2009 Self-Assessment Process Survey Summary

In early 2010, National CASA conducted a survey of 248 local CASA/GAL programs that completed our self-assessment process in 2009. The purpose of the survey was to measure local program satisfaction with and effectiveness of the self-assessment in four areas. The focus areas included benefits of the self-assessment; submission process; communication and service; and the report and compliance period. A total of 122 (49%) of the programs that were sent the survey completed and submitted it.

A Sampling of Results

Benefits of the Self-Assessment Process

77% of the programs that responded either agreed or strongly agreed that overall, the quality assurance/self-assessment process was valuable to their organization. 12% neither agreed nor disagreed, and 10% felt that the self-assessment was not valuable.

A high percentage of programs felt that the process helped to identify program strengths and areas for improvement as well as fostered greater awareness of program operations among staff and the governing body.

Submission Process

84% of respondents felt that the online tool was easy to navigate, 78% felt that the instructions for submitting the self-assessment were easy to understand, and 74% understood how to electronically upload and submit the indicators of compliance documents.

Communication and Service

90% of respondents felt that they received the information and instructions to begin the self-assessment in a timely manner, and 93% felt that they received prompt service in response to their questions throughout the process.

Report and Compliance Period

Of those responding, 87% had received the report back from the review process at the time of the survey. 78% felt that the report was easy to understand. For the programs found to be out of compliance, 90% felt that they received the support and assistance needed to meet compliance within the six-month improvement period.

Additional Comments and Suggested Improvements

The survey requested additional comments and suggestions. Among the typical comments were:

• The self-assessment process was valuable and worthwhile but time-consuming.
• The process has improved since the first cycle.
• Some small, rural programs may not have necessary resources (scanners, time, help, funds), which makes completion very challenging.
• The report is too standardized to account for uniqueness of each program.

 Suggested improvements included:

• Create assessment format options for programs that are considered a branch of the state court and are not separate entities. Develop separate assessments for different types of programs (for example, court, nonprofit, umbrella, small/rural, large/urban, tribal). 
• Provide more samples of required indicators of compliance. Create standardized forms for all programs to use that satisfy the standards. 
• Embed the list of indicators of compliance documents into the online self-assessment in each section as you work through to better coordinate what is required and what information the document should include (instead of being on a separate list).
• Improve the system for sending documents when some are sent in hard copy and some are uploaded electronically. 
• Reduce the number of required documents to streamline submissions.
• Train state directors to help new program directors with this process.

Next Steps

National CASA Program Services staff will do a thorough review of survey responses and consider changes that will improve our system. We will also survey all CASA programs participating in the self-assessment in 2010 and 2011 so that at the end of this cycle we can have a thorough understanding of the benefits and challenges programs experience and consider changes for the next full cycle of the self-assessment in late 2012.