary patterns in the data.
The coding process for the web-based survey data will be completed in
two phases. In Level 1 coding, a descriptive alphanumeric code will be
developed for each qualitative survey question. Level 2 coding will
include an open coding process to examine the narrative responses to
the open-ended items, categorize the information or concept(s)
conveyed in the responses, and assign a code to each response
category. All codes developed by the contractor will be documented in
a qualitative data codebook for ongoing reference throughout the
coding and analysis process.
Throughout the coding and reporting process, the contractor will
discuss patterns, categories, and themes, and results that emerge from
the qualitative analysis. In order to ensure reliable interpretation
of the data, the research team will meet to review emerging codes and
discuss category and theme variations across sites. Analyses will be
reviewed by the lead report writer for each grantee cluster.

2

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT G
Survey Respondents
Table 1. Survey Respondents documents the expected number of
respondents per respondent group multiplied by the number of grantees
in each project group. Based on detailed contact information
maintained by the contractor and experience conducting on-site and
telephone interviews with 2009 and 2011-funded Family Connection
cohorts, the contractor estimates that four to five staff members in
leadership positions, an average of nine service providers, and a
limit of two public child welfare partners and 2 community partners
will be familiar enough with the Family Connection-funded project to
address survey questions. Evaluation teams working on the projects
typically have up to three members involved in evaluation activities.
Table 1. Survey Respondents
Project Group

Respondent
Group

Project
Leadership
Protocol
Service
Provider
Protocol
Evaluation
Team
Protocol
Public
Child
Welfare
Partner
Protocol
Community
Partner
Protocol
Total

Number
per
grantee
(up to
__)

Familyfinding
and Family
Group
Decision
Making
(n=7)

Kinship
NavigatorTANF (n=5)

Residential
Family
Treatment
(n=5)

Total
Potential
Respondents

4 to 5

33

23

23

79

9

63

45

45

153

3

21

15

15

51

2

14

10

10

34

2

14

10

10

34

145

103

103

351

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT H
Cross-Site Process Evaluation Questions
What are the service models, interventions, and activities
implemented by the Family Connection projects?
Intervention
and Innovation

What are the characteristics of the parents, children and
families served by the Family Connection projects?
What amount and mix of services is provided to parents,
children, and families receiving Family Connection-funded
services?

Implementation
Drivers
(Selection,
Training,
Coaching;
Performance
Assessment;
Leadership;
Decision
Support Data
System;
Facilitative
Administration;
Systems
Intervention)

Influence
Factors

How do Family Connection grantees select, develop, and
sustain staff member’s ability to effectively implement
project services?
What is the quality of service implementation in regard to
timeliness, fidelity, and administration?
How do Family Connection project leaders promote, guide,
and sustain effective project implementation?
How do Family Connection projects pursue continuous quality
improvement as a way to improve services?
Have new policies and procedures been developed as a result
of the Family Connection projects?
To what extent do Family Connection projects collaborate
with key partners, particularly child welfare agencies, to
serve children and families?
What barriers and facilitators do Family Connection
projects experience in implementing services?

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT I
Communication 1
From: James Bell Associates
To:
Grantee Project Director(s), Grantee Evaluation Team
Cc:
FPO
(Insert Date Here)
Greetings 2012-funded Family Connection Project Directors and Evaluators,
As part of the Family Connection cross-site evaluation, James Bell
Associates, Inc., (JBA), as a contractor to the Children’s Bureau, will
collect information from each grantee to address key process evaluation
questions. These questions focus on stages of project maturation from design
and implementation to maintenance and sustainability. JBA is already
analyzing secondary data provided by grantees such as grant applications,
semi-annual reports, and other local project and evaluation documents. We
sent earlier versions of these syntheses to grantees via brief grantee
summaries in Fall 2012 and expanded grantee profiles in Fall 2013. We are
updating grantee profiles now and will provide new versions for grantees to
review in February 2014.
In addition to updated profiles that will be used as source material for the
cross-site evaluation report, JBA will administer electronic surveys to key
informants from each grantee organization. We have collected this type of
information from each grantee cohort, and those funded in 2009 and 2011 may
recall in-person discussions conducted during site visits in your second
and/or third year of Federal funding. The electronic survey will streamline
the process of data collection, analysis, and reporting, reduce burden to
sites, and enable us to collect data from a larger pool of respondents.
We will administer customized surveys to a cross-section of grantee
representatives, outlined below:
Representative
Category
Project Leaders

Service Providers
Project Partners
Evaluation Team

Included in Category
Project Director, Executive Leadership (e.g.,
President, CEO), and Other Project Leadership (e.g.,
Program or Project Manager, service provider
Supervisor)
Advocates, case managers, case workers, counselors,
educators, facilitators, mentors, nurses, therapists,
etc.
Public child welfare partner representative(s) (for
public or private grantee organizations)
Community partner representative(s)
Lead evaluator and evaluation team members

1

Many representatives are already known to us. Your evaluation TA liaison will
follow up with each project director to verify our existing lists and –
importantly! – obtain a list of service providers. Please take a few minutes
to think about the service providers who may receive the survey. If Family
Connection services are implemented in more than one geographic site, we will
want to survey service providers from each site. Service providers have been
with the Family Connection project for at least one year. Service providers
may be employees of the grantee organization or a contracted vendor. For
those grantees with many service providers, we can survey a sample (about
10).
At this time, we plan to administer the survey in early April 2015, sending
the survey as an individual link via grantee representative e-mail addresses.
The survey focuses on each respondent’s role in the Family Connection project
and does not include questions of a personal or sensitive nature. The
information will be included in the cross-site evaluation report that JBA
will deliver to CB later this year.
All survey responses are confidential and will not be shared with other
members of the grantee organization, Family Connection project partners, the
Children’s Bureau, or other Federal partners. All data collected through this
survey will be aggregated for analysis and reporting purposes.
Thank you in advance for your participation in this activity. As noted
earlier, your evaluation TA liaison will contact you in the coming week to
verify our existing contacts and assemble a list of service provider
respondents. Please address any questions on this activity to your evaluation
TA liaison or me, Jennifer Dewey, the Family Connection Evaluation Project
Director via the contact information below.
Best regards,
Jennifer Dewey
Jennifer Dewey, PhD
Senior Research Associate
James Bell Associates, Inc.
3033 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 650
Arlington, VA 22201
(703) 528-3230 Phone
(703) 247-2637 Direct
(703) 243-3017 Fax
www.jbassoc.com
dewey@jbassoc.com

2

THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Cross-site Evaluation Survey 2012 Family Connection Grantees

ATTACHMENT J
Communication 2
From: James Bell Associates, Inc.
To:
Grantee Project Directors, Other Grantee Project Leaders, Service
Providers, Public Child Welfare Agency Partners, Community Partners,
and Evaluation Team Members
Cc:
Grantee Project Director, Grantee Evaluation Team, FPO
(Insert Date Here)
Greetings 2012-funded [INSERT PROJECT NAME HERE] Project Leaders, Service
Providers, Project Partners, and Evaluators,
As part of the Family Connection cross-site evaluation, James Bell
Associates, Inc., (JBA), as a contractor to the Children’s Bureau, is
collecting information from each grantee to address key process evaluation
questions for [INSERT PROJECT NAME HERE]. These questions focus on stages of
project maturation from design and implementation to maintenance and
sustainability.
JBA will collect this information through web-based electronic surveys of key
informants from each grantee organization and its partners about [INSERT PROJECT
NAME HERE]. We have collected this type of information from each grantee
cohort, and those funded in 2009 and 2011 may recall in-person discussions
conducted during site visits in your second and/or third year of Federal
funding. The electronic survey, which will replace site visits conducted with
prior grantee cohorts, will streamline the process of data collection,
analysis, and reporting, reduce burden to sites, and enable us to collect
data from a larger pool of respondents.
Data will be collected from a cross-section of the following.
Representative
Category
Project Leaders

Service Providers

Project Partners
Evaluation Team

Included in Category
Project Director, Executive Leadership (e.g.,
President, CEO), and Other Project Leadership (e.g.,
Program or Project Manager, service provider
Supervisor)
Advocates, case managers, case workers, counselors,
educators, facilitators, mentors, nurses, therapists,
etc.
Public child welfare partner representative(s)
(required for private / non-profit grantee
organizations and non-child welfare public agencies)
Community partner representative(s)
Lead evaluator and evaluation team members

1

JBA will administer the survey via an individualized link to the web-based
survey embedded in an e-mail to respondents work e-mail addresses. Your
participation will be a key contribution to the cross-site evaluation of the
Family Connection projects. We do not anticipate that you will experience any
risks or discomforts from participating in the survey. We can provide a paper
copy of the survey to you, but there is no other way to participate in this
activity besides completing the survey.
The survey focuses on each respondent’s role in the Family Connection project
and does not include questions of a personal or sensitive nature. All survey
responses are confidential and will not be shared with other members of the
grantee organization, Family Connection project partners, the Children’s
Bureau, or other Federal partners. All data collected through this survey
will be aggregated for analysis and reporting purposes. The information will
be included in the cross-site evaluation report that JBA will deliver to CB
later this year. Your responses will not affect your involvement in the
Family Connection project.
Thank you in advance for your participation in this activity. Please address
any questions on this activity to Jennifer Dewey, the Family Connection
Evaluation Project Director at (703) 247-2637 or dewey@jbassoc.com.
Best regards,
Jennifer Dewey
Jennifer Dewey, PhD
Senior Research Associate
James Bell Associates, Inc.
3033 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 650
Arlington, VA 22201
(703) 528-3230 Phone
(703) 247-2637 Direct
(703) 243-3017 Fax
www.jbassoc.com
dewey@jbassoc.com

2