Running head: ASSIGNMENT 3 0

Racial disproportionality of Black families in the Canadian child welfare system: A

qualitative exploration of the experiences and perceptions of child welfare workers around

anti-black racism training

Charlotte Tanga-An, Joseph Choi, Zahra Abukar

AP/SOWK 3070 B: Foundations of Social Work Research

Professor Ruth Wilson

Tuesday December 8th, 2020 (Extension requested)

ASSIGNMENT 3 1

Introduction

What is the story behind the overrepresentation of Black families in the Canadian child

welfare system? Our research proposal is compelled to understand the nature of this phenomenon

by exploring the unique experiences of training among child welfare workers. It has been shown

that racism is experienced by both racialized welfare workers and service users (Cenat et al.,

2020; Clark, 2011; Pon & Gosine, 2011). These realities can be attributed to the historical

demands of race and class divisions that were central in the making of Canada, which led to the

discrimination and mistreatment of those who did not identify as the predominant White race

(Pon et al., 2017, p. 387). Additionally, it has been argued that current child welfare practices

“have been formulated from a ‘location of dominance’ and thereby perpetuate the ideal of White,

two-parent, heterosexual, able-bodied family” (Pon & Gosine, 2011, p. 137). In presuming that,

we have to wonder what the current status is on the literature on child welfare training. Despite

the growing evidence that have confirmed the overrepresentation of Black families in the

Canadian child welfare system (Adjei & Minka, 2018; Antwi-Boasiako et al., 2020; Boatswain-

Kyte et al, 2020; Clarke, 2011; King et al., 2017; Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2018; Pon

et al., 2017), there remains a gap in the literature. That is, little research has been devoted to the

workplace experiences of child welfare workers and their perceptions and experiences around

training, particularly anti-black racism training. In order to elucidate this pattern of

overrepresentation, our proposal intends to contribute to the literature on training and capture the

perceptions and experiences of anti-black racism training by raising questions around the

existence, effectiveness, and amount received by child welfare workers. By employing a case

study, it will not only be helpful in examining child welfare training in-depth, it will also help in

noticing if it is tied to the disproportionate representation of Black families.

ASSIGNMENT 3 2

Statement of the research

Based on the findings from the literature review on the overrepresentation of Black

children in the Canadian child welfare system, there appears to be a sufficient amount of

quantitative studies that have confirmed, in contrast to other racialized groups, Black families are

disproportionately involved in the child welfare process; they are more likely to be investigated,

to commit child maltreatment-related behaviours that lead up to investigation, to be placed in

ongoing services, and to result in an out-of-home care placement (Adjei & Minka, 2018; Antwi-

Boasiako et al., 2020; Boatswain-Kyte et al, 2020; King et al., 2017; Ontario Human Rights

Commission, 2018; Pon et al., 2017). Nevertheless, the state of the literature on

overrepresentation is problematic given that little attention is offered to the experiences of those

involved in the child welfare system—particularly child welfare workers’ experiences on anti-

black racism training—that could help explain why this trend is apparent. According to the

literature on child welfare workers’ experiences with training, a few studies highlight the

concerns of child welfare workers with the lack of cultural training. One study, using focus

groups, has displayed evidence of inadequate knowledge and training on cultural and racial

issues received by child welfare workers from a Children’s Aid Society in Ontario (Cenat et al.,

2020). Likewise, another study, using interviews, highlights the lack of cultural awareness of

Afro-Carribean service users by child welfare workers in Toronto (Clark, 2011). One of the

workers describes training as being dismissive of the structural inequalities that are associated

with the personal risk to the child (Clark, 2011, p. 279). Furthermore, the study by Pon and

Gosine (2011), employed focus groups and captured similar concerns of perceived racism by

racialized child welfare workers (Black and non-Black) in Toronto. Mandatory

anti-oppression/anti-racism training for managers and supervisors was recommended after most
ASSIGNMENT 3 3

of the workers worked in predominantly ‘White-normed’ agencies and shared a “perceived lack

of promotion and advancement opportunities, a lack of respect, silencing, microaggressions, and

workplace practices and policies that constrained their individual practices” (Pon & Gosine,

2011, p. 153-154). Therefore, our research proposal intends to not only to fill in the void of

qualitative data needed to explore the nuance behind the trend of overrepresentation, yet, it will

also contribute more to the existing literature by using semi-structured interviews and focus

groups to explore the experiences and perceptions of child welfare workers around training, with

a unique focus on anti-black racism training that has yet to be explored. Working with an anti-

racism theoretical approach, that recognizes race as determining aspect to social inequality in

contemporary Western societies (Pon & Gosine, 2011, p. 137), we plan to employ a case study

research design that will also help with understanding the relationship between anti-black racism

training and the overrepresentation of Black families, which also has yet to be discovered. We

hope the originality of our proposal will lend importance to the value of capturing lived-

experiences of training to better comprehend the message behind overrepresentation, and will

benefit other researchers with new findings on the existence of anti-black racism training and

whether or not a relationship exists between anti-black racism training and overrepresentation of

Black families. Taking all that into consideration, our research questions proposed are: Do child

welfare workers receive anti-black racism training in their agencies? How often are they trained

on anti-black racism? What are the perspectives of child welfare workers on the effectiveness of

training on anti-black racism? Finally, our research proposal has developed two main objectives:

(1) to explore the perceptions of child welfare workers on anti-black racism training in child

welfare work, (2) to explore experiences of anti-black racism training among racialized child

welfare workers.
ASSIGNMENT 3 4

Methodology

Qualitative data is focused “on collecting and analyzing research data that captures the

narratives and experiences people have” (Access Alliance Multicultural Health and Community

Services [AAMHCS], 2011, p. 107). Our interest in employing a qualitative research method

derives from the state of the Canadian child welfare literature that falls short of in-depth insights

—such as the narratives and experiences of child welfare workers on anti-black racism training

—needed to understand the story behind the pattern of overrepresented Black families in the

child welfare system. With that said, we strongly believe the research paradigm, Critical Theory,

is a suitable approach to producing and gathering subjective knowledge for our qualitative study.

Critical Theory draws from subjective knowledge and it assumes “that a reality exists, but it has

been shaped by cultural, political, ethnical, gender and religious factors” (Rehman & Alharthi,

2016, p. 57). Along with semi-structured interviews, the production of our data will entail

engaging our subjects in a dialogue about the existence, amount, and effectiveness of anti-black

racism training through focus groups, with the hope to detect any presence of oppressive or racist

structures that shape their reality of training. Since we intend to explore the stories of workers

regarding training, exploratory research is the type of inquiry that is most suited for our study.

This type of inquiry refers to a research goal that finds out “about an issue that people know very

little about or which has not been researched very much” (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 112). In order to

contribute to the existing data on training that has not been researched very much, and to build

on more qualitative data to understand the phenomenon behind the trend of overrepresentation,

we intend to explore perceptions and experiences of training by workers. As more details of the

proposed study is provided, we hope that the “results from our exploratory research can capture
ASSIGNMENT 3 5

the initial information of our issue which then can become the basis for conducting many more

in-depth research projects” (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 112).

Measurement

The unit of analysis is the subject or object of the study, which, in our case is child

welfare workers, particularly, Children’s Aid Society (CAS) workers in Toronto. The unit of

observation refers to whatever it is that is specifically being examined and measured in this

study. In our study, we are using semi-structured interviews and focus groups as a means to

gather data on the experiences and perceptions of CAS workers on anti-black racism training.

Last but not least, the geographic setting is the location of the study which is Toronto, Ontario,

since we plan to collect our data from CAS workers in Toronto. Our case study will explore the

relationship between two concepts which are: the experiences and perceptions from child welfare

workers on anti-black racism training and the disproportionate number of Black Children in the

child welfare system (refer to appendix F). If we closely look at Toronto, Ontario, “More than

one out of two Black people in Canada (52.4 %) live in the province of Ontario. The Black-

Ontarian population totals 627,710, with Black immigrants from 150 countries, according to the

last census” (Maheux & Do, 2019, p.17). Yet, somehow in Toronto Ontario, “Black Canadians

make up 8.2% of the provincial population yet represent a staggering 41% of all children and

youth in care” (Adjei, 2018, p.511). We propose that this disproportional representation is

associated with the lack of training on cultural and racial issues specific to Black families

(Clarke, 2011; Clarke, 2012; OHRC, 2018; Pon & Gosine, 2011; Turner, 2016). As one black

child welfare worker pointed out, “anti-racism and anti-oppression need to be prioritized”

(Gosine & Pon, 2011, p.152). With that said, we hope the makeup of our research will address
ASSIGNMENT 3 6

what exactly is going on behind the overrepresentation of Black families in the child welfare

system.

Methods

In order to figure out what exactly is occurring that makes Black families more likely to

be involved in the Canadian child welfare system, compared to other racialized groups, we

believe using a qualitative research method will be effective in “what is going on here from the

perspective of those who are in the situation being researched” (Wilkinson et al., 2019, p. 53).

Particularly, we want to know what is going on from the perspective of the child welfare worker.

The research design we will be employing is a case study because we as researchers not only

want to know what is going on, but to find out whether a relationship exists between the level of

anti-black racism training and the racial disproportionality of Black children in the child welfare

system (Wilkinson et al., 2019). One of the data collection methods we intend to use is in-depth

interviews and it will be a semi-structured interview. We believed this was the best way to

collect data because of the “facilitated conversation that is conducted one on one” (AAMHCS,

2011, p. 113). Since we want to explore experiences from the perspective of a child welfare

worker, we believe that collecting data using interviews “can generate detailed and rich

narratives about individual experiences and interpretation” and through the one-on-one interview

process “the interaction between researcher and participant can be richer so that their voices will

be heard” (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 113). Child welfare workers (racialized and non-racialized

workers) that are employed in Children’s Aid Society Toronto will be invited to participate in

our study which will be conducted over two different dates. In Toronto, there are seven

Children’s Aid Society agencies, and we are hoping to recruit 1-2 child welfare workers—who

vary in ethnic/cultural backgrounds and carry at least 5-20 years of experience—from each of the
ASSIGNMENT 3 7

agencies, totalling up to 8-12 participants for our study. We will be recruiting participants for our

study through a sampling technique referred to as purposive sampling. We believe that this

method of sampling best suits our research proposal as we are not trying to “generalize a larger

population but we are examining a typical case in order to fully understand it” (Wilkinson et al.,

2019, p. 160). We are aware that studying the perspective and experiences of anti-black racism

training from child welfare workers in Toronto does not hold true for all child welfare workers in

Canada; we recognize that only tentative generalizations can be made to this group (Wilkinson et

al., 2019, p. 160). Purposive sampling technique is also appropriate for topics that are new and

have not been fully explored, and according to the literature on child welfare training specific to

anti-black racism, it has not been fully researched. To ensure that we can successfully recruit our

“typical” case, we have set out our objective criteria (refer to appendix A). In regards to the

inclusion and exclusion criteria for our study, the participants that are eligible to participate are

child welfare workers working for Children’s Aid Society agencies in the Greater Toronto Area

(GTA), and who carry the recommended number years of experience. Participants that are not

suitable to support this research are people that are not employed in Children’s Aid Society

Toronto and child welfare workers who do not at least carry 5-20 years of experience. For the

first half of our data collection process, the participants will be given fare for their commute and

will be asked to meet at York University, in which each participant will participate in one semi-

structured interview in a secluded, comfortable office away from noise, and will last between 1-

1.5 hours (refer to appendix E regarding details of the semi-structured interview guide). Given

that 8-12 workers will be interviewed, the entire interview process should last for approximately

8-12+ hours. Aside from that, we are aware of the challenges that come with doing a one-on-one

in-depth interview. We realize that when we are “conducting a large number of interviews and
ASSIGNMENT 3 8

transcribing as well, it can be time consuming and costly” (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 113).

Furthermore, our semi-structured interview requires good interviewing skills that we are not

experienced or competent enough to do, and this can potentially hamper the results of our data.

We're also aware that a “smaller sample size means that it is difficult to get a representative

sample” (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 113), which is why we have narrowed our geographic setting to

Toronto since all of Ontario is tedious and impractical. One last challenge that we recognize is

the “freedom participants have in how they respond to general questions and the fact that they

often drift to topics unrelated to the research” (Wilkinson et al., 2019, p. 254). In order to make

sure this does not happen frequently; we hope that giving the interview guide questions along

with the consent form will help participants prepare beforehand in how they want to respond to

questions. The second method of data collection we plan to use after the interview is a focus

group which “involves a group discussion of a topic that is the ‘focus’ of the conversation”

(Stewart et al., 2013, p. 2). After each participant is finished with their interview, they can go

home. However, they will be asked to come back again to York University the following week

for a focus group discussion. Once again, they will be compensated for their travel expenses. We

will wrap up our data collection process with focus groups of the same 8-12 child welfare

workers, and as the moderators, we will initiate interaction by probing questions around the

workers’ experience with anti-black racism in particular (refer to Appendix F for more details of

the focus group guide). We plan to conduct a session for as long as 2-3 hrs in a commercial

facility at York University “designed especially for focus group interviewing” (Stewart et al.,

2019, p. 3). Some of the strengths included are as follows: focus group interviewing will prompt

engagement within our small group that gives everyone the opportunity to discuss a particular

subject that might not get raised in our interview (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 113); participants in the
ASSIGNMENT 3 9

group are also free to share their stories and perceptions on a topic that can be viewed as new

insight and learning for other group participants (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 113). Furthermore, this

method of data collection is less time consuming for us. Unlike our interview that will last for

about 8-12+ hours, our focus group should only take about 2-3 hours. We believe carrying out

this instrument will add depth to the responses obtained from the interviews. By facilitating a

conversation about their unique realities and experiences with anti-black racism training among

child welfare workers, who vary in racial ethnicity and expertise in the field, we hope to

successfully capture similarities and differences of stories that can be subsequently translated

into themes. We would open up the conversation to solutions for those who experienced an

absence or lack of training. Nonetheless, we are aware of the challenges and limitations that

accompany focus groups. Having child welfare workers touch upon a sensitive topic, whereby

not every worker has the same level of knowledge on, can cause tensions. This tension can make

one hesitant to talk, and results “may be biased by a very dominant or opinionated member”

(Stewart et al., 2019, p. 3). Therefore, the dynamic of the group may influence how participants

respond to the questions (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 113). Moreover, certain members of the group

may not be comfortable discussing a particular topic in front of other peers, as they may be

emotionally triggered by it or by a story or experience another participant mentions (AAMHCS,

2011, p. 113)—that said, this can hinder valuable subjective information that can be used to

understand a phenomenon better. There is also the issue of unavailability—given that the group

will consist of many subjects with different work-life schedules and are not in close proximity to

each other, there should be the option to conduct the sessions virtually. Additionally, as

moderators who are incompetent and inexperienced in running focus group sessions, we may

“bias results by knowingly or unknowingly providing cues about what types of responses and
ASSIGNMENT 3 10

answers are desirable” (Stewart et al., 2019, p. 7). Since notetaking an entire interview and focus

group session is challenging to do, we will collect the responses using a “tape recorder and then

do a transcription” (Wilkinson et al., 2019, p.255) or we will video record the both processes.

That will be up to the participants as they fill out their consent form and check off which method

of recording they prefer.

Limitations

With any research project, we are always aware that there are limitations to doing any

research project. Lietz & Zayas (2010) assert that “qualitative studies should achieve

trustworthiness, a study that represents as closely as possible the perspectives of the research

participants” (p.191). Our research requires us to do in-depth interviews which involves

“facilitating conversations on a one-on-one basis and asking questions that are mostly open-

ended” (A.A, 2011, p.113), as well as, conduct focus groups where “a group of people come

from the research population to participate in a conversation about an issue” (A.A, 2011, p.113).

Therefore, we realize that to “achieve credibility in qualitative research we must manage the risk

of research reactivity and bias” (Lietz & Zayas, 2010, p.191). In our interview and focus group,

we mentioned that we will be using a video recording camera or tape recorder based on the

participants choice as they fill out their consent form when they check off which method of

recording they prefer. We realize that having a recording camera can influence the credibility of

the responses that come out of research participants due to the presence of a camera. Which is

why we have given the participants a choice of being tape recorded or video recorded (refer to

appendix B). We also acknowledge that researcher bias is always present in the research we do.

As social work researchers who are trying to understand the lens of a child welfare worker, we

are aware that none of us are child welfare workers, and that our “socio-political locations and
ASSIGNMENT 3 11

preconceived ideas may shape the way we have designed our study and engage in analysis,

potentially leading to a misrepresentation of the data” (Lietz & Zayas, 2010, p.192). To manage

this, we will engage in reflexivity by “having self-awareness regarding our own influence on this

research project” (Lietz & Zayas, 2010, p.192). Since it’s easy to say that we will engage in

having self-awareness. In order to put reflexivity into action we plan to engage in peer debriefing

so that members have dialogue regarding research. Finally, in terms of the feasibility of our

research study, we believe that the completion of this study will last about 6 months. The reason

we believe it will last this long is because of the time and preparation it will take to round up our

participants. We recognize that it will not be easy to obtain 8-12 participants instantly, and the

chances of conducting the interview and the following focus group on a day that works for all

participants is unlikely. Therefore, more time will be needed, not only to ensure the data

collection process goes smoothly, but to be able to effectively write up the results and

conclusions of our study. We also acknowledge the feasibility of our setting—for the sake of

time and resources, we believe conducting our study in Toronto is practical and not as tedious as

conducting our study in all of Ontario or Canada.

Partnership Plan

We have learned in doing a research proposal that the partnerships with “multiple

stakeholders is a fundamental principle in research” (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 40). Through the

thoughtful discussions, we believe that these identifying partners that we will mention “have the

familiarity and work history, resources and expertise, availability, and strategic positioning in

championing our cause” (AAMHCS, 2011, p.41). Our first identifying partnership is the seven

Children Aid Society agencies in Toronto. As we are recruiting CAS workers that work in

Toronto to participate in our study, it is crucial for us to have a strong collaboration with these
ASSIGNMENT 3 12

agencies. In terms of the expectations that the seven agencies will play for us, we are simply

hoping that they can provide us with CAS workers who have worked in the field for about 5-20

years so that we can effectively conduct these one-on-one interviews. Some of the challenges we

see in this partnership is potentially the agency not allowing one-on-one interviews with their

CAS workers. Essentially, the benefit that we see in this partnership is being able to get the CAS

worker perspective regarding anti-black racism training. Our second identifying partner will be a

CAS reference group that consists of 10 African Canadian workers and allies from CAS agencies

across Ontario. What we expect from this partnership is for them to provide another perspective

and insight into the child welfare system and the racial disproportionality of African Canadian

children/families in the system. When it comes to our research teams’ social location, we realize

that no matter how much research and knowledge we obtain about child welfare training and the

racial disproportionality of Black children in the child welfare system, we could never fully

understand being in that position—that is why in hopes of this partnership, our biases and

judgments will not get in the way since we believe that is our most important collaboration. In

terms of having an equitable participation, the African Canadian workers “actively participate

and contribute in your meetings and activities to their full potential” (AAMHCS, 2011, p. 46). In

terms of how long this partnership will be, we believe that this partnership will last until the

completion of this study.

Ethical Considerations

Ethics is defined as “a set of principles, policies and practices that act as a guiding

framework to ensure that research is carried out in a manner that respects the dignity, safety and

rights of research participants and that recognizes the responsibilities of researchers” (AAMHCS,

2011, p. 126). As researchers who have been certified in TCPS 2, we strongly adhere to the
ASSIGNMENT 3 13

foundational principles of the TCPS 2 which are respect for persons, concern for welfare, and

justice. When it comes to respecting the persons we believe that individuals have the right to

make informed decisions and voluntary decisions. We realize that CAS workers deal with high

trauma and stress while on the job and that even possibly during the interviews and focus groups

they may not want to participate for whatever reason. By stating specifically on the consent form

that individuals have the right to withdraw from anytime from this study, we believe, as well as

reminding the participants that they can withdraw from the study at any time, this is how we will

uphold this first principle. When it comes to concern for welfare. We as researchers abide by

providing accurate and accessible information as well as considering potential impacts on

participants' physical and mental health, their social or economic circumstances and their

privacy. We plan to abide by this principle by showing participants our findings once the study is

completed. If participants do not agree with the findings, we will simply get rid of them; not

publish them as per what it states in the consent form. As we mentioned before CAS workers

deal with high stress and trauma while on the job. We recognize that some of the interview

questions we may ask can possibly make participants uncomfortable or they may just not want to

answer that specific question To ensure concern for welfare (refer to appendix B), we are going

to give the participants the right to withdraw from this study at any point in the study as well as

allowing them to not answer certain questions that they feel uncomfortable with. The last

principle that we researchers abide by is justice. We believe that participants that are studying in

the research deserve to be treated fairly and equitably. A big factor that we consider when it

comes to the principle of justice is power imbalance.

ASSIGNMENT 3 14

Appendix A: Recruitment Flyer (CAS Workers)

PARTICIPANTS WANTED FOR RESEARCH TO BRING IN YOUR OWN STORIES

AND EXPERIENCES AS A CHILD WELFARE WORKERS IN CHILDREN AID

SOCIETY TORONTO

Are you:

A Children’s Aid Society (CAS) worker in Toronto, Ontario with at least 5 to 20 or

more years of experience in the field.

If you have answered yes, you are invited to volunteer for a study that invites you to address

your perspectives.

For this study you will be asked to participate in a one-on-one in depth interview that is

semi-structured that is about 1-1.5 hours to talk about your experience. Once the interview

portion is completed. Subsequently, a focus group will be conducted amongst other CAS

workers who took part in the interviews.

If you are interested in participating in this study or want more information, please contact:

Email: [email protected]
ASSIGNMENT 3 15

Appendix B: Letter of Introduction and Informed Consent Form (CAS workers)

Study Title: Exploring your experiences as a CAS worker in Toronto, Ontario relating to anti-
black racism training.

Principal Investigators
Ruth Marie Wilson, PhD
York University

Research Coordinators
Charlotte Tanga-An (BSW)
Zahra Abukar (BSW)
Joseph Choi (BSW)
York University
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Partnerships
Ontario CAS Reference Group

Introduction
You have been invited to a research study because you are employed as a Children’s Aid Society
worker (CAS) for 5-20 years or over in Toronto, Ontario. And were given a recruitment flyer
from your supervisors within your agencies. Please carefully read this consent form so you are
aware of what your participation involves.

Who is conducting the research?

This research project has been made by a team of principal investigators, research coordinators,
and assisted by our partnership with the Ontario CAS reference group. The Ontario CAS
reference group consists of 10 African Canadian workers and allies from CAS agencies across
Ontario. This partnership is for them to provide us researchers their perspective and insight into
the child welfare system and the racial disproportionality of African Canadian children/families
in the system. All the names and contact are listed above.

Explanation of Procedures
This study is designed for us researchers to ask questions and explore your experiences as a CAS
worker in Toronto, Ontario relating to anti-black racism training in connection with the racial
disproportionality of Black Children in the child welfare system. Your participation in this study
involves a one time interview that is one-on-one lasting from 1-1.5 hours. The interviews will be
ASSIGNMENT 3 16

conducted by me (Joseph choi), as well as my other team members like Charlotte Tanga-An, and
Zahra Abukar. Upon completion of the one-on-one interviews, you will be asked to participate in
a focus group with other CAS workers that have participated in the interviews. The reason we
are conducting the focus group is by facilitating a conversation about your unique realities and
experiences with anti-black racism training among CAS workers, who vary in racial ethnicity
and expertise in the field. We hope to successfully capture similarities and differences of stories
that can be subsequently translated into themes.

Purpose and Background

The purpose of this study is: explore your experiences as a CAS worker in Toronto, Ontario
relating to anti-black racism training in connection with the racial disproportionality of Black
Children in the child welfare system.

We are completing this research proposal to finish a major assignment. As well, your results will
contribute to our major research proposal paper.

The Research Process

If you want to volunteer in this study, you will be asked to do the following steps:
1) Signing the Consent Form
Sign the York University consent form. Please take your time in reading this form. If you have
any questions, please contact the email above and we will address any questions. If you do
choose to participate, we will be going over this consent form during the interview.
2) Meeting Spot and Time Arrangements
The interview and focus group will take place at York University that is in a private room that is
secured with privacy to uphold confidentiality. Parking fees will be covered by us. You and
Joseph Choi will arrange a time to meet with the email provided above.
3) Review Interview Guide
Please take your time in reviewing the interview guide to see what type of questions that are
going to be asked. Feel free to bring a pen or notebook to document your answers or bring in any
questions.
3) Review Focus Group Guide
Please take your time in reviewing the focus group guide to see what type of questions that are
going to be asked. Feel free to bring a pen or notebook to document your answers or bring in any
questions.
5) Meet For the Interview and Focus Group
You will meet the researcher at the agreed upon interview time. The interviews will last from 1-
1.5 hours. There will be just one interview for this study. Subsequently, one focus group will
occur shortly after a 1 hour break. The focus group session will last for 2-3 hours.
6) Choice of Video Recording or Audio Recording
As researchers a way we collect data is by using video recording or audio recording. We realize
that a video can alter the responses because of one being visually filmed. That is why we will be
ASSIGNMENT 3 17

giving you an option of what you want to record responses with. Please check your preferred
method:
o A video recording.
o Audio recording.
7) Review Transcription
Once we have transcribed the interview and focus group, you will get the chance to read the
transcript, if you would like to. The transcripts will be given to you in 14 days. Once you have
made the decision that we can move forward with our findings, we will proceed to complete the
research proposal paper.

Potential Risks
There are no physical or psychological risks associated with this study. We as a group
acknowledge that as CAS workers and their day to day job experiences can be traumatizing as
you see a lot of different experiences and cases while on the job. We acknowledge that people
may not be comfortable about talking about certain issues. You are welcome to withdraw out this
research at any time during the interview process.

Potential Benefits
The anticipated benefit of your participation for this study is the opportunity to discuss your
perceptions, feelings, and concerns related to CAS workers training on Anti-Black racism in
connection with the racial disproportionality in Black children in the child welfare system.

Compensation
To express our thanks for participating in this study you will be compensated with a $30 gift card
at the end of the focus group. Food and refreshments will be provided as well.

Voluntary Participation and Withdrawal

Your participation is completely voluntary. You have the right to withdraw from the study at
ANY point during or before the interview or focus group and the video or audio recording will
be destroyed. During the interview and focus group, you have the right not to answer certain
questions that you do not want to discuss or which makes you feel uncomfortable.

Confidentiality
The information that is collected during this study WILL BE confidential and be kept in a secure
premises. Only the researchers WILL have access to the data and information. In terms of names.
There WILL NOT be any identifying names. Before the interview you will be given a code
number and the code will refer to your names (e.g. Worker #001). No personal information of
your identity will ever be included in our research. You will constantly be reminded by
researchers about confidentiality before and after the interview, as well as before and after the
focus group. You will also be asked to review/edit the interview transcriptions as well approve
ASSIGNMENT 3 18

the final information to make sure that you are fully comfortable with what is being transcribed
but as well protecting your identity. All the information in this research is NOT going to be
released to any other parties for any reason whatsoever. The audio or video recordings as well as
the interview transcripts will all be kept in a secured file on a computer that requires a password
to access the files. The computer will be stored in the researchers home.

Confirmation of Agreement
Your signature below lets us know that you have read the information in this form and have had
the chance to ask questions about the study. Even though your signature states you agree to
participate in this study you are welcome to withdraw at any point of the study.

______________________________
Name of Participant (Please print)

______________________________ ________________________
Signature of Participant Date

Appendix C: Confidentiality Agreement between members involved in the research project

ASSIGNMENT 3 19

Principal Investigator
Dr. Ruth Marie Wilson, Associate professor
Faculty of Social Work
York University

This project is based on principles of voluntary, informed consent and confidentiality for all
participants. The very careful procedures observed for protecting research participants will be
undermined if all people involved with the research do not maintain professional ethical
standards of confidentiality and consent in their interactions with participants. This applies to
researchers, research assistants, project coordinators and staff or partner agencies. All
information obtained during the course of the research which concerns participants, their
families, or the organizations they represent, is privileged information, whether it relates to the
interview itself or is extraneous information learned by interviewers during the performance of
their work.

Privacy and Confidentiality

All information collected will be collected in Dr. Wilson’s locked cabinetry in a secure
environment and her encrypted password-protected computer. The Research Ethics Program may
have access to confidential data and consent information for the purpose of quality assurance to
ensure that policies and guidelines follow requires procedures. If this study is selected for a
quality assurance review, all information is subject to the same level of confidentiality.

Oath of Confidentiality
I hereby confirm that I will respect potential participants’ right to refuse to be involved in this
study. Their refusal to participate, or their decisions to withdraw, from the study will no affect
their access to services. I will hold in absolute confidence any and all information about
participants about which I may become aware in the course of my involvement with the project
conducted by York University. I further commit to never discussing respondents with anyone
outside the research team.

Appendix D: Confidentiality Pledge form

ASSIGNMENT 3 20

I understand that during my experiences at this focus group, I may hear information about

other participants that are of a personal or sensitive nature.

I agree not to disclose or discuss anything about my fellow participants discussed in the

group outside of the group meeting.

I will make every effort to be aware of and sensitive to the confidence and trust placed with

me in receiving that information.

Signature of Study Participant__________________________________________

Print Name of Study Participant________________________________________

Print Name of Study Coordinator_______________________________________

Signature of Study Participant Date______________________________________

Signature of Study Coordinator Date_____________________________________

Appendix E: Interview Guide

ASSIGNMENT 3 21

1. Overrepresentation of Black children

- What is your experience like in the child welfare system as a worker?
- What is your experience working with Black families? Can you talk about your
experiences working with children/families from Black communities ?

2. Your views on the overrepresentation of Black children?

- What factors do you think are behind it?
- Not all child welfare workers carry racial biases but do you think that racial bias among CAS
workers contributes to the overrepresentation of Black children in the child welfare system?
- How do you think we can change this issue? Where does it start?
3. Training around anti-black racism.
- What kind of training is offered in your agency? Is it specifically tied to anti-black racism
training?
- How is anti-black racism training offered in your agency? (What important concepts are
taught?)
- Do you find that the training offered at your agency effective when it comes to working with
Black children/families?
- Does your agency provide consistent training when it comes to anti-black racism? Is it
mandatory or optional?
- If anti-black racism training is offered in your agency, how long does one session typically
take? Do you feel this is enough time to carry out an effective training session that fully
encapsulates an anti-black racism approach?
4. Other concepts to consider
- Which concepts do you find important to evaluate if we would want to have access to a global
view of the causes of overrepresentation of Black children in child welfare?

Appendix F: Focus Group Guide

ASSIGNMENT 3 22

First 20 minutes: Arrival, greeting, informed consent, honoraria

-Arrival and greeting: child welfare workers arrive, are greeted by researchers, help themselves
to food
-Informed Consent process and confidentiality pledge form: researchers individually review and
sign the consent form, along with the confidentiality pledge form with each participant, present
honoraria and transit fare

30 minutes: Introduction, group agreement

-Researchers introduce themselves and the research project
-Group Agreement: researchers invite participants to establish guidelines for communication in
group. Emphasize confidentiality, voluntary consent, mutual respect. Review limits to
confidentiality, and freedom to withdraw. Note availability of support person during group and
referrals after group, for participants experiencing distress.

45-90 minutes: Focus group discussions (Sample questions and probes)

1. Overrepresentation of Black families in the child welfare system

A study suggests that Black children, compared to White children in Ontario, are 41% more
likely to be investigated, 64% more likely to encounter substantiated maltreatment, 49% more
likely to be placed in ongoing services, and 57% more likely to result in an out-of-home care
placement.

What is your experience like in the child welfare system as a worker? (Probes: empowering,
oppressive, racist, similar to others, different than others)

2. Presence of anti-black racism training

In a study where Afro-Carribean families were interviewed about their experiences in navigating
through the child welfare system in Toronto, a theme that was generated from the interviews of
Afro-Carribean mothers was the lack of cultural awareness of child welfare workers.

What kind of training is offered in your agency? Is it specifically tied to anti-black racism
training?

If not, does the training dedicate some area to discuss about racial and ethnic issues? Or is there
some effort towards structuring the training based on an anti-black racism framework?

3. Amount of anti-black racism training

A study, using focus groups, has displayed evidence of inadequate knowledge and training on
cultural and racial issues received by child welfare workers from a Children’s Aid Society in
Ontario. A worker claimed she/he has been trained, but noted that the training was done a decade
ago. The worker also mentioned that if she/he recalled being trained, it had been likely outdated.
ASSIGNMENT 3 23

If anti-black racism training is offered in your agency, how many sessions are typically held?
Within a month? Within a year?

If anti-black racism training is offered in your agency, how long does one session typically take?
Do you feel this is enough time to carry out an effective training session that fully encapsulates
an anti-black racism approach?

4. Effectiveness of anti-black racism training

If anti-black racism is offered in your agency, do you find yourselves meaningfully engaged?
Are you given room or space to fully express your thoughts and opinions? Do you notice a
difference in your attitude and behaviour post-training?

If anti-black racism is not offered in your agency, do you find the current training to be effective
at employing an anti-black racism framework?

5. Recommendations for strengthening an anti-black racism approach in the child welfare

system

Studies have confirmed that Black families are disproportionately represented in the child
welfare system in Canada. Other studies have suggested that this could be linked to the lack of
anti-oppressive training or anti-racism training.

Other than the need for more anti-black racism training, what other changes should be in place to
create a more just and equitable child welfare system?

60 minutes: Closure
-Researchers review important points from discussion, clarify and confirm
-Review confidentiality, and what will be done with the information
-Review availability of support and referrals for families experiencing distress

Appendix F: Our Concepts

ASSIGNMENT 3 24

Experiences and perceptions The racial disproportionality of

from child welfare workers Black children in the child
regarding anti-black racism welfare system
training.

References
ASSIGNMENT 3 25

Access Alliance Multicultural Health and Community Services (2011). Community- Based

Research Toolkit: Resource for Doing Research with Community for Social Change.

Toronto: Access Alliance Multicultural Health and Community Services.

https://accessalliance.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/CBR_Toolkit_1_-Jan2012.pdf

Adjei, P., & Minka, E. (2018). Black parents ask for a second look: Parenting under “White”

Child Protection rules in Canada. Children and Youth Services Review, 94, 511–524.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.08.030

Antwi-Boasiako, K., King, B., Fallon, B., Trocmé, N., Fluke, J., Chabot, M., & Esposito, T.

(2020). Differences and disparities over time: Black and White families investigated by

Ontario’s child welfare system. Child Abuse & Neglect, 107, 104618.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104618

Boatswain-Kyte, A., Esposito, T., Trocmé, N., & Boatswain-Kyte, A. (2020). A longitudinal

jurisdictional study of Black children reported to child protection services in Quebec,

Canada. Children and Youth Services Review, 116, 105219.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105219

Cénat, J. M., Noorishad, P.-G., Czechowski, K., McIntee, S.-E., & Mukunzi, J. N. (2020). Racial

disparities in child welfare in Ontario (Canada) and training on ethnocultural diversity:

An innovative mixed-methods study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 108, 104659.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104659

Clarke, J. (2011). The challenges of child welfare involvement for Afro-Caribbean families in

Toronto. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(2), 274–283.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.09.010
ASSIGNMENT 3 26

King, B., Fallon, B., Boyd, R., Black, T., Antwi-Boasiako, K., & O’Connor, C. (2017). Factors

associated with racial differences in child welfare investigative decision-making in

Ontario, Canada. Child Abuse & Neglect, 73, 89–105.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.09.027

Lietz, C. A., & Zayas, L. E. (2010). Evaluating Qualitative Research for Social Work

Practitioners. Advances in Social Work, 11(2), 188–202. https://doi.org/10.18060/589

Maheux, H., & Do, D. (2019, February 27). Diversity of the Black population in Canada: An

overview. Statistics Canada.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-657-x/89-657-x2019002-eng.htm

Ontario Human Rights Commission. (2018, February). Interrupted childhoods:

Over-representation of Indigenous and Black children in Ontario child welfare. Ontario

Human Rights Commission. http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/interrupted-childhoods

Pon, G., Clarke, J., & Phillips, D. (2017). Who’s protecting whom? Child welfare and policing

Black families. In Doing anti-oppressive practice: Social justice social work (pp. 70–83).

Fernwood.

Pon, G., & Gosine, K. (2011). On the Front Lines: The Voices and Experiences of Racialized

Child Welfare Workers in Toronto, Canada. Journal of Progressive Human Services,

22(2), 135–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/10428232.2011.599280

Rehman, A. A., & Alharthi, K. (2016). An Introduction to Research Paradigms. International

Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(8), 51–59. Retrieved from

http://www.ijeionline.com/attachments/article/57/IJEI.Vol.3.No.8.05.pdf

Stewart, D. W., Shamdasani, P. N., & Rook, D. W. (2009). Group Depth Interview: Focus Group
ASSIGNMENT 3 27

Research. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Applied Social

Research Methods (2nd ed., pp. 1–29). SAGE Publications.

Turner, T. (2016). One Vision One Voice: Changing the Ontario Child Welfare System to Better

Serve African Canadians. Practice Framework Part 1: Research Report. Toronto, ON:

Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies.

Wilkinson, L., Bouma, G. D., & Carland, S. (2019). The Research Process (4th ed.). Oxford

University Press.