research on social work practice

Subject List
Take a Tour
For Authors
Subscriber Services
Publications
African American Studies
African Studies
American Literature
Anthropology
Architecture Planning and Preservation
Art History
Atlantic History
Biblical Studies
British and Irish Literature
Childhood Studies
Chinese Studies
Cinema and Media Studies
Communication
Criminology
Environmental Science
Evolutionary Biology
International Law
International Relations
Islamic Studies
Jewish Studies
Latin American Studies
Latino Studies
Linguistics
Literary and Critical Theory
Medieval Studies
Military History
Political Science
Public Health
Renaissance and Reformation

Social Work

Urban Studies
Victorian Literature
Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Social Work Research Methods

Introduction.

History of Social Work Research Methods
Feasibility Issues Influencing the Research Process
Measurement Methods
Existing Scales
Group Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Evaluating Outcome
Single-System Designs for Evaluating Outcome
Program Evaluation
Surveys and Sampling
Introductory Statistics Texts
Advanced Aspects of Inferential Statistics
Qualitative Research Methods
Qualitative Data Analysis
Historical Research Methods
Meta-Analysis and Systematic Reviews
Research Ethics
Culturally Competent Research Methods
Teaching Social Work Research Methods

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

Child Welfare Effectiveness
Immigration and Child Welfare
International Human Trafficking
Find more forthcoming articles...
Export Citations
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Social Work Research Methods by Allen Rubin LAST REVIEWED: 28 April 2017 LAST MODIFIED: 14 December 2009 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195389678-0008

Social work research means conducting an investigation in accordance with the scientific method. The aim of social work research is to build the social work knowledge base in order to solve practical problems in social work practice or social policy. Investigating phenomena in accordance with the scientific method requires maximal adherence to empirical principles, such as basing conclusions on observations that have been gathered in a systematic, comprehensive, and objective fashion. The resources in this entry discuss how to do that as well as how to utilize and teach research methods in social work. Other professions and disciplines commonly produce applied research that can guide social policy or social work practice. Yet no commonly accepted distinction exists at this time between social work research methods and research methods in allied fields relevant to social work. Consequently useful references pertaining to research methods in allied fields that can be applied to social work research are included in this entry.

This section includes basic textbooks that are used in courses on social work research methods. Considerable variation exists between textbooks on the broad topic of social work research methods. Some are comprehensive and delve into topics deeply and at a more advanced level than others. That variation is due in part to the different needs of instructors at the undergraduate and graduate levels of social work education. Most instructors at the undergraduate level prefer shorter and relatively simplified texts; however, some instructors teaching introductory master’s courses on research prefer such texts too. The texts in this section that might best fit their preferences are by Yegidis and Weinbach 2009 and Rubin and Babbie 2007 . The remaining books might fit the needs of instructors at both levels who prefer a more comprehensive and deeper coverage of research methods. Among them Rubin and Babbie 2008 is perhaps the most extensive and is often used at the doctoral level as well as the master’s and undergraduate levels. Also extensive are Drake and Jonson-Reid 2007 , Grinnell and Unrau 2007 , Kreuger and Neuman 2006 , and Thyer 2001 . What distinguishes Drake and Jonson-Reid 2007 is its heavy inclusion of statistical and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) content integrated with each chapter. Grinnell and Unrau 2007 and Thyer 2001 are unique in that they are edited volumes with different authors for each chapter. Kreuger and Neuman 2006 takes Neuman’s social sciences research text and adapts it to social work. The Practitioner’s Guide to Using Research for Evidence-based Practice ( Rubin 2007 ) emphasizes the critical appraisal of research, covering basic research methods content in a relatively simplified format for instructors who want to teach research methods as part of the evidence-based practice process instead of with the aim of teaching students how to produce research.

Drake, Brett, and Melissa Jonson-Reid. 2007. Social work research methods: From conceptualization to dissemination . Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

This introductory text is distinguished by its use of many evidence-based practice examples and its heavy coverage of statistical and computer analysis of data.

Grinnell, Richard M., and Yvonne A. Unrau, eds. 2007. Social work research and evaluation: Quantitative and qualitative approaches . 8th ed. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

Contains chapters written by different authors, each focusing on a comprehensive range of social work research topics.

Kreuger, Larry W., and W. Lawrence Neuman. 2006. Social work research methods: Qualitative and quantitative applications . Boston: Pearson, Allyn, and Bacon.

An adaptation to social work of Neuman's social sciences research methods text. Its framework emphasizes comparing quantitative and qualitative approaches. Despite its title, quantitative methods receive more attention than qualitative methods, although it does contain considerable qualitative content.

Rubin, Allen. 2007. Practitioner’s guide to using research for evidence-based practice . Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

This text focuses on understanding quantitative and qualitative research methods and designs for the purpose of appraising research as part of the evidence-based practice process. It also includes chapters on instruments for assessment and monitoring practice outcomes. It can be used at the graduate or undergraduate level.

Rubin, Allen, and Earl R. Babbie. 2007. Essential research methods for social work . Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks Cole.

This is a shorter and less advanced version of Rubin and Babbie 2008 . It can be used for research methods courses at the undergraduate or master's levels of social work education.

Rubin, Allen, and Earl R. Babbie. Research Methods for Social Work . 6th ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks Cole, 2008.

This comprehensive text focuses on producing quantitative and qualitative research as well as utilizing such research as part of the evidence-based practice process. It is widely used for teaching research methods courses at the undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral levels of social work education.

Thyer, Bruce A., ed. 2001 The handbook of social work research methods . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

This comprehensive compendium includes twenty-nine chapters written by esteemed leaders in social work research. It covers quantitative and qualitative methods as well as general issues.

Yegidis, Bonnie L., and Robert W. Weinbach. 2009. Research methods for social workers . 6th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

This introductory paperback text covers a broad range of social work research methods and does so in a briefer fashion than most lengthier, hardcover introductory research methods texts.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

About Social Work »
Meet the Editorial Board »
Adolescent Depression
Adolescent Pregnancy
Adolescents
Adoption Home Study Assessments
Adult Protective Services in the United States
African Americans
Aging out of foster care
Aging, Physical Health and
Alcohol and Drug Abuse Problems
Alcohol and Drug Problems, Prevention of Adolescent and Yo...
Alcohol Problems: Practice Interventions
Alcohol Use Disorder
Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias
Anti-Oppressive Practice
Asian Americans
Asian-American Youth
Autism Spectrum Disorders
Baccalaureate Social Workers
Behavioral Health
Behavioral Social Work Practice
Bereavement Practice
Bisexuality
Brief Therapies in Social Work: Task-Centered Model and So...
Bullying and Social Work Intervention
Canadian Social Welfare, History of
Case Management in Mental Health in the United States
Central American Migration to the United States
Child Maltreatment Prevention
Child Neglect and Emotional Maltreatment
Child Poverty
Child Sexual Abuse
Child Welfare
Child Welfare and Child Protection in Europe, History of
Child Welfare Practice with LGBTQ Youth and Families
Children of Incarcerated Parents
Christianity and Social Work
Chronic Illness
Clinical Social Work Practice with Adult Lesbians
Clinical Social Work Practice with Males
Cognitive Behavior Therapies with Diverse and Stressed Pop...
Cognitive Processing Therapy
Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy
Community Development
Community Policing
Community-Needs Assessment
Comparative Social Work
Computational Social Welfare: Applying Data Science in Soc...
Conflict Resolution
Council on Social Work Education
Counseling Female Offenders
Criminal Justice
Crisis Interventions
Cultural Competence and Ethnic Sensitive Practice
Culture, Ethnicity, Substance Use, and Substance Use Disor...
Dementia Care
Dementia Care, Ethical Aspects of
Depression and Cancer
Development and Infancy (Birth to Age Three)
Differential Response in Child Welfare
Digital Storytelling for Social Work Interventions
Direct Practice in Social Work
Disabilities
Disability and Disability Culture
Domestic Violence Among Immigrants
Early Pregnancy and Parenthood Among Child Welfare–Involve...
Eating Disorders
Ecological Framework
Elder Mistreatment
End-of-Life Decisions
Epigenetics for Social Workers
Ethical Issues in Social Work and Technology
Ethics and Values in Social Work
European Institutions and Social Work
European Union, Justice and Home Affairs in the
Evidence-based Social Work Practice: Issues, Controversies...
Families with Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual Parents
Family Caregiving
Family Group Conferencing
Family Policy
Family Services
Family Therapy
Family Violence
Fathering Among Families Served By Child Welfare
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders
Field Education
Financial Literacy and Social Work
Financing Health-Care Delivery in the United States
Forensic Social Work
Foster Care
Foster care and siblings
Gender, Violence, and Trauma in Immigration Detention in t...
Generalist Practice and Advanced Generalist Practice
Grounded Theory
Group Work across Populations, Challenges, and Settings
Group Work, Research, Best Practices, and Evidence-based
Harm Reduction
Health Care Reform
Health Disparities
Health Social Work
History of Social Work and Social Welfare, 1900–1950
History of Social Work and Social Welfare, 1950-1980
History of Social Work and Social Welfare, pre-1900
History of Social Work from 1980-2014
History of Social Work in China
History of Social Work in Northern Ireland
History of Social Work in the Republic of Ireland
History of Social Work in the United Kingdom
HIV/AIDS and Children
HIV/AIDS Prevention with Adolescents
Homelessness
Homelessness: Ending Homelessness as a Grand Challenge
Homelessness Outside the United States
Human Needs
Human Trafficking, Victims of
Immigrant Integration in the United States
Immigrant Policy in the United States
Immigrants and Refugees
Immigrants and Refugees: Evidence-based Social Work Practi...
Immigration and Health Disparities
Immigration and Intimate Partner Violence
Immigration and Poverty
Immigration and Spirituality
Immigration and Substance Use
Immigration and Trauma
Impaired Professionals
Indigenous Peoples
Individual Placement and Support (IPS) Supported Employmen...
In-home Child Welfare Services
Intergenerational Transmission of Maltreatment
International Social Welfare
International Social Work
International Social Work and Education
International Social Work and Social Welfare in Southern A...
Internet and Video Game Addiction
Interpersonal Psychotherapy
Intervention with Traumatized Populations
Intimate-Partner Violence
Juvenile Justice
Kinship Care
Korean Americans
Latinos and Latinas
Law, Social Work and the
LGBTQ Populations and Social Work
Mainland European Social Work, History of
Major Depressive Disorder
Management and Administration in Social Work
Maternal Mental Health
Medical Illness
Men: Health and Mental Health Care
Mental Health
Mental Health Diagnosis and the Addictive Substance Disord...
Mental Health Needs of Older People, Assessing the
Mental Illness: Children
Mental Illness: Elders
Microskills
Middle East and North Africa, International Social Work an...
Military Social Work
Mixed Methods Research
Moral distress and injury in social work
Motivational Interviewing
Multiculturalism
Native Americans
Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders
Neighborhood Social Cohesion
Neuroscience and Social Work
Nicotine Dependence
Organizational Development and Change
Pain Management
Palliative Care
Palliative Care: Evolution and Scope of Practice
Pandemics and Social Work
Parent Training
Personalization
Person-in-Environment
Philosophy of Science and Social Work
Physical Disabilities
Podcasts and Social Work
Police Social Work
Political Social Work in the United States
Positive Youth Development
Postsecondary Education Experiences and Attainment Among Y...
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
Practice Interventions and Aging
Practice Interventions with Adolescents
Practice Research
Primary Prevention in the 21st Century
Productive Engagement of Older Adults
Profession, Social Work
Program Development and Grant Writing
Promoting Smart Decarceration as a Grand Challenge
Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Psychoanalysis and Psychodynamic Theory
Psychoeducation
Psychometrics
Psychopathology and Social Work Practice
Psychopharmacology and Social Work Practice
Psychosocial Framework
Psychosocial Intervention with Women
Psychotherapy and Social Work
Race and Racism
Readmission Policies in Europe
Redefining Police Interactions with People Experiencing Me...
Rehabilitation
Religiously Affiliated Agencies
Reproductive Health
Restorative Justice
Risk Assessment in Child Protection Services
Risk Management in Social Work
Rural Social Work in China
Rural Social Work Practice
School Social Work
School Violence
School-Based Delinquency Prevention
Services and Programs for Pregnant and Parenting Youth
Severe and Persistent Mental Illness: Adults
Sexual and Gender Minority Immigrants, Refugees, and Asylu...
Sexual Assault
Single-System Research Designs
Social and Economic Impact of US Immigration Policies on U...
Social Development
Social Insurance and Social Justice
Social Justice and Social Work
Social Movements
Social Planning
Social Policy
Social Policy in Denmark
Social Security in the United States (OASDHI)
Social Work and Islam
Social Work and Social Welfare in East, West, and Central ...
Social Work and Social Welfare in Europe
Social Work Education and Research
Social Work Leadership
Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries Contributing to the Cla...
Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries contributing to the fou...
Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries Who Contributed to Soci...
Social Work Regulation
Social Work Research Methods
Social Work with Interpreters
Solution-Focused Therapy
Strategic Planning
Strengths Perspective
Strengths-Based Models in Social Work
Supplemental Security Income
Survey Research
Sustainability: Creating Social Responses to a Changing En...
Syrian Refugees in Turkey
Task-Centered Practice
Technology Adoption in Social Work Education
Technology, Human Relationships, and Human Interaction
Technology in Social Work
Terminal Illness
The Impact of Systemic Racism on Latinxs’ Experiences with...
Transdisciplinary Science
Translational Science and Social Work
Transnational Perspectives in Social Work
Transtheoretical Model of Change
Trauma-Informed Care
Triangulation
Tribal child welfare practice in the United States
United States, History of Social Welfare in the
Universal Basic Income
Veteran Services
Vicarious Trauma and Resilience in Social Work Practice wi...
Vicarious Trauma Redefining PTSD
Victim Services
Virtual Reality and Social Work
Welfare State Reform in France
Welfare State Theory
Women and Macro Social Work Practice
Women's Health Care
Work and Family in the German Welfare State
Workforce Development of Social Workers Pre- and Post-Empl...
Working with Non-Voluntary and Mandated Clients
Young and Adolescent Lesbians
Youth at Risk
Youth Services
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Legal Notice
Accessibility

[66.249.64.20|81.177.182.174]
81.177.182.174

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
HHS Author Manuscripts

The Pursuit of Quality for Social Work Practice: Three Generations and Counting

Enola proctor.

Shanti K. Khinduka Distinguished Professor and director of the Center for Mental Health Services Research at Washington University in St. Louis

Social work addresses some of the most complex and intractable human and social problems: poverty, mental illness, addiction, homelessness, and child abuse. Our field may be distinct among professions for its efforts to ameliorate the toughest societal problems, experienced by society’s most vulnerable, while working from under-resourced institutions and settings. Members of our profession are underpaid, and most of our agencies lack the data infrastructure required for rigorous assessment and evaluation.

Moreover, social work confronts these challenges as it is ethically bound to deliver high-quality services. Policy and regulatory requirements increasingly demand that social work deliver and document the effectiveness of highest quality interventions and restrict reimbursement to those services that are documented as evidence based. Social work’s future, its very survival, depends on our ability to deliver services with a solid base of evidence and to document their effectiveness. In the words of the American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare (AASWSW; n.d.) , social work seeks to “champion social progress powered by science.” The research community needs to support practice through innovative and rigorous science that advances the evidence for interventions to address social work’s grand challenges.

My work seeks to improve the quality of social work practice by pursuing answers to three questions:

What interventions and services are most effective and thus should be delivered in social work practice?
How do we measure the impact of those interventions and services? (That is, what outcomes do our interventions achieve?)
How do we implement the highest quality interventions?

This paper describes this work, demonstrates the substantive and methodological progression across the three questions, assesses what we have learned, and forecasts a research agenda for what we still need to learn. Given Aaron Rosen’s role as my PhD mentor and our many years of collaboration, the paper also addresses the role of research mentoring in advancing our profession’s knowledge base.

What Interventions and Services Are Most Effective?

Answering the question “What services are effective?” requires rigorous testing of clearly specified interventions. The first paper I coauthored with Aaron Rosen—“Specifying the Treatment Process: The Basis for Effectiveness Research” ( Rosen & Proctor, 1978 )—provided a framework for evaluating intervention effectiveness. At that time, process and outcomes were jumbled and intertwined concepts. Social work interventions were rarely specified beyond theoretical orientation or level of focus: casework (or direct practice); group work; and macro practice, which included community, agency-level, and policy-focused practice. Moreover, interventions were not named, nor were their components clearly identified. We recognized that gross descriptions of interventions obstruct professional training, preclude fidelity assessment, and prevent accurate tests of effectiveness. Thus, in a series of papers, Rosen and I advocated that social work interventions be specified, clearly labeled, and operationally defined, measured, and tested.

Specifying Interventions

Such specification of interventions is essential to two professional responsibilities: professional education and demonstrating the effectiveness of the field’s interventions. Without specification, interventions cannot be taught. Social work education is all about equipping students with skills to deliver interventions, programs, services, administrative practices, and policies. Teaching interventions requires an ability to name, define, see them in action, measure their presence (or absence), assess the fidelity with which they are delivered, and give feedback to students on how to increase or refine the associated skills.

To advance testing the effectiveness of social work interventions, we drew distinctions between interventions and outcomes and proposed these two constructs as the foci for effectiveness research. We defined interventions as practitioner behaviors that can be volitionally manipulated by practitioners (used or not, varied in intensity and timing), that are defined in detail, can be reliably measured, and can be linked to specific identified outcomes ( Rosen & Proctor, 1978 ; Rosen & Proctor, 1981 ). This definition foreshadowed the development of treatment manuals, lists of specific evidence-based practices, and calls for monitoring intervention fidelity. Recognizing the variety of intervention types, and to advance their more precise definition and measurement, we proposed that interventions be distinguished in terms of their complexity. Interventive responses comprise discrete or single responses, such as affirmation, expression of empathy, or positive reinforcement. Interventive strategies comprise several different actions that are, together, linked to a designated outcome, such as motivational interviewing. Most complex are interventive programs , which are a variety of intervention actions organized and integrated as a total treatment package; collaborative care for depression or community assertive treatment are examples. To strengthen the professional knowledge base, we also called for social work effectiveness research to begin testing the optimal dose and sequencing of intervention components in relation to attainment of desired outcomes.

Advancing Intervention Effectiveness Research

Our “specifying paper” also was motivated by the paucity of literature at that time on actual social work interventions. Our literature review of 13 major social work journals over 5 years of published research revealed that only 15% of published social work research addressed interventions. About a third of studies described social problems, and about half explored factors associated with the problem ( Rosen, Proctor, & Staudt, 2003 ). Most troubling was our finding that only 3% of articles described the intervention or its components in sufficient detail for replication in either research or practice. Later, Fraser (2004) found intervention research to comprise only about one fourth of empirical studies in social work. Fortunately, our situation has improved. Intervention research is more frequent in social work publications, thanks largely to the publication policies of the Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research and Research on Social Work Practice .

Research Priorities

Social work faces important and formidable challenges as it advances research on intervention effectiveness. The practitioner who searches the literature or various intervention lists can find more than 500 practices that are named or that are shown to have evidence from rigorous trials that passes a bar to qualify as evidence-based practices. However, our profession still lacks any organized compendium or taxonomy of interventions that are employed in or found to be effective for social work practice. Existing lists of evidence-based practices, although necessary, are insufficient for social work for several reasons. First, as a 2015 National Academies Institute of Medicine (IOM) report—“Psychosocial Interventions for Mental and Substance Use Disorders: A Framework for Establishing Evidence-Based Standards” ( IOM, 2015 )—concluded, too few evidence-based practices have been found to be appropriate for low-resource settings or acceptable to minority groups. Second, existing interventions do not adequately reflect the breadth of social work practice. We have too few evidence-based interventions that can inform effective community organization, case management, referral practice, resource development, administrative practice, or policy. Noting that there is far less literature on evidence-based practices relevant to organizational, community, and policy practice, a social work task force responding to the 2015 IOM report recommended that this gap be a target of our educational and research efforts ( National Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work, 2016 ). And finally, our field—along with other professions that deliver psychosocial interventions—lacks the kinds of procedure codes that can identify the specific interventions we deliver. Documenting social work activities in agency records is increasingly essential for quality assurance and third-party reimbursement.

Future Directions: Research to Advance Evidence on Interventions

Social work has critically important research needs. Our field needs to advance the evidence base on what interventions work for social work populations, practices, and settings. Responding to the 2015 IOM report, the National Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work (2016) identified as a social work priority the development and testing of evidence-based practices relevant to organizational, community, and policy practice. As we advance our intervention effectiveness research, we must respond to the challenge of determining the key mechanisms of change ( National Institute of Mental Health, 2016 ) and identify key modifiable components of packaged interventions ( Rosen & Proctor, 1978 ). We need to explore the optimal dosage, ordering, or adapted bundling of intervention elements and advance robust, feasible ways to measure and increase fidelity ( Jaccard, 2016 ). We also need to conduct research on which interventions are most appropriate, acceptable, and effective with various client groups ( Zayas, 2003 ; Videka, 2003 ).

Documenting the Impact of Interventions: Specifying and Measuring Outcomes

Outcomes are key to documenting the impact of social work interventions. My 1978 “specifying” paper with Rosen emphasized that the effectiveness of social work practice could not be adequately evaluated without clear specification and measurement of various types of outcomes. In that paper, we argued that the profession cannot rely only on an assertion of effectiveness. The field must also calibrate, calculate, and communicate its impact.

The nursing profession’s highly successful campaign, based on outcomes research, positioned that field to claim that “nurses save lives.” Nurse staffing ratios were associated with in-hospital and 30-day mortality, independent of patient characteristics, hospital characteristics, or medical treatment ( Person et al., 2004 ). In contrast, social work has often described—sometimes advertised—itself as the low-cost profession. The claim of “cheapest service” may have some strategic advantage in turf competition with other professions. But social work can do better. Our research base can and should demonstrate the value of our work by naming and quantifying the outcomes—the added value of social work interventions.

As a start to this work—a beginning step in compiling evidence about the impact of social work interventions—our team set out to identify the outcomes associated with social work practice. We felt that identifying and naming outcomes is essential for conveying what social work is about. Moreover, outcomes should serve as the focus for evaluating the effectiveness of social work interventions.

We produced two taxonomies of outcomes reflected in published evaluations of social work interventions ( Proctor, Rosen, & Rhee, 2002 ; Rosen, Proctor, & Staudt, 2003 ). They included such outcomes as change in clients’ social functioning, resource procurement, problem or symptom reduction, and safety. They exemplify the importance of naming and measuring what our profession can contribute to society. Although social work’s growing body of effectiveness research typically reports outcomes of the interventions being tested, the literature has not, in the intervening 20 years, addressed the collective set of outcomes for our field.

Fortunately, the Grand Challenges for Social Work (AASWSW, n.d.) now provide a framework for communicating social work’s goals. They reflect social work’s added value: improving individual and family well-being, strengthening social fabric, and helping to create a more just society. The Grand Challenges for Social Work include ensuring healthy development for all youth, closing the health gap, stopping family violence, advancing long and productive lives, eradicating social isolation, ending homelessness, creating social responses to a changing environment, harnessing technology for social good, promoting smart decarceration, reducing extreme economic inequality, building financial capability for all, and achieving equal opportunity and justice ( AASWSW, n.d. ).

These important goals appropriately reflect much of what we are all about in social work, and our entire field has been galvanized—energized by the power of these grand challenges. However, the grand challenges require setting specific benchmarks—targets that reflect how far our professional actions can expect to take us, or in some areas, how far we have come in meeting the challenge.

For the past decade, care delivery systems and payment reforms have required measures for tracking performance. Quality measures have become critical tools for all service providers and organizations ( IOM, 2015 ). The IOM defines quality of care as “the degree to which … services for individuals and populations increase the likelihood of desired … outcomes and are consistent with current professional knowledge” ( Lohr, 1990 , p. 21). Quality measures are important at multiple levels of service delivery: at the client level, at the practitioner level, at the organization level, and at the policy level. The National Quality Forum has established five criteria for quality measures: They should address (a) the most important, (b) the most scientifically valid, (c) the most feasible or least burdensome, (d) the most usable, and (e) the most harmonious set of measures ( IOM, 2015 .) Quality measures have been advanced by accrediting groups (e.g., the Joint Commission of the National Committee for Quality Assurance), professional societies, and federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. However, quality measures are lacking for key areas of social work practice, including mental health and substance-use treatment. And of the 55 nationally endorsed measures related to mental health and substance use, only two address a psychosocial intervention. Measures used for accreditation and certification purposes often reflect structural capabilities of organizations and their resource use, not the infrastructure required to deliver high-quality services ( IOM, 2015 ). I am not aware of any quality measure developed by our own professional societies or agreed upon across our field.

Future Directions: Research on Quality Monitoring and Measure Development

Although social work as a field lacks a strong tradition of measuring and assessing quality ( Megivern et al., 2007 ; McMillen et al., 2005 ; Proctor, Powell, & McMillen, 2012 ), social work’s role in the quality workforce is becoming better understood ( McMillen & Raffol, 2016 ). The small number of established and endorsed quality measures reflects both limitations in the evidence for effective interventions and challenges in obtaining the detailed information necessary to support quality measurement ( IOM, 2015 ). According to the National Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work (2016) , developing quality measures to capture use of evidence-based interventions is essential for the survival of social work practice in many settings. The task force recommends that social work organizations develop relevant and viable quality measures and that social workers actively influence the implementation of quality measures in their practice settings.

How to Implement Evidence-Based Care

A third and more recent focus of my work addresses this question: How do we implement evidence-based care in agencies and communities? Despite our progress in developing proven interventions, most clients—whether served by social workers or other providers—do not receive evidence-based care. A growing number of studies are assessing the extent to which clients—in specific settings or communities—receive evidence-based interventions. Kohl, Schurer, and Bellamy (2009) examined quality in a core area of social work: training for parents at risk for child maltreatment. The team examined the parent services and their level of empirical support in community agencies, staffed largely by master’s-level social workers. Of 35 identified treatment programs offered to families, only 11% were “well-established empirically supported interventions,” with another 20% containing some hallmarks of empirically supported interventions ( Kohl et al., 2009 ). This study reveals a sizable implementation gap, with most of the programs delivered lacking scientific validation.

Similar quality gaps are apparent in other settings where social workers deliver services. Studies show that only 19.3% of school mental health professionals and 36.8% of community mental health professionals working in Virginia’s schools and community mental health centers report using any evidence-based substance-abuse prevention programs ( Evans, Koch, Brady, Meszaros, & Sadler, 2013 ). In mental health, where social workers have long delivered the bulk of services, only 40% to 50% of people with mental disorders receive any treatment ( Kessler, Chiu, Demler, Merikangas, & Walters, 2005 ; Merikangas et al., 2011 ), and of those receiving treatment, a fraction receive what could be considered “quality” treatment ( Wang, Demler, & Kessler, 2002 ; Wang et al., 2005 ). These and other studies indicate that, despite progress in developing proven interventions, most clients do not receive evidence-based care. In light of the growth of evidence-based practice, this fact is troubling evidence that testing interventions and publishing the findings is not sufficient to improve quality.

So, how do we get these interventions in place? What is needed to enable social workers to deliver, and clients to receive, high-quality care? In addition to developing and testing evidence-based interventions, what else is needed to improve the quality of social work practice? My work has focused on advancing quality of services through two paths.

Making Effective Interventions Accessible to Providers: Intervention Reviews and Taxonomies

First, we have advocated that research evidence be synthesized and made available to front-line practitioners. In a research-active field where new knowledge is constantly produced, practitioners should not be expected to rely on journal publications alone for information about effective approaches to achieve desired outcomes. Mastering a rapidly expanding professional evidence base has been characterized as a nearly unachievable challenge for practitioners ( Greenfield, 2017 ). Reviews should critique and clarify the intervention’s effectiveness as tested in specific settings, populations, and contexts, answering the question, “What works where, and with whom?” Even more valuable are studies of comparative effectiveness—those that answer, “Which intervention approach works better, where, and when?”

Taxonomies of clearly and consistently labeled interventions will enhance their accessibility and the usefulness of research reports and systematic reviews. A pre-requisite is the consistent naming of interventions. A persistent challenge is the wide variation in names or labels for interventive procedures and programs. Our professional activities are the basis for our societal sanction, and they must be capable of being accurately labeled and documented if we are to describe what our profession “does” to advance social welfare. Increasingly, and in short order, that documentation will be in electronic records that are scrutinized by third parties for purposes of reimbursement and assessment of value toward outcome attainment.

How should intervention research and reviews be organized? Currently, several websites provide lists of evidence-based practices, some with links, citations, or information about dissemination and implementation organizations that provide training and facilitation to adopters. Practitioners and administrators find such lists helpful but often note the challenge in determining which are most appropriate for their needs. In the words of one agency leader, “The drug companies are great at presenting [intervention information] in a very easy form to use. We don’t have people coming and saying, ‘Ah, let me tell you about the best evidence-based practice for cognitive behavioral therapy for depression,’” ( Proctor et al., 2007 , p. 483). We have called for the field to devise decision aids for practitioners to enhance access to the best available empirical knowledge about interventions ( Proctor et al., 2002 ; Proctor & Rosen, 2008 ; Rosen et al., 2003 ). We proposed that intervention taxonomies be organized around outcomes pursued in social work practice, and we developed such a taxonomy based on eight domains of outcomes—those most frequently tested in social work journals. Given the field’s progress in identifying its grand challenges, its associated outcomes could well serve as the organizing focus, with research-tested interventions listed for each challenge. Compiling the interventions, programs, and services that are shown—through research—to help achieve one of the challenges would surely advance our field.

We further urged profession-wide efforts to develop social work practice guidelines from intervention taxonomies ( Rosen et al., 2003 ). Practice guidelines are systematically compiled, critiqued, and organized statements about the effectiveness of interventions that are organized in a way to help practitioners select and use the most effective and appropriate approaches for addressing client problems and pursuing desired outcomes.

At that time, we proposed that our published taxonomy of social work interventions could provide a beginning architecture for social work guidelines ( Rosen et al., 2003 ). In 2000, we organized a conference for thought leaders in social work practice. This talented group wrestled with and formulated recommendations for tackling the professional, research, and training requisites to developing social work practice guidelines to enable researchers to access and apply the best available knowledge about interventions ( Rosen et al., 2003 ). Fifteen years later, however, the need remains for social work to synthesize its intervention research. Psychology and psychiatry, along with most fields of medical practice, have developed practice guidelines. Although their acceptance and adherence is fraught with challenges, guidelines make evidence more accessible and enable quality monitoring. Yet, guidelines still do not exist for social work.

The 2015 IOM report, “Psychosocial Interventions for Mental and Substance Use Disorders: A Framework for Establishing Evidence-Based Standards,” includes a conclusion that information on the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions is not routinely available to service consumers, providers, and payers, nor is it synthesized. That 2015 IOM report called for systematic reviews to inform clinical guidelines for psychosocial interventions. This report defined psychosocial interventions broadly, encompassing “interpersonal or informational activities, techniques, or strategies that target biological, behavioral, cognitive, emotional, interpersonal, social, or environmental factors with the aim of reducing symptoms and improving functioning or well-being” ( IOM, 2015 , p. 5). These interventions are social work’s domain; they are delivered in the very settings where social workers dominate (behavioral health, schools, criminal justice, child welfare, and immigrant services); and they encompass populations across the entire lifespan within all sociodemographic groups and vulnerable populations. Accordingly, the National Task Force on Evidence Based Practice in Social Work (2016) has recommended the conduct of more systematic reviews of the evidence supporting social work interventions.

If systematic reviews are to lead to guidelines for evidence-based psychosocial interventions, social work needs to be at the table, and social work research must provide the foundation. Whether social work develops its own guidelines or helps lead the development of profession-independent guidelines as recommended by the IOM committee, guidelines need to be detailed enough to guide practice. That is, they need to be accompanied by treatment manuals and informed by research that details the effect of moderator variables and contextual factors reflecting diverse clientele, social determinants of health, and setting resource challenges. The IOM report “Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust” sets criteria for guideline development processes ( IOM, 2011 ). Moreover, social work systematic reviews of research and any associated evidence-based guidelines need to be organized around meaningful taxonomies.

Advancing the Science of Implementation

As a second path to ensuring the delivery of high-quality care, my research has focused on advancing the science of implementation. Implementation research seeks to inform how to deliver evidence-based interventions, programs, and policies into real-world settings so their benefits can be realized and sustained. The ultimate aim of implementation research is building a base of evidence about the most effective processes and strategies for improving service delivery. Implementation research builds upon effectiveness research then seeks to discover how to use specific implementation strategies and move those interventions into specific settings, extending their availability, reach, and benefits to clients and communities. Accordingly, implementation strategies must address the challenges of the service system (e.g., specialty mental health, schools, criminal justice system, health settings) and practice settings (e.g., community agency, national employee assistance programs, office-based practice), and the human capital challenge of staff training and support.

In an approach that echoes themes in an early paper, “Specifying the Treatment Process—The Basis for Effectiveness Research” ( Rosen & Proctor, 1978 ), my work once again tackled the challenge of specifying a heretofore vague process—this time, not the intervention process, but the implementation process. As a first step, our team developed a taxonomy of implementation outcomes ( Proctor et al., 2011 ), which enable a direct test of whether or not a given intervention is adopted and delivered. Although it is overlooked in other types of research, implementation science focuses on this distinct type of outcome. Explicit examination of implementation outcomes is key to an important research distinction. Often, evaluations yield disappointing results about an intervention, showing that the expected and desired outcomes are not attained. This might mean that the intervention was not effective. However, just as likely, it could mean that the intervention was not actually delivered, or it was not delivered with fidelity. Implementation outcomes help identify the roadblocks on the way to intervention adoption and delivery.

Our 2011 taxonomy of implementation outcomes ( Proctor et al., 2011 ), became the framework for two national repositories of measures for implementation research: the Seattle Implementation Research Collaborative ( Lewis et al., 2015 ) and the National Institutes of Health GEM measures database ( Rabin et al., 2012 ). These repositories of implementation outcomes seek to harmonize and increase the rigor of measurement in implementation science.

We also have developed taxonomies of implementation strategies ( Powell et al., 2012 ; Powell et al., 2015 ; Waltz et al., 2014 , 2015) . Implementation strategies are interventions for system change—how organizations, communities, and providers can learn to deliver new and more effective practices ( Powell et al., 2012 ).

A conversation with a key practice leader stimulated my interest in implementation strategies. Shortly after our school endorsed an MSW curriculum emphasizing evidence-based practices, a pioneering CEO of a major social service agency in St. Louis met with me and asked,

Enola Proctor, I get the importance of delivering evidence based practices. My organization delivers over 20 programs and interventions, and I believe only a handful of them are really evidence based. I want to decrease our provision of ineffective care, and increase our delivery of evidence-based practices. But how? What are the evidence-based ways I, as an agency director, can transform my agency so that we can deliver evidence-based practices?

That agency director was asking a question of how . He was asking for evidence-based implementation strategies. Moving effective programs and practices into routine care settings requires the skillful use of implementation strategies, defined as systematic “methods or techniques used to enhance the adoption, implementation, and sustainability of a clinical program or practice into routine service” ( Proctor et al., 2013 , p. 2).

This question has shaped my work for the past 15 years, as well as the research priorities of several funding agencies, including the National Institutes of Health, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, and the World Health Organization. Indeed, a National Institutes of Health program announcement—Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health ( National Institutes of Health, 2016 )—identified the discovery of effective implementation strategies as a primary purpose of implementation science. To date, the implementation science literature cannot yet answer that important question, but we are making progress.

To identify implementation strategies, our teams first turned to the literature—a literature that we found to be scattered across a wide range of journals and disciplines. Most articles were not empirical, and most articles used widely differing terms to characterize implementation strategies. We conducted a structured literature review to generate common nomenclature and a taxonomy of implementation strategies. That review yielded 63 distinct implementation strategies, which fell into six groupings: planning, educating, financing, restructuring, managing quality, and attending to policy context ( Powell et al., 2012 ).

Our team refined that compilation, using Delphi techniques and concept mapping to develop conceptually distinct categories of implementation strategies ( Powell et al., 2015 ; Waltz et al., 2014 ). The refined compilation of 73 discrete implementation strategies was then further organized into nine clusters:

changing agency infrastructure,
using financial strategies,
supporting clinicians,
providing interactive assistance,
training and educating stakeholders,
adapting and tailoring interventions to context,
developing stakeholder relationships,
using evaluative and iterative strategies, and
engaging consumers.

These taxonomies of implementation strategies position the field for more robust research on implementation processes. The language used to describe implementation strategies has not yet “gelled” and has been described as a “Tower of Babel” ( McKibbon et al., 2010 ). Therefore, we also developed guidelines for reporting the components of strategies ( Proctor et al., 2013 ) so researchers and implementers would have more behaviorally specific information about what a strategy is, who does it, when, and for how long. The value of such reporting guidelines is illustrated in the work of Gold and colleagues (2016) .

What have we learned, through our own program of research on implementation strategies—the “how to” of improving practice? First, we have been able to identify from practice-based evidence the implementation strategies used most often. Using novel activity logs to track implementation strategies, Bunger and colleagues (2017) found that strategies such as quality improvement tools, using data experts, providing supervision, and sending clinical reminders were frequently used to facilitate delivery of behavioral health interventions within a child-welfare setting and were perceived by agency leadership as contributing to project success.

Second, reflecting the complexity of quality improvement processes, we have learned that there is no magic bullet ( Powell, Proctor, & Glass, 2013 ). Our study of U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs clinics working to implement evidence-based HIV treatment found that implementers used an average of 25 (plus or minus 14) different implementation strategies ( Rogal, et al., 2017 ). Moreover, the number of implementation strategies used was positively associated with the number of new treatment starts. These findings suggest that implementing new interventions requires considerable effort and resources.

To advance our understanding of the effectiveness of implementation strategies, our teams have conducted a systematic review ( Powell et al., 2013 ), tested specific strategies, and captured practice-based evidence from on-the-ground implementers. Testing the effectiveness of implementation strategies has been identified as a top research priority by the IOM (2009) . In work with Charles Glisson in St. Louis, our 15-agency-based randomized clinical trial found that an organizational-focused intervention—the attachment, regulatory, and competency model—improved agency culture and climate, stimulated more clinicians to enroll in evidence-based-practice training, and boosted clinical effect sizes of various evidence-based practices ( Glisson, Williams, Hemmelgarn, Proctor, & Green, 2016a , 2016b ). And in a hospital critical care unit, the implementation strategies of developing a team, selecting and using champions, provider education sessions, and audit and feedback helped increase team adherence to phlebotomy guidelines ( Steffen et al., in press ).

We are also learning about the value of different strategies. Experts in implementation science and implementation practice identified as most important the strategies of “use evaluate and iterative approaches” and “train and educate stakeholders.” Reported as less helpful were such strategies as “access new funding streams” and “remind clinicians of practices to use” ( Waltz et al., 2015 ). Successful implementers in Veterans Affairs clinics relied more heavily on such strategies as “change physical structures and equipment” and “facilitate relay of clinical data to providers” than did less successful implementers ( Rogal et al., 2017 ).

Many strategies have yet to be investigated empirically, as has the role of dissemination and implementation organizations—organizations that function to promote, provide information about, provide training in, and scale up specific treatments. Most evidence-based practices used in behavioral health, including most listed on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration National Registry of Promising and Effective Practices, are disseminated and distributed by dissemination and implementation organizations. Unlike drugs and devices, psychosocial interventions have no Federal Drug Administration-like delivery system. Kreuter and Casey (2012) urge better understanding and use of the intervention “delivery system,” or mechanisms to bring treatment discoveries to the attention of practitioners and into use in practice settings.

Implementation strategies have been shown to boost clinical effectiveness ( Glisson et al., 2010 ), reduce staff turnover ( Aarons, Sommerfield, Hect, Silvosky, & Chaffin, 2009 ) and help reduce disparities in care ( Balicer et al., 2015 ).

Future directions: Research on implementation strategies

My work in implementation science has helped build intellectual capital for the rapidly growing field of dissemination and implementation science, leading teams to distinguish, clearly define, develop taxonomies, and stimulate more systematic work to advance the conceptual, linguistic, and methodological clarity in the field. Yet, we continue to lack understanding of many issues. What strategies are used in usual implementation practice, by whom, for which empirically supported interventions? What strategies are effective in which organizational and policy contexts? Which strategies are effective in attaining which specific implementation outcomes? For example, are the strategies that are effective for initial adoption also effective for scale up, spread, and sustained use of interventions? Social workers have the skill set for roles as implementation facilitators, and refining packages of implementation strategies that are effective in social service and behavioral health settings could boost the visibility, scale, and impact of our work.

The Third Generation and Counting

Social work faces grand, often daunting challenges. We need to develop a more robust base of evidence about the effectiveness of interventions and make that evidence more relevant, accessible, and applicable to social work practitioners, whether they work in communities, agencies, policy arenas, or a host of novel settings. We need to advance measurement-based care so our value as a field is recognized. We need to know how to bring proven interventions to scale for population-level impact. We need to discover ways to build capacity of social service agencies and the communities in which they reside. And we need to learn how to sustain advances in care once we achieve them ( Proctor et al., 2015 ). Our challenges are indeed grand, far outstripping our resources.

So how dare we speak of a quality quest? Does it not seem audacious to seek the highest standards in caring for the most vulnerable, especially in an era when we face a new political climate that threatens vulnerable groups and promises to strip resources from health and social services? Members of our profession are underpaid, and most of our agencies lack the data infrastructure required for assessment and evaluation. Quality may be an audacious goal, but as social workers we can pursue no less. By virtue of our code of ethics, our commitment to equity, and our skills in intervening on multiple levels of systems and communities, social workers are ideally suited for advancing quality.

Who will conduct the needed research? Who will pioneer its translation to improving practice? Social work practice can be only as strong as its research base; the responsibility for developing that base, and hence improve practice, is lodged within social work research.

If my greatest challenge is pursuing this quest, my greatest joy is in mentoring the next generation for this work. My research mentoring has always been guided by the view that the ultimate purpose of research in the helping professions is the production and systemization of knowledge for use by practitioners ( Rosen & Proctor, 1978 ). For 27 years, the National Institute of Mental Health has supported training in mental health services research based in the Center for Mental Health Services Research ( Hasche, Perron, & Proctor, 2009 ; Proctor & McMillen, 2008 ). And, with colleague John Landsverk, we are launching my sixth year leading the Implementation Research Institute, a training program for implementation science supported by the National Institute of Mental Health ( Proctor et al., 2013 ). We have trained more than 50 social work, psychology, anthropology, and physician researchers in implementation science for mental health. With three more cohorts to go, we are working to assess what works in research training for implementation science. Using bibliometric analysis, we have learned that intensive training and mentoring increases research productivity in the form of published papers and grants that address how to implement evidence-based care in mental health and addictions. And, through use of social network analysis, we have learned that every “dose” of mentoring increases scholarly collaboration when measured two years later ( Luke, Baumann, Carothers, Landsverk, & Proctor, 2016 ).

As his student, I was privileged to learn lessons in mentoring from Aaron Rosen. He treated his students as colleagues, he invited them in to work on the most challenging of questions, and he pursued his work with joy. When he treated me as a colleague, I felt empowered. When he invited me to work with him on the field’s most vexing challenges, I felt inspired. And as he worked with joy, I learned that work pursued with joy doesn’t feel like work at all. And now the third, fourth, and fifth generations of social work researchers are pursuing tough challenges and the quality quest for social work practice. May seasoned and junior researchers work collegially and with joy, tackling the profession’s toughest research challenges, including the quest for high-quality social work services.

Acknowledgments

Preparation of this paper was supported by IRI (5R25MH0809160), Washington University ICTS (2UL1 TR000448-08), Center for Mental Health Services Research, Washington University in St. Louis, and the Center for Dissemination and Implementation, Institute for Public Health, Washington University in St. Louis.

This invited article is based on the 2017 Aaron Rosen Lecture presented by Enola Proctor at the Society for Social Work and Research 21st Annual Conference—“Ensure Healthy Development for All Youth”—held January 11–15, 2017, in New Orleans, LA. The annual Aaron Rosen Lecture features distinguished scholars who have accumulated a body of significant and innovative scholarship relevant to practice, the research base for practice, or effective utilization of research in practice.

Aarons GA, Sommerfield DH, Hect DB, Silvosky JF, Chaffin MJ. The impact of evidence-based practice implementation and fidelity monitoring on staff turnover: Evidence for a protective effect. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2009; 77 (2):270–280. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013223 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare (AASWSW) Grand challenges for social work (n.d.) Retrieved from http://aaswsw.org/grand-challenges-initiative/
Balicer RD, Hoshen M, Cohen-Stavi C, Shohat-Spitzer S, Kay C, Bitterman H, Shadmi E. Sustained reduction in health disparities achieved through targeted quality improvement: One-year follow-up on a three-year intervention. Health Services Research. 2015; 50 :1891–1909. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12300 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bunger AC, Powell BJ, Robertson HA, MacDowell H, Birken SA, Shea C. Tracking implementation strategies: A description of a practical approach and early findings. Health Research Policy and Systems. 2017; 15 (15):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0175-y . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Evans SW, Koch JR, Brady C, Meszaros P, Sadler J. Community and school mental health professionals’ knowledge and use of evidence based substance use prevention programs. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2013; 40 (4):319–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-012-0422-z . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Fraser MW. Intervention research in social work: Recent advances and continuing challenges. Research on Social Work Practice. 2004; 14 (3):210–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731503262150 . [ Google Scholar ]
Glisson C, Schoenwald SK, Hemmelgarn A, Green P, Dukes D, Armstrong KS, Chapman JE. Randomized trial of MST and ARC in a two-level evidence-based treatment implementation strategy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2010; 78 (4):537–550. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019160 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Glisson C, Williams NJ, Hemmelgarn A, Proctor EK, Green P. Increasing clinicians’ EBT exploration and preparation behavior in youth mental health services by changing organizational culture with ARC. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 2016a; 76 :40–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2015.11.008 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Glisson C, Williams NJ, Hemmelgarn A, Proctor EK, Green P. Aligning organizational priorities with ARC to improve youth mental health service outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2016b; 84 (8):713–725. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000107 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gold R, Bunce AE, Cohen DJ, Hollombe C, Nelson CA, Proctor EK, DeVoe JE. Reporting on the strategies needed to implement proven interventions: An example from a “real-world” cross-setting implementation study. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2016; 91 (8):1074–1083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.03.014 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Greenfield S. Clinical practice guidelines: Expanded use and misuse. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2017; 317 (6):594–595. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.19969. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hasche L, Perron B, Proctor E. Making time for dissertation grants: Strategies for social work students and educators. Research on Social Work Practice. 2009; 19 (3):340–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731508321559 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Institute of Medicine (IOM), Committee on Comparative Effectiveness Research Prioritization. Initial national priorities for comparative effectiveness research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
Institute of Medicine (IOM) Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
Institute of Medicine (IOM) Psychosocial interventions for mental and substance use disorders: A framework for establishing evidence-based standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2015. https://doi.org/10.17226/19013 . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jaccard J. The prevention of problem behaviors in adolescents and young adults: Perspectives on theory and practice. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research. 2016; 7 (4):585–613. https://doi.org/10.1086/689354 . [ Google Scholar ]
Kessler RC, Chiu WT, Demler O, Merikangas KR, Walters EE. Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Archives of General Psychiatry. 2005; 62 (6):617–627. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.617 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kohl PL, Schurer J, Bellamy JL. The state of parent training: Program offerings and empirical support. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services. 2009; 90 (3):248–254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.3894 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kreuter MW, Casey CM. Enhancing dissemination through marketing and distribution systems: A vision for public health. In: Brownson R, Colditz G, Proctor E, editors. Dissemination and implementation research in health: Translating science to practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
Lewis CC, Stanick CF, Martinez RG, Weiner BJ, Kim M, Barwick M, Comtois KA. The Society for Implementation Research collaboration instrument review project: A methodology to promote rigorous evaluation. Implementation Science. 2015; 10 (2):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0193-x . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lohr KN. Medicare: A strategy for quality assurance. I. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1990. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Luke D, Baumann A, Carothers B, Landsverk J, Proctor EK. Forging a link between mentoring and collaboration: A new training model for implementation science. Implementation Science. 2016; 11 (137):1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0499-y . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
McKibbon KA, Lokker C, Wilczynski NL, Ciliska D, Dobbins M, Davis DA, Straus SS. A cross-sectional study of the number and frequency of terms used to refer to knowledge translation in a body of health literature in 2006: A tower of Babel? Implementation Science. 2010; 5 (16) doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-16. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
McMillen JC, Proctor EK, Megivern D, Striley CW, Cabasa LJ, Munson MR, Dickey B. Quality of care in the social services: Research agenda and methods. Social Work Research. 2005; 29 (3):181–191. doi.org/10.1093/swr/29.3.181. [ Google Scholar ]
McMillen JC, Raffol M. Characterizing the quality workforce in private U.S. child and family behavioral health agencies. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2016; 43 (5):750–759. doi: 10.1007/s10488-0150-0667-4. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Megivern DA, McMillen JC, Proctor EK, Striley CW, Cabassa LJ, Munson MR. Quality of care: Expanding the social work dialogue. Social Work. 2007; 52 (2):115–124. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sw/52.2.115 . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Merikangas KR, He J, Burstein M, Swendsen J, Avenevoli S, Case B, Olfson M. Service utilization for lifetime mental disorders in U.S. adolescents: Results of the National Comorbidity Survey Adolescent Supplement (NCS-A) Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2011; 50 (1):32–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2010.10.006 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
National Institute of Mental Health. Psychosocial research at NIMH: A primer. 2016 Retrieved from https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research-priorities/psychosocial-research-at-nimh-a-primer.shtml .
National Institutes of Health. Dissemination and implementation research in health (R01) 2016 Sep 14; Retrieved from https://archives.nih.gov/asites/grants/09-14-2016/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-16-238.html .
National Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work. Unpublished recommendations to the Social Work Leadership Roundtable 2016 [ Google Scholar ]
Person SD, Allison JJ, Kiefe CI, Weaver MT, Williams OD, Centor RM, Weissman NW. Nurse staffing and mortality for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction. Medical Care. 2004; 42 (1):4–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000102369.67404.b0 . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Powell BJ, McMillen C, Proctor EK, Carpenter CR, Griffey RT, Bunger AC, York JL. A compilation of strategies for implementing clinical innovations in health and mental health. Medical Care Research and Review. 2012; 69 (2):123–157. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1077558711430690 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Powell BJ, Proctor EK, Glass JE. A systematic review of strategies for implementing empirically supported mental health interventions. Research on Social Work Practice. 2013; 24 (2):192–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731513505778 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Powell BJ, Waltz TJ, Chinman MJ, Damschroder LJ, Smith JL, Matthieu MM, Kirchner JE. A refined compilation of implementation strategies: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implementation Science. 2015; 10 (21):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Proctor EK, Knudsen KJ, Fedoravicius N, Hovmand P, Rosen A, Perron B. Implementation of evidence-based practice in community behavioral health: Agency director perspectives. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2007; 34 (5):479–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-007-0129-8 . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Proctor EK, Landsverk J, Baumann AA, Mittman BS, Aarons GA, Brownson RC, Chambers D. The Implementation Research Institute: Training mental health implementation researchers in the United States. Implementation Science. 2013; 8 (105):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-105 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Proctor EK, Luke D, Calhoun A, McMillen C, Brownson R, McCrary S, Padek M. Sustainability of evidence-based healthcare: Research agenda, methodological advances, and infrastructure support. Implementation Science. 2015; 10 (88):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0274-5 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Proctor EK, McMillen JC. Quality of care. In: Mizrahi T, Davis L, editors. Encyclopedia of Social Work. 20. Washington, DC, and New York, NY: NASW Press and Oxford University Press; 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.33 . [ Google Scholar ]
Proctor EK, Powell BJ, McMillen CJ. Implementation strategies: Recommendations for specifying and reporting. Implementation Science. 2012; 8 (139):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-139 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Proctor EK, Rosen A. From knowledge production to implementation: Research challenges and imperatives. Research on Social Work Practice. 2008; 18 (4):285–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731507302263 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Proctor EK, Rosen A, Rhee C. Outcomes in social work practice. Social Work Research & Evaluation. 2002; 3 (2):109–125. [ Google Scholar ]
Proctor EK, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, Hensley M. Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2011; 38 (2):65–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rabin BA, Purcell P, Naveed S, Moser RP, Henton MD, Proctor EK, Glasgow RE. Advancing the application, quality and harmonization of implementation science measures. Implementation Science. 2012; 7 (119):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-119 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rogal SS, Yakovchenko V, Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Kirchner JE, Proctor EK, Chinman MJ. The association between implementation strategy use and the uptake of hepatitis C treatment in a national sample. Implementation Science. 2017; 12 (60) http://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0588-6 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rosen A, Proctor EK. Specifying the treatment process: The basis for effectiveness research. Journal of Social Service Research. 1978; 2 (1):25–43. https://doi.org/10.1300/J079v02n01_04 . [ Google Scholar ]
Rosen A, Proctor EK. Distinctions between treatment outcomes and their implications for treatment evaluation. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1981; 49 (3):418–425. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.49.3.418 . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rosen A, Proctor EK, Staudt M. Targets of change and interventions in social work: An empirically-based prototype for developing practice guidelines. Research on Social Work Practice. 2003; 13 (2):208–233. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049731502250496 . [ Google Scholar ]
Steffen K, Doctor A, Hoerr J, Gill J, Markham C, Riley S, Spinella P. Controlling phlebotomy volume diminishes PICU transfusion: Implementation processes and impact. Pediatrics (in press) [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Videka L. Accounting for variability in client, population, and setting characteristics: Moderators of intervention effectiveness. In: Rosen A, Proctor EK, editors. Developing practice guidelines for social work intervention: Issues, methods, and research agenda. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 2003. pp. 169–192. [ Google Scholar ]
Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Chinman MJ, Smith JL, Matthieu MM, Proctor EK, Kirchner JE. Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC): Protocol for a mixed methods study. Implementation Science. 2014; 9 (39):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-39 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Matthieu MM, Damschroder LJ, Chinman MJ, Smith JL, Kirchner JE. Use of concept mapping to characterize relationships among implementation strategies and assess their feasibility and importance: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study. Implementation Science. 2015; 10 (109):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0295-0 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wang PS, Lane M, Olfson M, Pincus HA, Wells KB, Kessler RC. Twelvemonth use of mental health services in the United States: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Archives of General Psychiatry. 2005; 62 (6):629–640. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.629. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wang PS, Demler O, Kessler RC. Adequacy of treatment for serious mental illness in the United States. American Journal of Public Health. 2002; 92 (1):92–98. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.92.1.92 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zayas L. Service delivery factors in the development of practice guidelines. In: Rosen A, Proctor EK, editors. Developing practice guidelines for social work intervention: Issues, methods, and research agenda. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 2003. pp. 169–192. https://doi.org/10.7312/rose12310-010 . [ Google Scholar ]

Social Work Research Methods That Drive the Practice

A social worker surveys a community member.

Social workers advocate for the well-being of individuals, families and communities. But how do social workers know what interventions are needed to help an individual? How do they assess whether a treatment plan is working? What do social workers use to write evidence-based policy?

Social work involves research-informed practice and practice-informed research. At every level, social workers need to know objective facts about the populations they serve, the efficacy of their interventions and the likelihood that their policies will improve lives. A variety of social work research methods make that possible.

Data-Driven Work

Data is a collection of facts used for reference and analysis. In a field as broad as social work, data comes in many forms.

Quantitative vs. Qualitative

As with any research, social work research involves both quantitative and qualitative studies.

Quantitative Research

Answers to questions like these can help social workers know about the populations they serve — or hope to serve in the future.

How many students currently receive reduced-price school lunches in the local school district?
How many hours per week does a specific individual consume digital media?
How frequently did community members access a specific medical service last year?

Quantitative data — facts that can be measured and expressed numerically — are crucial for social work.

Quantitative research has advantages for social scientists. Such research can be more generalizable to large populations, as it uses specific sampling methods and lends itself to large datasets. It can provide important descriptive statistics about a specific population. Furthermore, by operationalizing variables, it can help social workers easily compare similar datasets with one another.

Qualitative Research

Qualitative data — facts that cannot be measured or expressed in terms of mere numbers or counts — offer rich insights into individuals, groups and societies. It can be collected via interviews and observations.

What attitudes do students have toward the reduced-price school lunch program?
What strategies do individuals use to moderate their weekly digital media consumption?
What factors made community members more or less likely to access a specific medical service last year?

Qualitative research can thereby provide a textured view of social contexts and systems that may not have been possible with quantitative methods. Plus, it may even suggest new lines of inquiry for social work research.

Mixed Methods Research

Combining quantitative and qualitative methods into a single study is known as mixed methods research. This form of research has gained popularity in the study of social sciences, according to a 2019 report in the academic journal Theory and Society. Since quantitative and qualitative methods answer different questions, merging them into a single study can balance the limitations of each and potentially produce more in-depth findings.

However, mixed methods research is not without its drawbacks. Combining research methods increases the complexity of a study and generally requires a higher level of expertise to collect, analyze and interpret the data. It also requires a greater level of effort, time and often money.

The Importance of Research Design

Data-driven practice plays an essential role in social work. Unlike philanthropists and altruistic volunteers, social workers are obligated to operate from a scientific knowledge base.

To know whether their programs are effective, social workers must conduct research to determine results, aggregate those results into comprehensible data, analyze and interpret their findings, and use evidence to justify next steps.

Employing the proper design ensures that any evidence obtained during research enables social workers to reliably answer their research questions.

Research Methods in Social Work

The various social work research methods have specific benefits and limitations determined by context. Common research methods include surveys, program evaluations, needs assessments, randomized controlled trials, descriptive studies and single-system designs.

Surveys involve a hypothesis and a series of questions in order to test that hypothesis. Social work researchers will send out a survey, receive responses, aggregate the results, analyze the data, and form conclusions based on trends.

Surveys are one of the most common research methods social workers use — and for good reason. They tend to be relatively simple and are usually affordable. However, surveys generally require large participant groups, and self-reports from survey respondents are not always reliable.

Program Evaluations

Social workers ally with all sorts of programs: after-school programs, government initiatives, nonprofit projects and private programs, for example.

Crucially, social workers must evaluate a program’s effectiveness in order to determine whether the program is meeting its goals and what improvements can be made to better serve the program’s target population.

Evidence-based programming helps everyone save money and time, and comparing programs with one another can help social workers make decisions about how to structure new initiatives. Evaluating programs becomes complicated, however, when programs have multiple goal metrics, some of which may be vague or difficult to assess (e.g., “we aim to promote the well-being of our community”).

Needs Assessments

Social workers use needs assessments to identify services and necessities that a population lacks access to.

Common social work populations that researchers may perform needs assessments on include:

People in a specific income group
Everyone in a specific geographic region
A specific ethnic group
People in a specific age group

In the field, a social worker may use a combination of methods (e.g., surveys and descriptive studies) to learn more about a specific population or program. Social workers look for gaps between the actual context and a population’s or individual’s “wants” or desires.

For example, a social worker could conduct a needs assessment with an individual with cancer trying to navigate the complex medical-industrial system. The social worker may ask the client questions about the number of hours they spend scheduling doctor’s appointments, commuting and managing their many medications. After learning more about the specific client needs, the social worker can identify opportunities for improvements in an updated care plan.

In policy and program development, social workers conduct needs assessments to determine where and how to effect change on a much larger scale. Integral to social work at all levels, needs assessments reveal crucial information about a population’s needs to researchers, policymakers and other stakeholders. Needs assessments may fall short, however, in revealing the root causes of those needs (e.g., structural racism).

Randomized Controlled Trials

Randomized controlled trials are studies in which a randomly selected group is subjected to a variable (e.g., a specific stimulus or treatment) and a control group is not. Social workers then measure and compare the results of the randomized group with the control group in order to glean insights about the effectiveness of a particular intervention or treatment.

Randomized controlled trials are easily reproducible and highly measurable. They’re useful when results are easily quantifiable. However, this method is less helpful when results are not easily quantifiable (i.e., when rich data such as narratives and on-the-ground observations are needed).

Descriptive Studies

Descriptive studies immerse the researcher in another context or culture to study specific participant practices or ways of living. Descriptive studies, including descriptive ethnographic studies, may overlap with and include other research methods:

Informant interviews
Census data
Observation

By using descriptive studies, researchers may glean a richer, deeper understanding of a nuanced culture or group on-site. The main limitations of this research method are that it tends to be time-consuming and expensive.

Single-System Designs

Unlike most medical studies, which involve testing a drug or treatment on two groups — an experimental group that receives the drug/treatment and a control group that does not — single-system designs allow researchers to study just one group (e.g., an individual or family).

Single-system designs typically entail studying a single group over a long period of time and may involve assessing the group’s response to multiple variables.

For example, consider a study on how media consumption affects a person’s mood. One way to test a hypothesis that consuming media correlates with low mood would be to observe two groups: a control group (no media) and an experimental group (two hours of media per day). When employing a single-system design, however, researchers would observe a single participant as they watch two hours of media per day for one week and then four hours per day of media the next week.

These designs allow researchers to test multiple variables over a longer period of time. However, similar to descriptive studies, single-system designs can be fairly time-consuming and costly.

Learn More About Social Work Research Methods

Social workers have the opportunity to improve the social environment by advocating for the vulnerable — including children, older adults and people with disabilities — and facilitating and developing resources and programs.

Learn more about how you can earn your Master of Social Work online at Virginia Commonwealth University . The highest-ranking school of social work in Virginia, VCU has a wide range of courses online. That means students can earn their degrees with the flexibility of learning at home. Learn more about how you can take your career in social work further with VCU.

From M.S.W. to LCSW: Understanding Your Career Path as a Social Worker

How Palliative Care Social Workers Support Patients With Terminal Illnesses

How to Become a Social Worker in Health Care

Gov.uk, Mixed Methods Study

MVS Open Press, Foundations of Social Work Research

Open Social Work Education, Scientific Inquiry in Social Work

Open Social Work, Graduate Research Methods in Social Work: A Project-Based Approach

Routledge, Research for Social Workers: An Introduction to Methods

SAGE Publications, Research Methods for Social Work: A Problem-Based Approach

Theory and Society, Mixed Methods Research: What It Is and What It Could Be

READY TO GET STARTED WITH OUR ONLINE M.S.W. PROGRAM FORMAT?

Want to learn more about the program and application process? Get in touch with the form below.

Bachelor’s degree is required to attend.

The link between social work research and practice

When thinking about social work, some may consider the field to solely focus on clinical interventions with individuals or groups.

There may be a mistaken impression that research is not a part of the social work profession. This is completely false. Rather, the two have been and will continue to need to be intertwined.

This guide covers why social workers should care about research, how both social work practice and social work research influence and guide each other, how to build research skills both as a student and as a professional working in the field, and the benefits of being a social worker with strong research skills.

A selection of social work research jobs are also discussed.

Social workers and research
Evidence-based practice
Practice and research
Research and practice
Build research skills
Social worker as researcher
Benefits of research skills
Research jobs

Why should social workers care about research?

Sometimes it may seem as though social work practice and social work research are two separate tracks running parallel to each other – they both seek to improve the lives of clients, families and communities, but they don’t interact. This is not the way it is supposed to work.

Research and practice should be intertwined, with each affecting the other and improving processes on both ends, so that it leads to better outcomes for the population we’re serving.

Section 5 of the NASW Social Work Code of Ethics is focused on social workers’ ethical responsibilities to the social work profession. There are two areas in which research is mentioned in upholding our ethical obligations: for the integrity of the profession (section 5.01) and for evaluation and research (section 5.02).

Some of the specific guidance provided around research and social work include:

5.01(b): …Social workers should protect, enhance, and improve the integrity of the profession through appropriate study and research, active discussion, and responsible criticism of the profession.
5.01(d): Social workers should contribute to the knowledge base of social work and share with colleagues their knowledge related to practice, research, and ethics…
5.02(a) Social workers should monitor and evaluate policies, the implementation of programs, and practice interventions.
5.02(b) Social workers should promote and facilitate evaluation and research to contribute to the development of knowledge.
5.02(c) Social workers should critically examine and keep current with emerging knowledge relevant to social work and fully use evaluation and research evidence in their professional practice.
5.02(q) Social workers should educate themselves, their students, and their colleagues about responsible research practices.

Evidence-based practice and evidence-based treatment

In order to strengthen the profession and determine that the interventions we are providing are, in fact, effective, we must conduct research. When research and practice are intertwined, this leads practitioners to develop evidence-based practice (EBP) and evidence-based treatment (EBT).

Evidence-based practice is, according to The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) , a process involving creating an answerable question based on a client or organizational need, locating the best available evidence to answer the question, evaluating the quality of the evidence as well as its applicability, applying the evidence, and evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the solution.

Evidence-based treatment is any practice that has been established as effective through scientific research according to a set of explicit criteria (Drake et al., 2001). These are interventions that, when applied consistently, routinely produce improved client outcomes.

For example, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) was one of a variety of interventions for those with anxiety disorders. Researchers wondered if CBT was better than other intervention options in producing positive, consistent results for clients.

So research was conducted comparing multiple types of interventions, and the evidence (research results) demonstrated that CBT was the best intervention.

The anecdotal evidence from practice combined with research evidence determined that CBT should become the standard treatment for those diagnosed with anxiety. Now more social workers are getting trained in CBT methods in order to offer this as a treatment option to their clients.

How does social work practice affect research?

Social work practice provides the context and content for research. For example, agency staff was concerned about the lack of nutritional food in their service area, and heard from clients that it was too hard to get to a grocery store with a variety of foods, because they didn’t have transportation, or public transit took too long.

So the agency applied for and received a grant to start a farmer’s market in their community, an urban area that was considered a food desert. This program accepted their state’s version of food stamps as a payment option for the items sold at the farmer’s market.

The agency used their passenger van to provide free transportation to and from the farmer’s market for those living more than four blocks from the market location.

The local university also had a booth each week at the market with nursing and medical students checking blood pressure and providing referrals to community agencies that could assist with medical needs. The agency was excited to improve the health of its clients by offering this program.

But how does the granting foundation know if this was a good use of their money? This is where research and evaluation comes in. Research could gather data to answer a number of questions. Here is but a small sample:

How many community members visited each week and purchased fruits and vegetables?
How many took advantage of the transportation provided, and how many walked to the market?
How many took advantage of the blood pressure checks? Were improvements seen in those numbers for those having repeat blood pressure readings throughout the market season?
How much did the self-reported fruit and vegetable intake increase for customers?
What barriers did community members report in visiting and buying food from the market (prices too high? Inconvenient hours?)
Do community members want the program to continue next year?
Was the program cost-effective, or did it waste money by paying for a driver and for gasoline to offer free transportation that wasn’t utilized? What are areas where money could be saved without compromising the quality of the program?
What else needs to be included in this program to help improve the health of community members?

How does research affect social work practice?

Research can guide practice to implement proven strategies. It can also ask the ‘what if’ or ‘how about’ questions that can open doors for new, innovative interventions to be developed (and then research the effectiveness of those interventions).

Engel and Schutt (2017) describe four categories of research used in social work:

Descriptive research is research in which social phenomena are defined and described. A descriptive research question would be ‘How many homeless women with substance use disorder live in the metro area?’
Exploratory research seeks to find out how people get along in the setting under question, what meanings they give to their actions, and what issues concern them. An example research question would be ‘What are the barriers to homeless women with substance use disorder receiving treatment services?’
Explanatory research seeks to identify causes and effects of social phenomena. It can be used to rule out other explanations for findings and show how two events are related to each other. An explanatory research question would be ‘Why do women with substance use disorder become homeless?’
Evaluation research describes or identifies the impact of social programs and policies. This type of research question could be ‘How effective was XYZ treatment-first program that combined housing and required drug/alcohol abstinence in keeping women with substance use disorder in stable housing 2 years after the program ended?’

Each of the above types of research can answer important questions about the population, setting or intervention being provided. This can help practitioners determine which option is most effective or cost-efficient or that clients are most likely to adhere to. In turn, this data allows social workers to make informed choices on what to keep in their practice, and what needs changing.

How to build research skills while in school

There are a number of ways to build research skills while a student. BSW and MSW programs require a research course, but there are other ways to develop these skills beyond a single class:

Volunteer to help a professor working in an area of interest. Professors are often excited to share their knowledge and receive extra assistance from students with similar interests.
Participate in student research projects where you’re the subject. These are most often found in psychology departments. You can learn a lot about the informed consent process and how data is collected by volunteering as a research participant. Many of these studies also pay a small amount, so it’s an easy way to earn a bit of extra money while you’re on campus.
Create an independent study research project as an elective and work with a professor who is an expert in an area you’re interested in. You’d design a research study, collect the data, analyze it, and write a report or possibly even an article you can submit to an academic journal.
Some practicum programs will have you complete a small evaluation project or assist with a larger research project as part of your field education hours.
In MSW programs, some professors hire students to conduct interviews or enter data on their funded research projects. This could be a good part time job while in school.
Research assistant positions are more common in MSW programs, and these pay for some or all your tuition in exchange for working a set number of hours per week on a funded research project.

How to build research skills while working as a social worker

Social service agencies are often understaffed, with more projects to complete than there are people to complete them.

Taking the initiative to volunteer to survey clients about what they want and need, conduct an evaluation on a program, or seeing if there is data that has been previously collected but not analyzed and review that data and write up a report can help you stand out from your peers, be appreciated by management and other staff, and may even lead to a raise, a promotion, or even new job opportunities because of the skills you’ve developed.

Benefits of being a social worker with strong research skills

Social workers with strong research skills can have the opportunity to work on various projects, and at higher levels of responsibility.

Many can be promoted into administration level positions after demonstrating they understand how to conduct, interpret and report research findings and apply those findings to improving the agency and their programs.

There’s also a level of confidence knowing you’re implementing proven strategies with your clients.

Social work research jobs

There are a number of ways in which you can blend interests in social work and research. A quick search on Glassdoor.com and Indeed.com retrieved the following positions related to social work research:

Research Coordinator on a clinical trial offering psychosocial supportive interventions and non-addictive pain treatments to minimize opioid use for pain.
Senior Research Associate leading and overseeing research on a suite of projects offered in housing, mental health and corrections.
Research Fellow in a school of social work
Project Policy Analyst for large health organization
Health Educator/Research Specialist to implement and evaluate cancer prevention and screening programs for a health department
Research Interventionist providing Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for insomnia patients participating in a clinical trial
Research Associate for Child Care and Early Education
Social Services Data Researcher for an organization serving adults with disabilities.
Director of Community Health Equity Research Programs evaluating health disparities.

No matter your population or area of interest, you’d likely be able to find a position that integrated research and social work.

Social work practice and research are and should remain intertwined. This is the only way we can know what questions to ask about the programs and services we are providing, and ensure our interventions are effective.

There are many opportunities to develop research skills while in school and while working in the field, and these skills can lead to some interesting positions that can make a real difference to clients, families and communities.

Drake, R. E., Goldman, H., Leff, H. S., Lehman, A. F., Dixon, L., Mueser, K. T., et al. (2001). Implementing evidence-based practices in routine mental health service settings. Psychiatric Services, 52(2), 179-182.

Engel, R.J., & Schutt, R.K. (2017). The Practice of Research in Social Work. Sage.

National Association of Social Workers. (n.d). Evidence Based Practice. Retrieved from: https://www.socialworkers.org/News/Research-Data/Social-Work-Policy-Research/Evidence-Based-Practice

Search Menu
Advance articles
Editor's Choice
Author Guidelines
Submission Site
Open Access
About The British Journal of Social Work
About the British Association of Social Workers
Editorial Board
Advertising and Corporate Services
Journals Career Network
Self-Archiving Policy
Dispatch Dates
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, acknowledgements, supplementary material, conflict of interest statement.

< Previous

Social Work with No Recourse to Public Fund Migrants: Obstacles and Strategies

Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data

Jonathan Lacey, Nicola Moran, Social Work with No Recourse to Public Fund Migrants: Obstacles and Strategies, The British Journal of Social Work , Volume 54, Issue 2, March 2024, Pages 607–628, https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcad224

Permissions Icon Permissions

Migrants with no recourse to public funds (NRPFs) are vulnerable to destitution due to the NRPF condition attached to their immigration status. In this quantitative study, fifty-five social workers in England completed an anonymous online survey identifying the obstacles faced in their practice with NRPF migrants and any strategies they developed to overcome these impediments. Informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework, the study identified four main obstacles when working with NRPF migrants: lack of resources to support NRPF migrants; lack of knowledge/skills; negative attitudes from colleagues and insufficient institutional support. Compared to their local authority counterparts, NHS social workers expressed lower levels of confidence in their knowledge and skill level, and received less specific training, organisational guidance and support in their work with NRPF migrants. A 4-fold typology of strategies used by social workers to overcome obstacles was devised from responses to an open-ended question. In addition to the need for more resourcing, the findings suggest a need for social work education and training on how to effectively support NRPF migrants using extant legislation and agencies, and suggest knowledge exchange to promote inter-agency collaboration.

The last two decades have witnessed vigorous growth in international migration, increasing from 173 million in 2000 to 281 million by 2020 ( United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2020 ). Whilst the vast majority of international migrants are unlikely to ever require the support of social workers ( Jolly, 2018a ), those that do are amongst the most vulnerable and marginalised in society. This is particularly the case for migrants with No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPFs; Jolly, 2018a ), hereto ‘NRPF migrants’.

NRPF migrants are ‘subject to immigration control’ and have an NRPF condition attached to their immigration status, excluding them from accessing public funds, including the mainstream benefits system, public housing and local authority (LA) homelessness aid. According to the NRPF Network, NRPF migrants include:

‘asylum-seekers;

refused asylum-seekers;

special visa categories, such as spousal, student and some human rights cases;

people who have overstayed their visas;

undocumented or irregular migrants;

some European Economic Area (EEA) migrant cases and

people who have leave to remain but with an NRPF condition’ (cited in Farmer, 2017 , p. 359).

Determining the number of individuals with NRPF in the UK is acknowledged by the Government to be challenging (Home Office cited in Benton et al. , 2022 , p. 6). However, a recent study estimated the figure to be around 2.2 million ( Benton et al. , 2022 ).

The 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act was a seminal piece of UK legislation designed to create a ‘hostile environment’ for migrants deemed undesirable ( Allsopp et al. , 2014 , p. 14). This Act excluded asylum-seekers from the benefits system and dispersed them throughout the country, increasing the risk of destitution and social isolation ( Sales, 2002 ), with the aim of deterring asylum-seekers from coming to the UK and disincentivising those whose asylum application was denied from remaining in the country ( Parker, 2020 ). The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act (2002) further compounded the prospect of destitution as it largely removed asylum-seekers’ right to work. The 2014 and 2016 Immigration Acts intensified the hostile environment as they ‘created a legislative framework for criminalising the rental of accommodation to undocumented migrants, new sanctions for illegal workers and their employers and restrictions on undocumented migrants opening bank accounts or holding driving licences’ ( Jolly, 2018a , p. 190). The coronavirus pandemic also exposed the vulnerability of NRPF migrants who have the right to work in the UK but have no access to social security benefits if they cannot work, placing them at an increased risk of destitution ( Hines and Leishman, 2023 ).

According to Griffiths and Yeo (2021) , these dire outcomes are not unintended consequences of state policy but pivotal to its functioning and teleology. The UK’s immigration infrastructure was initially developed following the disintegration of the British Empire and ‘reflected a political drive to control the entry of racialised and dispossessed former colonial peoples’ ( Griffiths and Yeo, 2021 , p. 524). Scholars have argued that immigration policy in the UK retains a strong racial dimension ( Turnbull, 2017 ; El-Enany, 2020 ), with the hostile environment ‘legitimising and even encouraging racism and xenophobia’ ( Griffiths and Yeo, 2021 , p. 533).

Mann’s concept of ‘infrastructural power’, defined as ‘the capacity of the state to penetrate civil society, and to implement logistically political decisions throughout the realm’ ( Mann, 1986 , p. 113) can be used to understand the societal diffusion of the hostile environment ( Morgan, 2023 ). In the UK, the state has ‘deputised’ ( Griffiths and Yeo, 2021 , p. 536) a plethora of actors to enforce immigration policy during routine interfaces. Landlords, employers, bank workers, school officials, police, health and social care practitioners and even marriage registrars, have all been co-opted into this system, as they are compelled to check immigration status or face significant penalties. Social workers are amongst those identified as potential border control deputies ( Griffiths and Trebilcock, 2023 ). Humphries asserted that ‘the balance has shifted decisively towards control, restriction, surveillance and ultimately exclusion’ ( 2004 , p. 94), and Farmer identified a shift from ‘“gatekeeping at the border” to “gatekeeping access to services”’ (2017, p. 365), with social workers acting as ‘border-guards’. Jolly similarly highlighted the ‘ambivalent role of social work’, where practitioners are caught between their commitment to ‘social justice’ and ‘human rights’ whilst also being asked to exercise ‘exclusionary policies’ (2018a, p. 191). As well as being members of a value-based profession, social workers are also constituents of society and therefore not immune to the influence of a culture hostile to ‘unauthorised’ migrants and its concomitant racial associations. A recent survey by Gurau and Bacchoo (2022) illustrated a level of racism amongst social work practitioners and found that 9 per cent had experienced racism from a colleague or manager in the previous year.

However, since infrastructural power relies on the cooperation of multiple actors and power is a ‘two-way street’ ( Morgan, 2023 , p. 1081), there exist opportunities for ‘deputised’ actors to resist. Morgan (2023 , p. 1081) cites multiple examples of how unions, charities, schools and administrators adopted various resistant strategies, from ‘bureaucratic foot-dragging’ to coordinated campaigns.

Masocha’s (2014) study of social workers in Scotland found frustration at the lack of training and guidance when working with asylum-seekers, as well as the poverty of resources available. Masocha reported that social workers typically used rhetorical strategies to depict themselves as advocates for asylum-seekers, levelling the blame for their plight at structural deficiencies, thus alleviating themselves from any complicity and circumventing ‘potential charges of discriminatory or oppressive practice’ (2014, p. 1632). Jolly’s work repeatedly refers to the structural obstacles faced by social workers, reporting that the undocumented migrants he interviewed exhibited multiple levels of ‘statutory neglect’, including ‘failure to provide adequate food, clothing and shelter’ (2018a, p. 192). Elsewhere, Jolly highlighted the difficulties where social workers are required to make ‘complex ethical decisions about whether to implement a policy which conflicts with social work standards, professional capabilities, values or ethics’ (2018b, p. 112). He argued that this is yet more complicated since there is no ‘statutory guidance’ directing social work practice with NRPF migrants, which can lead to ‘confusion about rights and entitlements’ (2018b, p. 100).

Other researchers have explored how social workers attempt to overcome these obstacles. Robinson and Masocha (2017) interviewed thirty-four social workers in England and Scotland who found ‘creative … ways to navigate these problems’ (p. 1528) using ‘discretionary power’ (p. 1525). However, details of these ‘creative’ strategies and discretionary powers were not presented. Mostowska’s (2014) study of social workers in Copenhagen and Dublin engaged with homeless EU migrants identified three broad strategies and provided examples of how social workers attempted to support migrants excluded from the mainstream benefits system. First, ‘submissive’ strategies whereby social workers comply with government guidelines, such as contacting embassies or migrant-specific organisations and recommending migrants return to their country of origin. Second, ‘subversive’ strategies which undermine government policies, such as offering ‘anonymous help’ (p. i24) by choosing not to disclose/record service-users’ nationality and immigrant status when not mandated to do so. Finally, ‘innovative’ strategies where social workers were involved in ‘seeking more “structural”, long term solutions’ (p. i24), such as generating private funding for migrant projects and activist endeavours, including ‘campaigning, advocacy and research’ (p. i25). Whilst findings from studies conducted in different countries (within the UK and beyond) are not directly comparable due to differences in legislative frameworks, funding and cultural contexts, they nonetheless indicate some of the challenges and considerations facing social workers when they encounter NRPF migrants.

Previous research has largely been qualitative. This study utilised a quantitative research design to obtain data from a larger number of social workers about the obstacles faced in their practice with NRPF migrants and the strategies developed to try to overcome some of those obstacles. The study sought to answer the research question: What type of problems do social workers encounter whilst working with NRPF migrants, and what strategies are used to attempt to overcome those obstacles?

Research design

The study adopted a quantitative cross-sectional research design in the form of an anonymous online self-administered survey, using Qualtrics software. The benefits of this design include low cost, the convenience for participants to complete the survey in their own time, broad reach and, arguably, its lack of ‘interviewer-related biases’ ( Vehovar and Manfreda, 2017 , p. 144). Anonymous online surveys are also anticipated to reduce social desirability bias thus resulting in more honest responses, particularly on sensitive issues ( Larson, 2019 ). The disadvantages, however, include the potential for participants to misunderstand questions, with no opportunity to clarify meanings, and the lack of nuance ( Dalati and Gomez, 2018 ). Further, conscious or unconscious bias may inform the design and framing of survey questions and/or the interpretation and communication of responses ( Buetow and Zawaly, 2022 ). This was mitigated as far as possible by piloting the survey, giving equal space for open-text responses to different questions and the researchers discussing the design and results to reflect on potential biases. However, not all the survey questions were neutral. Some questions were positioned from a value base of assuming that social workers should treat migrants well irrespective of their legal status. Whilst there were options to disagree with the positively framed statements, this may have affected responses.

Measures: theoretical domains framework

The survey design was based upon the validated Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF, version two) which synthesises thirty-three behaviour change theories into fourteen domains ( Atkins et al. , 2017 ). Developed by implementation researchers and behavioural scientists, the TDF attempts to ‘simplify and integrate a plethora of behaviour change theories’ ( Cane et al. , 2012 , p. 2). The TDF is a theoretically informed framework, not a theoretical perspective in itself, and is particularly helpful in exploring the ‘barriers and facilitators’ of various practices and interventions ( Atkins et al. , 2017 , p. 3).

The TDF provides a useful structure to explore the obstacles, solutions and approaches of social workers to particular interventions, practices and conundrums. This framework was chosen as its prescribed domains (see Table 2 ) dovetailed with the research question. The authors anticipated that an exploration of each domain would highlight the challenges and considerations facing social workers when they encounter NRPF migrants within a hostile environment and in the context of a lack of material resources to support them. This in turn could help to inform practice.

TDF domains, survey statements and responses

Domain definitions (taken from Huijg et al. , 2014 , p. 4, Table 1 ).

In this study, thirteen of the fourteen domains were considered relevant and thus used ( Atkins et al. , 2017 ), two of which were combined for pragmatic reasons. Generic domains include categories such as ‘knowledge’, ‘skills/beliefs about capabilities’ and ‘social/professional role and identity’. Whilst the TDF provides a structured research agenda through its domains, users must devise their own questions within each domain heading (see examples by Paudyal et al. (2019) and Huijg et al. (2014) , which guided the authors in devising survey questions for this study). For example, in the domain ‘Behavioural Regulation’, defined as ‘Anything aimed at managing or changing objectively observed or measured actions’ ( Huijg et al. , 2014 , p. 4), participants were asked to rate their level of agreement with the statement: ‘I have developed strategies to overcome the obstacles faced when working with NRPF migrants’. Whilst the questions largely focused on the competencies of working with migrants, some questions did focus on attitudinal or value statements, for example, ‘My inability to effectively support NRPF migrants presents a challenge to my professional values’ and ‘If I effectively advocate on behalf of NRPF Migrants, I feel like I am making a positive impact’.

The survey consisted of thirty closed, mostly forced-response, questions, using five-point Likert-style attitudinal and agreement scales (see Table 2 ). Participants were also asked demographic questions, their experience of working with NRPF migrants, and two optional open-ended questions asking about any strategies they used to work with NRPF migrants and any further comments.

Ethical considerations

The information sheet formed the front page of the survey to ensure participants had the option to read it. The next page presented a series of consent statements and the survey would only open if participants clicked to confirm that they agreed with each statement. No identifying participant information was requested and responses were submitted anonymously thus ensuring anonymity and confidentiality. Participation was voluntary and no incentives were offered. The study received ethical approval from the social policy and social work departmental ethics committee of the University of York (Ref: SPSW/MTA/2019/7).

Eligibility and recruitment

Participants had to be registered social workers practicing in voluntary or statutory settings in England.

Recruitment blurbs were circulated online via social work organisations and special interest groups, including The British Association of Social Workers (BASW); BASW’s Immigration, Asylum and Trafficking Special Interest Group; The Social Workers Union; the NRPF Network and mental health charity Think Ahead. Additionally, the study was publicised through the researchers’ twitter accounts and networks. This snowballing technique meant that the study was advertised nationally to all social workers and also targeted at those with an interest in immigration and asylum. The survey was live from April to June 2020. Respondents were asked to focus on their practice in non-pandemic conditions, prior to the coronavirus pandemic.

Data analysis

Quantitative data were analysed using SPSS (version 26) and reported using descriptive statistics. Open-ended questions were thematically analysed, whereby themes and patterns were derived inductively from the data ( Joffe, 2012 ). Analysis of strategies social workers reported to use or have used to support NRPF migrants led to the development of a new 4-fold typology.

Fifty-five social workers completed the survey. Respondents were mostly female (69.1%, n = 38), employed in statutory services (89%, n = 49), with thirty (54.5%) working in LA and nineteen (34.5%) working in NHS settings, and the rest working in charitable (7.3%, n = 4) or independent sectors (3.6%, n = 2). Almost three-quarters of participants worked in mental health (43.6%, n = 24) or family and childcare services (29.1%, n = 16), with the rest (27.3%, n = 15) working across other sectors, including migrant specialist services (16.4%, n = 9). All but one family and childcare practitioners worked for an LA, whilst over two-thirds of mental health social workers worked for the NHS (70.8%, n = 17), with the rest (29.2%, n = 7) working in LA settings. Most regions of England were represented. Years’ experience in social work ranged from <1 to 20<, with 1–5 years’ experience reported most frequently (38.2%, n = 21) and just over half (50.9%, n = 28) reporting six or more years’ social work practice experience (see Supplementary Table S1 ).

Experience of working with NRPF migrants

Almost half of participants (49.1%, n = 27) reported working with NRPF migrants at least 1–3 times per month, of whom seventeen (30.9%) worked with this population daily. In contrast, two-fifths (41.8%, n = 23) rarely worked with this group, with a small minority (9.1%, n = 5) disclosing never having worked with NRPF migrants.

Respondents reported that NRPF migrants sought their help with a range of issues, from accommodation to mental health and education. The most common issues NRPF migrants sought support with were financial (32.7%, n = 18), accommodation (23.6%, n = 13) and mental health (16.4%, n = 9), with a small minority citing immigration (9.1%, n = 5) and family and childcare issues (3.6%, n = 2) (see Table 1 ).

TDF analysis

The most notable findings are presented below, though all results, and definitions of each domain in the TDF, are displayed in Table 2 .

Knowledge and skills/belief about capabilities of working with NRPF migrants

Participants reported mixed levels of confidence vis-à-vis their knowledge and skillset in working with NRPF migrants, with those practicing in LA settings expressing considerably more confidence than NHS social workers. Over half of participants strongly or somewhat agreed that they had a reasonable comprehension of immigration legislation (54.4%, n = 30), understood the rights and entitlements of NRPF migrants (56.4%, n = 31) and believed they had the necessary skills to support them (54.4%, n = 30). However, whilst roughly two-thirds of LA social workers expressed agreement across these three statements, only one-third of NHS practitioners agreed, indicating differences in confidence in knowledge and abilities to support NRPF migrants. Whilst three-quarters of those working in family and childcare reported some level of confidence, only one-third of mental health practitioners did so.

Half of respondents (50.9%, n = 28) strongly or somewhat agreed they were confident they could effectively advise NRPF migrants on their rights and entitlements, and 43.6% ( n = 24) indicated that they received training to work with NRPF migrants. Over two-thirds of LA respondents expressed agreement, compared with only one-fifth of NHS practitioners. The vast majority of family and childcare social workers indicated agreement, compared to less than a quarter of mental health practitioners.

The low-levels of confidence amongst social workers practicing in the NHS is notable, since over two-thirds of NHS respondents worked in mental health, and two-thirds of all respondents reported that NRPF migrants sought help with their mental health. This raises important questions about the preparedness of NHS social workers to effectively support NRPF migrants. Indeed, only one NHS respondent indicated they had received training to work with this client group. As expected with generic social work training programmes, the overwhelming majority of respondents (90.9%, n = 50) indicated that they did not receive instruction on how to work with this population during university or college training. However, the majority (80%, n = 45) suggested that they knew where to seek relevant advice.

Environmental contexts and resources

Nearly half of all participants (49.1%, n = 27), including two-thirds of LA social workers but only one-fifth of NHS practitioners, strongly or somewhat agreed that their organisation provided guidelines on how best to work with NRPF migrants, and that their organisation takes a proactive approach to supporting NRPF migrants. Three-quarters of family and childcare social workers indicated some level of agreement, compared with only one-fifth of mental health practitioners. These figures further evidence that LAs, and in particular family and childcare services, appear better prepared to work with NRPF migrants than NHS social work services, particularly in mental health.

Social influences and reinforcement

The majority of participants (72.7%, n = 40) strongly or somewhat agreed that they could depend on the support of colleagues if they advocated on behalf of NRPF migrants. However, a considerable minority (30.9%, n = 17), roughly one-quarter of LA ( n = 8), one-fifth of NHS ( n = 4) and three-quarters of charitable or independent ( n = 5) social workers, indicated that some social work colleagues had a negative attitude towards NRPF migrants. Whilst these figures are small, they nonetheless raise concerns, running contrary to fundamental social work values and potentially having an adverse impact on service provision for this group.

Social or professional role and identity/emotion

Almost all respondents (90.9%, n = 50) strongly or somewhat agreed it was their professional duty to advocate on behalf of NRPF migrants and an even higher figure (94.5%, n = 52) indicated that it was their professional duty to challenge their organisation if they did not support NRPF migrants. Over three-quarters (76.4%, n = 42) indicated that their inability to effectively support NRPF migrants presented a challenge to their professional values. On these three issues, there were no major differences across social work divisions.

However, there were differences regarding social workers’ emotional response to working with NRPF migrants. The majority (67.3%, n = 37) indicated that they experienced considerable frustration when working with NRPF migrants because they did not have the resources to support them effectively. Over two-thirds of family and childcare social workers (68.7%, n = 11) and three-quarters of mental health practitioners (75%, n = 28) expressed frustration at the lack of resources. Frustrations were higher amongst NHS social workers (reported by 84.2%, n = 16) compared to LA practitioners (56.6%, n = 17). This difference may be attributable to NHS social workers’ self-disclosed lower levels of confidence and knowledge in working with this group and/or differences in resourcing and experience.

Beliefs about consequences

A majority of participants (87.2%, n = 48) strongly or somewhat disagreed that working with NRPF migrants was pointless because they had no access to public funds.

A sizable minority (30.9%, n = 17), almost half of NHS social workers (47.4%, n = 9) but less than one-fifth of LA practitioners (17.7%, n = 5), strongly or somewhat agreed that their inability to effectively support NRPF migrants had an adverse impact on their own mental health and emotional well-being. Over one-third ( n = 9) of mental health social workers and one-quarter of family and childcare practitioners ( n = 4) indicated some level of agreement. The higher number of NHS social workers indicates a level of emotional turmoil may be related to a lack of material resources to support NRPF migrants and a lack of knowledge and skills around creative ways of working within the existing legislation.

Behavioural regulation

This domain referred to social workers managing or changing their actions ( Huijg et al. , 2014 ) in response to the challenges faced. Almost half of participants (49.1%, n = 27) strongly or somewhat agreed that they developed strategies to overcome obstacles faced when working with NRPF migrants. Twenty-six participants (47.3%) responded to an open-ended question describing strategies they developed to overcome such obstacles. Roughly two-thirds ( n = 17) worked in a LA, with the rest working for the NHS ( n = 6) and charitable organisations ( n = 3). Most practiced in either family and childcare settings ( n = 10) or mental health services ( n = 9), with the remainder operating in a range of other sectors. The majority had six or more years’ experience in social work ( n = 15), though a considerable number had five or fewer years’ experience ( n = 11). Respondents from Yorkshire and Humberside ( n = 8) offered the most strategies, followed by those from London ( n = 6) and the North-West ( n = 5). The strategies are described below.

Strategies to overcome obstacles

Thirty-two strategies were reported, with several respondents outlining multiple strategies. In total, four broad strategies were identified: (i) collaborative; (ii) self-directed learning; (iii) adaptive and (iv) consciousness-raising.

Collaborative strategies involved attempts to refer to, cooperate with and seek guidance and support from organisations with expertise in the field of immigration. Fifteen strategies fell under this category, with two-thirds from LA social workers ( n = 10). Respondents cited the importance of relying on other professionals’ expertise including legal assistance, interpreters, immigration case workers and strong connections with housing providers and voluntary organisations, to facilitate their work with NRPF migrants.

I learnt by making mistakes when supporting people to apply for immigration statuses, which could have led to someone being deported.

This participant underscored the important role social workers can play in NRPF migrants’ lives, acknowledging that a mistake may have life-changing consequences for service-users.

I advise the migrant families to find a solicitor so they can challenge us. My manager know[s] this strategy and when we are challenged they always give in.

This is a clear example of how understanding local procedures can help social workers support NRPF migrants.

Consciousness-raising strategies involved efforts to raise awareness of the plight of NRPF migrants, through education, confrontation and/or advocacy. This included educating other professionals around issues facing NRPF families, writing comprehensive guidelines to support NRPF migrants, and challenging the ‘hostile’ environment and directly confronting institutions that perpetuate oppressive practice. Six participants identified this strategy, with equal representation between settings and divisions.

This study highlighted the obstacles facing social workers when working with NRPF migrants and explored the strategies they develop to overcome these impediments. Four key obstacles were identified: (i) lack of resources to support NRPF migrants; (ii) lack of knowledge and skills including the absence of relevant teaching and training; (iii) negative attitudes from some social work colleagues and (iv) insufficient support from employing organisations.

All participants agreed that there are not enough resources to effectively support NRPF migrants. This was hampered by the fact that social workers receive little or no training about how to circumvent this lack of resource to offer some support to this heterogeneous group. However, whilst training may help social workers find creative ways of providing support, the poverty of resources still needs to be addressed. These findings echo those of Jolly (2018a , 2018b ), Robinson and Masocha (2017) and Masocha (2014) . As social work is a value-based profession with an explicit commitment to social justice, human rights and anti-oppressive practice ( Dominelli, 2002 ), it was unsurprising that social workers believed they had an important role to play in the lives of NRPF migrants who sought support, and most agreed they had a responsibility to advocate on their behalf. Due to a dearth of resources, most also agreed that their failure to support NRPF migrants effectively challenged their professional values.

However, contrary to the core values of social work, a minority of respondents from across social work divisions suggested that some colleagues held negative attitudes towards NRPF migrants, raising questions about discrimination. Rather than engaging in anti-oppressive practice, this finding suggests that some social workers either actively or passively reproduced oppressive practices towards NRPF migrants, echoing similar findings around racial discrimination by Gurau and Bacchoo (2022) . Some social workers thus seem to hold contrary value positions that influence their practice goals and this is perhaps unsurprising as social workers are influenced to some degree by a society that is being pushed to become more hostile and xenophobic. Indeed, trying to positively support NRPF migrants in this hostile climate could come at personal and/or professional cost for social workers in unsupportive environments. This resonates with Masocha’s (2015) findings that whilst most practitioners expressed positive regard towards asylum-seekers, a minority conveyed pejorative views.

This study uncovered striking differences between social workers practicing in different settings and divisions. Compared to their LA and family and childcare counterparts, NHS and mental health social workers expressed substantially lower levels of confidence in their knowledge and skill-level in working with NRPF migrants, received notably lower levels of specific training and obtained less organisational guidance and institutional support in their work with NRPF migrants. They also reported much higher levels of frustration and emotional distress when working with NRPF migrants, likely due to their inability to effectively support them. This emotional turmoil is emblematic of the ambivalent aspect of social work with NRPF migrants, where practitioners are expected to be both helpers and deputised border control agents, expected to provide a holistic support to service users, but starved of the resources to do so.

Social workers, like other state and non-state actors who encounter NRPF migrants, are co-opted into a system of immigration control dominated by a hostile environment, which has a near-hegemonic status in the UK. However, hegemonies are not beyond contestation, particularly in a system that relies on infrastructural power. This article identified a series of strategies enacted by social workers that attempt to circumvent the draconian implications of hostile policies.

A 4-fold typology of strategies was inductively derived from the data, with ‘collaborative’, ‘self-directed learning’ and ‘adaptive strategies’ loosely fitting into Mostowska’s (2014) ‘subversive’ classification and ‘consciousness-raising’ fitting neatly into Mostowska’s category of 'innovative’ strategies.

Congruent with Robinson and Masocha’s (2017) findings, the results demonstrate that social workers tend to practice within the governing framework but show considerable discretion, skill and innovation to overcome substantial impediments in their efforts to support NRPF migrants. In this way, practitioners attempt to resolve the ambivalence and competing demands associated with their complex role.

Implications for policy and practice

The typology of strategies offers practical solutions and adds to the cannon of knowledge social workers can access in their work with NRPF migrants, especially in the context of a paucity of resource and a ‘hostile environment’. Results of this study indicate that social workers practicing in LAs have higher levels of knowledge, skills and confidence in working with NRPF migrants than their NHS counterparts, thus initiatives could be developed to facilitate knowledge-exchange programmes between organisations to increase practitioners’ ability to support NRPF migrants. Social work education and training could also be enhanced to increase social workers’ knowledge, skillset and confidence in using extant legislation and agencies to help support NRPF migrants. Such training may also help to educate social workers about the challenges facing NRPF migrants and help to counter the negative media and political portrayal of this group.

Limitations

This study was limited by its small sample size, which restricted generalisability and a comparative analysis of the findings. Future larger-scale studies could explore any relationships between practitioners’ use of particular strategies and the socioeconomic characteristics, local politics and number of NRPF migrants in those areas. Additionally, a mixed methods approach could augment the specificities of each strategy and explore challenges and considerations in their use through qualitative interviews. Future research could also explore the views, experiences and strategies used by other professional groups working with NRPF migrants both in the UK and elsewhere.

Exploration of each domain in the TDF shed light on the obstacles and facilitators of good practice. However, the framework focused predominantly on competencies; a more explicit examination of participants’ values and attitudes towards NRPF migrants would have been insightful. Social workers are members of broader society and also work in a contentious environment subject to the whims of political power. They are not immune to the influence of dominant narratives depicting ‘undocumented’ migrants in a pejorative manner. Asking social workers about their attitudes to undocumented migrants and major political events such as Brexit may have been illuminating.

Additionally, the self-selected sample may be biased as practitioners who hold sympathetic/more progressive views towards NRPF migrants were perhaps more likely to complete the survey and to have considered/used strategies to circumvent existing legislation.

Finally, the focus on improving social work practice with NRPF migrants has limited utility since the structural impediments imposed by a state-sponsored hostile environment are so comprehensive that practitioners will continue to struggle to meet the needs of this marginalised group. Nonetheless, social workers continue to work with this population, and any marginal improvements in practice are thus worthwhile.

Migrants with NRPFs are denied access to welfare benefits and public housing. Structurally informed by the TDF, a cross-sectional anonymous online survey examined the obstacles facing social workers working with NRPF migrants and explored their strategies for overcoming these obstacles. Responses from fifty-five social workers across England identified four major obstacles, and a new 4-fold typology of strategies was devised. Differences were noted between social workers employed in different settings, with NHS social workers reporting notably lower levels of confidence in their skill-set and knowledge, receiving less specific training and obtaining less organisational guidance and institutional support in their work with NRPF migrants compared to those in LA settings. With a lack of material resources to support NRPF migrants and the lack of political will to make public funds available to newly arrived migrants, this article has identified a number of strategies that social workers are using to support NRPF migrants. Opportunities to discuss and share such strategies, perhaps through knowledge exchange, could support this approach further.

The authors would like to thank all those who took part in the study.

The study was unfunded.

Supplementary material is available at British Journal of Social Work Journal online.

None declared.

Allsopp J. , Sigona N. , Phillimore J. ( 2014 ) ‘Poverty among refugees and asylum seekers in the UK: An evidence and policy review’, IRiS Working Paper Series, No.1 . Birmingham , Institute for Research into Superdiversity

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Atkins L. , Francis J. , Islam R. , O’Connor D. , Patey A. , Ivers N. , Foy R. , Duncan E. M. , Colquhoun H. , Grimshaw J. M. , Lawton R. , Michie S. ( 2017 ) ‘ A guide to using the theoretical domains framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems ’, Implementation Science , 12 ( 1 ), pp. 77 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9

Benton E. , Karlsson J. , Pinter I. , Provan B. , Scanlon K. , Whitehead C. ( 2022 ) Social Cost Benefit Analysis of the No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) Policy in London , London , Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE . https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/CASE/_new/publications/abstract/?index=9187

Buetow S. , Zawaly K. ( 2022 ) ‘ Rethinking researcher bias in health research ’, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice , 28 ( 5 ), pp. 843 – 6 .

Cane J. , O’Connor D. , Michie S. ( 2012 ) ‘ Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research ’, Implementation Science , 7 ( 1 ), pp. 37 . https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-37

Dalati S. , Gómez J. ( 2018 ) ‘Surveys and questionnaires’, in Gómez J. , Mouselli S. (eds), Modernizing the Academic Teaching and Research Environment: Methodologies and Cases in Business Research (Progress in is) , Cham, Switzerland , Springer .

Dominelli L. ( 2002 ) Anti-Oppressive Social Work Theory and Practice , Basignstoke, Hampshire , Palgrave Macmillan .

El-Enany N. ( 2020 ) ( B) Ordering Britain: Law, Race and Empire , Manchester, England , Manchester University Press . https://manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9781526145420/

Farmer N. J. ( 2017 ) ‘“ No recourse to public funds”, insecure immigration status and destitution: The role of social work? ’, Critical and Radical Social Work , 5 ( 3 ), pp. 357 – 67 .

Griffiths C. , Trebilcock J. ( 2023 ) ‘ Continued and intensified hostility: The problematisation of immigration in the UK government’s 2021 New Plan for Immigration ’, Critical Social Policy , 43 ( 3 ), pp. 401 – 22 . https://doi.org/10.1177/02610183221109133 .

Griffiths M. , Yeo C. ( 2021 ) ‘ The UK’s hostile environment: Deputising immigration control ’, Critical Social Policy , 41 ( 4 ), pp. 521 – 44 .

Gurau O. , Bacchoo A. ( 2022 ) Anti-Racist Report . Anti-racism Steering Group . https://whatworks-csc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WWCSC_SWE_PSWN_Anti-Racism_Full_Report_March2022.pdf

Hines Z. , Leishman E. ( 2023 ) ‘ No knowledge of “public funds”? An investigation into social work practitioners’ confidence and knowledge when working with adults with ‘no recourse to public funds ’, The British Journal of Social Work , 53 ( 1 ), pp. 40 – 59 . https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcac108

Huijg J. M. , Gebhardt W. A. , Crone M. R. , Dusseldorp E. , Presseau J. ( 2014 ) ‘ Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research ’, Implementation Science , 9 ( 11 ), pp. 11 – 6 .

Humphries B. ( 2004 ) ‘ An unacceptable role for social work: Implementing immigration policy ’, British Journal of Social Work , 34 ( 1 ), pp. 93 – 107 .

Joffe H. ( 2012 ) ‘Thematic analysis’, in Harper D. , Thompson A.R. (eds), Qualitative Research Methods in Mental Health and Psychotherapy: A Guide for Students and Practitioners , West Sussex, John Wiley & Sons .

Jolly A. ( 2018a ) ‘ No recourse to social work? Statutory neglect, social exclusion and undocumented migrant families in the UK ’, Social Inclusion , 6 ( 3 ), pp. 190 – 200 .

Jolly A. ( 2018b ) ‘“ You just have to work with what you’ve got”: Practitioner research with precarious migrant families ’, Practice , 30 ( 2 ), pp. 99 – 116 .

Larson R. B. ( 2019 ) ‘ Controlling social desirability bias ’, International Journal of Market Research , 61 ( 5 ), pp. 534 – 47 .

Mann M. ( 1986 ) ‘The autonomous power of the state: Its origins, mechanisms, and results’, in Hall J.A. (ed), States in History , Oxford , Blackwell .

Masocha S. ( 2015 ) ‘ Construction of the “other” in social workers’ discourses of asylum seekers ’, Journal of Social Work , 15 ( 6 ), pp. 569 – 85 .

Masocha S. ( 2014 ) ‘ We do the best we can: Accounting practices in social work discourses of asylum seekers ’, British Journal of Social Work , 44 ( 6 ), pp. 1621 – 36 .

Morgan K. J. ( 2023 ) ‘ Hostile environments: State infrastructural power and the exclusion of unauthorized migrants in Western Europe ’, American Journal of Sociology , 128 ( 4 ), pp. 1077 – 113 .

Mostowska M. ( 2014 ) ‘“ We shouldn’t but we do …”: Framing the strategies for helping homeless EU migrants in Copenhagen and Dublin ’, British Journal of Social Work , 44 ( 1 ), pp. i18 – i34 .

Parker S. ( 2020 ) ‘“ Just eating and sleeping”: Asylum seekers’ constructions of belonging within a restrictive policy environment ’, Critical Discourse Studies , 17 ( 3 ), pp. 243 – 59 .

Paudyal V. , Gibson Smith K. , MacLure K. , Forbes-McKay K. , Radley A. , Stewart D. ( 2019 ) ‘ Perceived roles and barriers in caring for the people who are homeless: A survey of UK community pharmacists ’, International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy , 41 ( 1 ), pp. 215 – 27 .

Robinson K. , Masocha S. ( 2017 ) ‘ Divergent practices in statutory and voluntary-sector settings? Social Work with asylum seekers ’, The British Journal of Social Work , 47 ( 5 ), pp. 1517 – 33 .

Sales R. ( 2002 ) ‘ The deserving and the undeserving? Refugees, asylum seekers and welfare in Britain ’, Critical Social Policy , 22 ( 3 ), pp. 456 – 78 .

Turnbull S. ( 2017 ) ‘ Immigration detention and the racialized governance of illegality in the United Kingdom ’, Social Justice , 44 ( 1 ), pp. 142 – 64 .

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs ( 2020 ) ‘International Migration 2020 Highlights’, available online at: https://www.un.org/en/desa/international-migration-2020-highlights

Vehovar V. , Manfreda K. L. ( 2017 ) ‘Overview: Online surveys’, in Fielding N.G , Lee R.M. , Blank G. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods , 2nd edn, London , Sage .

Supplementary data

Email alerts, citing articles via.

Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

Online ISSN 1468-263X
Print ISSN 0045-3102
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Program Finder
Admissions Services
Course Directory
Academic Calendar
Hybrid Campus
Lecture Series
Convocation
Strategy and Development
Implementation and Impact
Integrity and Oversight
In the School
In the Field
In Baltimore
Resources for Practitioners
Articles & News Releases
In The News
Statements & Announcements
At a Glance
Student Life
Strategic Priorities
Inclusion, Diversity, Anti-Racism, and Equity (IDARE)
What is Public Health?

Strategies for Effective Community Engagement: Critical Service-Learning Seminar

Come join us in a rich community engagement talk with Dr. Tyler Derreth, an assistant professor in the Department of Health, Behavior and Society and an associate Director of SOURCE. Dr. Derreth will share with BSPH community tools and resources on how public health professionals can engage in community by building authentic relationships, learning through service, redistributing power, and promoting social change during their time here at Hopkins and beyond.

Lunch included.

Part of Public Health Week 2024, hosted by the Anna Baetjer Society for Public Health Practice and sponsored by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Student Assembly.

Dr. Tyler Derreth (SOURCE)

Tyler Derreth, PhD is an assistant teaching professor in the Department of Health, Behavior, and Society. He is also the Associate Director of SOURCE, the community engagement and service-learning center at Johns Hopkins. His work concentrates on urban community-university partnerships that work toward social change. He frequently engages in educational practices to advance community goals around various social justice issues. The majority of his work centers on collaboration with Baltimore communities.

Filters and Digital Health Program Reduced Participants' Arsenic Levels by Nearly Half in American Indian Households Relying on Well Water

Two black women dressed in business attire smile at the camera as they stand next to each other.

Student Spotlight: Glendedora Dolce

A Seat at Every Table

A child drinking water from tap with her hands.

Study Estimates Nearly 70 Percent of Children Under Six in Chicago May Be Exposed to Lead-Contaminated Tap Water

Wendy Bennett Empowers Women and Families Through Research

IMAGES

(PDF) Social Work Practitioners and Practice Evaluation: How Are We Doing?
Social-Work-Research-Topics-List-Ideas.pdf
(PDF) Revisiting the Knowledge Base of Social Work: A Framework for
Journal of Social Work Practice
The Practice of Research in Social Work 3rd edition
(PDF) Teaching Social Work Practice: A Review and Analysis of Empirical

VIDEO

Social Work Practice II 03 Feb 2024
Social Work Practice II 09 November 2023 Part 2
Social Work Practice II 16 September 2023
Social Work Interviewing Skills
National Study Conference
Social work research social work important topic pms urdu

COMMENTS

Research on Social Work Practice: Sage Journals
Research on Social Work Practice (RSWP), peer-reviewed and published eight times per year, is a disciplinary journal devoted to the publication of empirical research concerning the assessment methods and outcomes of social work practice. Intervention programs covered include behavior analysis and therapy; psychotherapy or counseling with ...
Social Work Research
Social Work Research publishes exemplary research to advance the development of knowledge and inform social work practice. Find out more. Advertisement. ... Discover a more complete picture of how readers engage with research in Social Work Research through Altmetric data. Now available on article pages.
Back to the Future: Using Social Work Research to Improve Social Work
Abstract This article traces themes over time for conducting social work research to improve social work practice. The discussion considers 3 core themes: (a) the scientific practitioner, including different models for applying this perspective to research and practice; (b) intervention research; and (c) implementation science. While not intended to be a comprehensive review of these themes ...
Journal of Social Work Practice
The journal embraces social work values and seeks to represent diverse and intercultural perspectives. The journal aims to provide a forum in which: • practice, institutional and policy matters are examined through psychodynamic and systemic lenses; • the lived experience of practitioners, educators and researchers in contemporary helping ...
Social Work Research Methods
Social work research means conducting an investigation in accordance with the scientific method. The aim of social work research is to build the social work knowledge base in order to solve practical problems in social work practice or social policy. Investigating phenomena in accordance with the scientific method requires maximal adherence to ...
Social Work Research and Its Relevance to Practice: "The Gap Between
The social work profession should take action to address and further research the research-practice disconnect by establishing a clear definition and aims of social work research, and training academics in effective research-to-practice translational methods. KEYWORDS: Qualitative; research capacity;
The Pursuit of Quality for Social Work Practice: Three Generations and
Noting that there is far less literature on evidence-based practices relevant to organizational, community, and policy practice, a social work task force responding to the 2015 IOM report recommended that this gap be a target of our educational and research efforts (National Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work, 2016). And ...
(PDF) Social Work Research and Its Relevance to Practice: "The Gap
The social work profession should take action to address and further research the research-practice disconnect by establishing a clear definition and aims of social work research, and training ...
Social Work Practice: History and Evolution
Social work practice is created within a political, social, cultural and economic matrix that shapes the assumptions of practice, the problems that practice must deal with and the preferred outcomes of practice. Over time, the base forces that create practice and create the context for practice, change. Midgley (1981) correctly notes that ...
Social Work Research Methods
Social work researchers will send out a survey, receive responses, aggregate the results, analyze the data, and form conclusions based on trends. Surveys are one of the most common research methods social workers use — and for good reason. They tend to be relatively simple and are usually affordable.
Full article: Social workers use of knowledge in an evidence-based
View PDF View EPUB. Since the 1990s, evidence-based practice has become part of social work, grounded in the notion that social work should be a research-based profession. However, recent studies show that social workers struggle with bridging research and practice. This study analysed Norwegian social workers' use of knowledge in their daily ...
PDF Practice-Informed Research: Contemporary Challenges and Ethical
social work. The development of research for use in practice has matured considerably during recent decades and well beyond Meyer's (1976) characterization of social work research as being haphazard and with little demand. Austin (1999) chronicles and describes the advancement of social work research highlighting the development
How to Bring Research Into Social Work Practice
5.01 (d): Social workers should contribute to the knowledge base of social work and share with colleagues their knowledge related to practice, research, and ethics…. 5.02 (a) Social workers should monitor and evaluate policies, the implementation of programs, and practice interventions. 5.02 (b) Social workers should promote and facilitate ...
Integrating Practice Research into Social Work Field Education
Bringing Practice Research and Social Work Field Education Together. In recent years, many social work scholars have described how the profession requires incorporating a greater understanding of research into social work practice (Teater, 2017). Despite good intentions and the pursuit of the "social good," social work can often lack ...
Social Work with No Recourse to Public Fund Migrants: Obstacles and
As social work is a value-based profession with an explicit commitment to social justice, human rights and anti-oppressive practice (Dominelli, 2002), it was unsurprising that social workers believed they had an important role to play in the lives of NRPF migrants who sought support, and most agreed they had a responsibility to advocate on ...
What Can You Do With a Master's In Social Work?
An equity-first mindset brings attention to inequalities and fosters empowering, anti-oppressive practice. In jobs outside of social work, prioritizing equity helps ensure reasonable accommodations, fair pay, and competitive benefits while avoiding discriminatory conduct. ... (a form of medical racism). Relying on this research, a social worker ...
Social workers with lived experience of mental health concerns
Personal experience with adversity or mental health concerns may draw people to the social work profession (Dykes, 2016; Steen et al., 2021) ... Implications are offered for preparing professionals to use LE in practice. KEYWORDS: Anti-oppressive practice; mental distress; ... Register to receive personalised research and resources by email ...
Strategies for Effective Community Engagement: Critical Service
Come join us in a rich community engagement talk with Dr. Tyler Derreth, an assistant professor in the Department of Health, Behavior and Society and an associate Director of SOURCE. Dr. Derreth will share with BSPH community tools and resources on how public health professionals can engage in community by building authentic relationships, learning through service, redistributing power, and ...