Key Processes

Decision-making and Problem Solving

Effective administrative practices must institutionalize a process for decision-making that is focused first and foremost on the balance between proper controls and effective support of the work of program staff. Decisions must remain customer, not system, focused. Because technical training in both administrative professions and policies often leans more heavily toward responsibility for controls, this is an area where administrative leadership focused on results for children, youth and families is invaluable.

Both program managers and administrative managers should be aware of the impact that decisions may have in both arenas. When decisions are made that complicate the work of program staff, children, youth and families are negatively impacted. When decisions are made that sacrifice critical controls, the entire agency is at risk for significant monetary or public relations problems. Finding the balance between controls and supports requires intentionality at every point of decision-making – both large and small. Seemingly simple matters such as the number of signatures needed for approval have significant impact when multiplied over the entire agency.

Administrative and program managers must also take responsibility for communicating decisions to staff that mitigate the tendency of both sides to think in terms of “us and them.” This requires that:

• Everyone involved in decision-making believes his/her voice was heard.
• Everyone is aware of and respects factors that weigh most heavily in the decision.
• Decision makers understand the decision’s impact on all sides or actively seek the information to create that understanding so that those impacted do not feel disregarded or invisible.
• Agreement is reached on the objective criteria for a good decision and, when possible, data support the criteria used.

Effective decision-making processes include feedback mechanisms aimed at continuous improvement.

• Feedback is more effectively delivered and more easily incorporated when those in administrative management roles seek feedback on administrative practices rather than receive it as complaints or as non-compliance.
• Institutionalizing a feedback process for administrative decisions (e.g., a focus group after 60 days of implementing a new procedure or an informal survey through visits to units impacted by the decision) is critical.

Effective feedback mechanisms build staff confidence throughout the agency in the administrative processes and in administrative decision-making. And such confidence on the part of program staff will lead to greater compliance and excellence.

Leaders at all levels in the agency should be working to create an environment where frontline staff in both program and administration are invested in solving day-to-day as well as systemic problems. Communicating this as an expectation, with accountability for such built into the performance management system, is essential. The problems and challenges of the agency are “our” problems and challenges. And because any problem has the potential to negatively impact outcomes for an individual family or for families in general, the creativity and investment of all staff are needed.

Frontline administrative staff is often in a position to identify practice or operational issues of program staff. This information is important for supervisors and managers. Unfortunately, when the agency is not highly focused on outcomes for children, youth and families or the agency culture is one of punishment rather than learning, such information is often not communicated or is actively hidden. Again, it is the responsibility of leaders at every level to communicate and expect a more positive problem solving approach. Administrative staff must be seen as advocates for children, youth and families when they report problems in compliance or execution of responsibilities. Early identification of problem behavior provides the best opportunity for correction and education. Patterns of problems that may indicate systemic issues rather than individual performance concerns can also be identified more easily when administrative staff members are encouraged to be partners in creating excellence.

• Senior leaders should meet regularly with supervisory staff to talk about the “big picture” problems and challenges. This provides managers and supervisors with the appropriate context for understanding their problems and it provides administrators with the opportunity to gather information about the potential impact of larger issues on day-to-day operations.
• Managers and supervisors should also meet together regularly to identify and solve problems, as well as to share a common communication plan for supervisees across the agency related to current issues and challenges.
• Problem solving within the agency should reflect the same strengths-based, solution-focused approach that is employed with children, youth and families.

Customer Focus in All Functions

Unlike most practitioners, administrative professionals have been trained in technical areas that do not necessarily connect to the service of children, youth and families. Many of those with significant administrative expertise may not be inspired or engaged by the mission of public child welfare.

While it is tempting to hire administrative staff for primarily technical expertise and experience, it is nearly always a mistake. The administrative practices of the agency will never actively support the practice model and further the mission of public child welfare if the day-to-day administrative functions, as well as the leadership for those functions, are not executed by those with a commitment to children, youth and families.

Gaining support for this hiring stance with a centralized human resources department may be a challenge, since many other departments or agencies will not have a similar requirement for their hires. Making the case for the importance of this stance may require numerous conversations over time, with data related to retention and performance as well as anecdotes that illuminate the value mission-oriented staff bring to the bottom line and to customer service effectiveness. Any initiative on the part of a mission-oriented administrative staff person that has positive political impact should always be reported to Human Resources and other political stakeholders to highlight the benefit of administrative staff who embrace the mission.

The hiring process should screen for and inquire about applicants’ values related to:

• The practice model
• Cultural awareness
• Interest in the mission of the agency

While previous work experience may not have provided opportunity for the demonstration of some of these values, behavioral questions that begin with “Tell me about a time when...” can allow an applicant to discuss examples that may have occurred in volunteer or other non-professional contexts.


All staff should be held accountable for furthering the mission of the agency. Therefore, performance management expectations for administrative staff as well as program staff must closely tie back to desired outcomes for children, youth and families. Administrative staff must have performance expectations that measure their day-to-day performance against the expectation that they enable and support the agency mission. Competencies used for setting expectations and managing the performance of administrative staff should parallel those competencies used with program staff, such as:

• Engaging clients in a collaborative, respectful and empathetic way.
• Improving or streamlining processes that are used in working with children, youth and families.
• Performing ongoing assessment, evaluating results, and adapting plans and services to improve client outcomes.

Program staff members often have valuable information for consideration in evaluating administrative staff performance. Gathering that feedback through any variety of mechanisms (e.g. informal written feedback, individual interviews, formal survey instruments) will enable administrative supervisors to provide relevant feedback to staff about how their performance has or has not been helpful in furthering the mission. Likewise, administrative staff members often have valuable information for consideration in evaluating program staff performance. For example, program staff who do not treat administrative staff in ways that align with practice model values or those who chronically keep families waiting prolonged times for appointments or return phone calls must be held to account. Although eliciting performance feedback from staff about colleagues is a sensitive issue that must be handled well, the information provided is critical if all staff are to be given the opportunity to contribute toward desired client outcomes.

Poor performance in the support of the mission should be dealt with by:

• Provision of additional training, resources and support to enable staff to build their capacity and skills in supporting the mission.
• Evaluation of the unit or program’s overall performance in support of the mission to assess whether systemic issues are contributing to an individual’s seeming lack of support for children, youth and family outcomes.
• Action that communicates it is unacceptable for a person to perform adequately in technical areas but in such a way that children, youth and family outcomes are not assertively supported.

Balancing Support and Control

The “art” of excellence in administrative functions is often finding the right balance between support of the mission and staff carrying out that mission and the controls necessary to promote ethical, accurate and prudent behavior by those in the agency. Finding and maintaining the proper balance requires vigilance and continuous dialogue among the leadership and between administrative and program staff.

Administrative processes serve the function of making processes auditable, absent of bias and/or in line with best practices in certain professions such as finance or information technology. Administrative processes are not inherently in conflict with mission fulfillment and should not be seen as such by leaders or program staff. When an agency is in disarray, when abuse or impropriety has been uncovered or suspected, or when the risk to the agency is deemed to be great in a particular area, greater control is needed. In some functions, such as cash management, a high level of control is constant and non-negotiable. If and when a high level of management can be modified, it should be the result of progress, greater confidence in compliance and lessened risk. Even when controls must remain strong, well written protocols allow the human processes to proceed well and major barriers to the work are not created. Through active feedback loops, stakeholder conversations and innovative thinking on the part of all, highly controlled processes can be effective and not create barriers to service.

It is important that administrative mechanisms enable the agency to work with integrity and do not become onerous or a consuming concern of supervisors and staff. Serving clients requires the majority of the program staff time and energy. This focus needs to be protected rather than eroded by administrative procedures. Staff who must comply with administrative procedures may not understand how to find the balance between control and support but they can often provide valuable information about what processes need to be modified so that support is maximized.

Improving Practice through Effective Administration

Administrative practices add significant value to the delivery of services to children, youth and families. Administrative staff must consistently be encouraged to see their roles in this light. For example:

• A case tracking and documentation system implemented by the information technology staff has tremendous potential to improve practice when done well.
• A well designed training and support system to teach managers how to track their budgets will result in better utilization of resources for families.

Too often, administrative systems and processes are experienced as additional burdens by program staff rather than assets. As a result, program staff and administrative staff can perceive themselves as adversaries rather than collaborators. Again, it is the task of leaders at all levels and in all areas of the agency to make certain this is not the case. Assessing the effectiveness of key processes is the first step to finding ways to improve effectiveness and an important task for both program and administrative leadership.



A reasonable question to ask when any new system or process is being considered is “How will this improve our outcomes with children, youth and families?” Certainly, there are times when systems and processes are mandated rather than chosen. But even in that circumstance, a well run agency will exert considerable effort to mold, interpret and implement what is required so that it can add value to the mission.

Quality assurance systems and departments are designed with the intention of improving practice. The quality assurance process can improve outcomes and be embraced by staff as mission critical if it:

• Directly supports the practice model.
• Strikes an effective balance between control and support.
• Is administered by quality assurance staff well versed in the current practice and committed to the values in the practice model.
• Includes numerous, institutionalized methods for educating and receiving input from program staff on the front line.
• Communicates critical measures regularly to all levels of staff in the agency, with the goal of continuous improvement and education.
• Is a continuous process rather than simply a series of occasional “point-in-time” measures.

Connecting Administrative Staff to Children, Youth and Families

Perhaps the most powerful mechanism for aligning administrative staff and administrative practices to the mission is to involve administrative staff as directly as possible and in some meaningful way to the children, youth and families served. There is no way to make a mission more real than to see it in action. It is important for administrative staff to:

• Understand the experience of the children being served
• Have opportunity to relate to the parents as “real people”
• Observe the staff interacting with families and doing their jobs

When administrative staff can do this in the context of participation as volunteers with children, youth and families the connection is most powerful.

Connecting administrative staff with those served may take the form of:

• Regular story sharing
• Direct observation of practice (e.g., listening to hotline calls or observing foster parent training)
• Observing case conferences
• Volunteerism (raising money to purchase school supplies, sponsoring a child for the prom, outreach at shelters)

Connecting administrative staff to children, youth and families enables them to better understand why they are there and the value of their work to the families and communities the agency serves.

Developing Effective Administrative Policies

Policy development is an ongoing function in any agency. In public child welfare, there are numerous and sometimes contradictory needs that must be taken into consideration when developing policy. It is critical to identify all of the stakeholders early in any policy making process and to institutionalize mechanisms by which to engage them throughout the process.

Future compliance from staff is often based on the degree to which they believe their input has been sought and considered when creating new policies. Effective policy development requires that those “closest to the action” provide input during the development process. In other words, those administrative staffs and program staffs who are most impacted by the policy or who do work that are impacted by the policy should be involved and consulted when new policies or modifications to policies are being considered. Policies should be empowering rather than simply authoritative. Where discretion in case-by-case situations can be exercised, it should be allowed and so stated. Conversely, when compliance is critical in all circumstances, this should be clearly explained, understood and respected.

Once developed, regular reviews and updates of policies should occur. As policies are changed, both formal and informal communication must occur in order for staff to align their behavior with the new policy.

It is important that there be sound rationale for policy development. Individual or localized performance issues should not be solved through policy making. Such efforts are often ineffective and create unnecessary constraints or additional work on staff whose practice was not problematic.

Criteria for Evaluating Key Administrative Processes

There are a series of questions that leaders (executive, administrative or program) can ask to determine if key processes are designed and executed well. Again, the goal for any key process is to be focused on achieving outcomes rather than creating undue focus on the internal systems.

These evaluative questions are located in the Leadership chapter of this guidance and linked here because they are an excellent set of criteria.