The use of professional time in relation to case content and services rendered : an exploratory analysis based on a representative group of cases carried by the Children's Aid Society of Vancouver, and the Agency Time Study of June, 1955.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While it is generally accepted that basic child welfare services are essential, insufficient attention has yet been granted to the problems of (a) the shortage of professionally qualified social workers in relation to the many types of need, (b) making the best use of professional personnel in relation to specific job content, (c) setting up criteria on priority indications for the different fields of social work, which, in a children's agency alone can be separated into many categories. As an approach to some of these patterns, a study was devised to review the main branches of the Vancouver Children's Aid Society caseload, using an administrative ''time study" made in 1955 as a base. Aiming at a group of cases representative of an average worker's share of responsibility, cases were selected proportionately from five main areas, (a) family cases, (including services to unmarried mothers), (b) foster homes, (c) adoptive applicants, (d) children in care, and (e) children on adoption probation. (1) Visits and interviews carried out in one month (June 1955) on behalf of these clients, are tabulated and compared with those undertaken by the "average worker" in the agency time study, (2) service rendered is qualitatively rated for each ease, and (3) case illustrations are employed as a further aid to evaluation. In a summary assessment, (4) the relation of availability of worker-time to the adequacy of service is examined. Using a threefold rating of service, it is estimated that in the 83 sample cases adequate or fair service was given in 66 cases. The quality of service in 45 cases was judged to be not affected by lack of worker-time, although it was an important cause of limitation of service in the remaining 38. The proportion of total time revealed as spent on visits and interviews, 23 - 28 percent, is similar to that of the few other agencies which have studied this matter, but must be regarded as low if direct service to clients is considered to be the chief responsibility of qualified social workers. Possible methods of increasing time spent on visits and interviews are suggested, and subjects requiring further research are indicated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".