NYS OCFS and the Local Departments of Social Services wanted to obtain the best possible returns on their investment on mobile technology deployment. The original goals state that increasing caseworker productivity by allowing more work opportunities was highly desired. Laptops could be used at times during the day when caseworkers could not access their computer. Thus, if caseworkers could use those times more effectively, productivity would increase.

Assessment findings show that to maximize returns from the laptop investment, policies, procedures, and practices must be addressed within each LDSS. This extended assessment and previous work suggests that the use of technology alone does not drive substantial productivity increases in CPS casework. More specifically, it seems that caseworkers’ productivity may be far more influenced by their current caseload size and polices and management practices that surround mobility. Technology is a core component of this organizational change but in the current environment, its highest value may be difficult to attain.

This extended assessment and previous work suggests that the use of technology alone does not drive substantial productivity increases in CPS casework. More specifically, it seems that caseworkers’ productivity may be far more influenced by current caseload size and polices and management practices that surround mobility.

Maximizing the investment starts with wireless connectivity. A laptop is only a piece of hardware until it has a wireless connection. Once that is in place, the laptop becomes a useful tool for caseworkers. If a LDSS chooses not to provide wireless connectivity, the technology cannot be used to its fullest capability and, subsequently, the return on the laptop investment will decrease. Not addressing this fundamental component will result in fewer benefits and less return on investment.

Once the core technology and connectivity pieces are in place, policies and practices gain more importance. Creating supportive policies about compensation for work done outside regular work hours and scheduling “office-time” are critical. When a LDSS creates policies which promote some type of compensation, even with pre-approval processes or over time limits, the likelihood of using the laptop increases. When policies are created that discourage or restrict use, the propensity to experiment with using the laptop and likelihood of using the laptop decreases.

The existence of uniform policies for scheduling and working in the field are critical to gaining the most benefits. The lack of a blanket policy that describes laptop use in the field causes each supervisor to set his or her own policies, which creates inconsistent use across districts and fosters frustration for caseworkers. One supervisor in this assessment, for instance, discouraged caseworkers from using the laptop in the field to document notes. He felt that sitting in a public parking lot or at a public library was not acceptable and reported that caseworkers should drive back to the office to document notes. In that same district, another supervisor openly supported using the laptops in the field and the caseworkers were able to document notes without having to travel back to the office. When caseworkers talked to each other, both were openly frustrated with the conflicting policies.

If a LDSS does choose to set policy that encourages use in the field and promotes flexible scheduling of field visits, the likelihood of using the laptop increases. Similarly, if the policy discourages use in the field, caseworkers will be less apt to bring the laptops with them and subsequently miss many opportunities for use.