This report was supported by the Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research, John J. Lanigan, Jr., Executive Director, individual social work schools / programs and social work organizations.

The dissemination of this report has been funded by a '98-99 grant from the Ford Foundation, NY, NY.

No National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) funds were used to support, conduct, publish or disseminate this report.
 
 

Acknowledgements

This report was prepared at the suggestion of IASWR and members of the 1988-1991 Task Force on Social Work Research. The contents of the Report on Progress and the recommendations that are included are solely the responsibility of the author. Karen Gray, Ph.D. student at the School of Social Work, provided technical assistance during the summer of 1997. Drafts of the Report were circulated to members of the 88-91 Task Force. Comments and suggestions were received from Dean Ronald Feldman, Columbia University School of Social Work, Professor Betsy Vourlekis, School of Social Work, University of Maryland, Professor Claudia Coulton, Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Dean Tony Tripodi, College of Social Work, Ohio State University, Dean Pat Ewalt, School of Social Work, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Professor Steve Segal, School of Social Welfare, University of California at Berkeley. Information was also provided by Dr. John Lanigan, Jr., Executive Director, IASWR, Dr. Juan Ramos, NIMH, and Dr. Kenneth Lutterman, NIMH. We are also grateful for support from the Ford Foundation, allowing for the printing and dissemination of this report.

Sources of Information

The information contained in this report came from a number of different sources: a survey of social work education programs conducted by the National Association of Deans and Directors supplemented by an additional inquiry to deans and directors in 1997; an e-mail inquiry to members of the Society for Social Work and Research; reports of the research development activities carried out through IASWR; reports from the National Institute of Mental Health, and the annual statistical reports of the Council on Social Work Education. Preliminary presentations of the report were made to the membership of the Society for Social Work and Research at the Second National Conference in Miami in January 1998, and to members of the IASWR Board of Directors and of the 1988-1991 Task Force at a pre-conference meeting held in conjunction with the 1998 Annual Program Meeting of the Council on Social Work Education.
 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY *

National Foundations *

SECTION 11 *

SOURCES: *
 
 
 
 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Task Force on Social Work Research presented its Report to the National Advisory Mental Health Council of the National Institute of Mental Health in 1991. This Report on Progress is an overview of the very important expansion of research resources within social work that has taken place since 1991, and an examination of issues that still require action. Current research initiatives within social work deal with some of the most

critical human problems in this society, including:

• Problems affecting the safety and well-being of children;
• Problems of mental illness;
• Problems of persistent household poverty;
• Problems of substance abuse;
• Problems of acute and chronic illness;
• Problems particularly affecting women;
• Problems associated with race and ethnicity;
• Problems associated with aging.

NIMH has responded to recommendations of the 1991 Task Force Report in a very substantial way. Seven Social Work Research Development Centers have been funded. With initial support from NIMH 5 professional associations within social work created the Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research (IASWR). Research training workshops have been held as a result of collaborative efforts between NIMH and IASWR. An increased number of social work principal investigators have been funded through NIMH. Through IASWR social work has participated in national developments that promise to provide increased support for social work research, particularly in the fields of child welfare services and drug addiction services.

The number of social work education programs with substantial research development infrastructures has increased. Some 200 social work researchers have received national-level support from both governmental sources and foundations for research within the problem areas identified above. However, pre-doctoral and post-doctoral research education programs have not been expanded. There are significant limitations on the future availability of well-prepared social work scholar/researchers. There has been an increase in the professional channels for research dissemination but it is not clear that practice-relevant findings from research are actually reaching the current practice community. Funding for individual research initiatives now comes from a wide variety of governmental and non-governmental sources. However, it is NIMH that has provided consistent institutional support directed to the systematic development and expansion of research resources within social work. This has included funding support for mental health related developmental projects, consistent professional support from members of the NIMH staff, and leadership support from Dr. Steven Hyman, Director of the National Institute of Mental Health.

Issues for the Future

The development of practice-relevant research for social workers has become a crucial issue in the 1990s. There are demands from all directions for research-based practice guidelines and for research-based evidence of professional effectiveness. The most critical issue for the future is to develop collaboration between social work researchers and social work practitioners in developing research dealing with evidence-based treatment and services, and in communicating the results of such research to the professional practice community.

Pre-doctoral and post-doctoral education programs do not meet the needs for an expanded number of well-prepared social work researchers from diverse cultural backgrounds. Limitations in financial support for such students is a key barrier - a barrier that requires action by individual social work education programs, the organized profession and the federal government. Dissemination strategies, which actually reach the professional practice community, are urgently needed. Each of the major social problem domains in which social work researchers are involved requires a distinctive developmental strategy. Of highest priority are strategies for the continued development of research resources in mental health and for the development of research-based, practice-relevant knowledge for use in services dealing with children and their families, including the public child welfare services.

The creation of IASWR by five professional associations was a very significant step for the development of research resources within social work. Continued funding support for IASWR from the profession is essential. However, it is also important that CSWE and NASW take action to implement recommendations in the 1991 Task Force Report, that have not yet been implemented, that: 1) NASW establish an office specifically concerned with the application of research-based practice-relevant knowledge by the present body of professional practitioners; and 2) that CSWE establish an office specifically concerned with the integration of research-based, practice-relevant knowledge into the professional curriculum at all levels. It is essential that NIMH continue its support for research development as well as support for new research initiatives. There is also a need for a national leadership initiative within social work to establish an expanded funding base for the development of research resources within social work. Particular attention should be given to the development of on-going support from national foundations that are concerned with the fundamental social conditions that social work researchers are now dealing with.

BACKGROUND

The Task Force on Social Work Research, appointed in 1988 by Lewis Judd, M.D., Director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), presented a report to the National Advisory Mental Health Council of NIMH: Building Social Work Knowledge for Effective Services and Policies; A Plan for Research Development (December 1991). The report was based on an extensive assessment of the research resources in the field of social work and the requirements for strengthening those resources in order to contribute to the social work knowledge base in mental health and in other areas of social work practice. Recommendations in the report included:

• Recommendations to the National Institute of Mental Health.
• Recommendations to professional associations in social work and social work education.
• Recommendations to other federal agencies.
• Recommendations to social work education programs.
• Recommendations to service agencies.

The Report on Progress provides an examination of nationwide research resource developments against the background of The Task Force Report without attempting to examine the specific characteristics of individual research initiatives. The report focuses on nationally visible research developments that are intended to contribute to the general body of knowledge used by social work practitioners, as well as by other human service professional specialists. There are many other types of research that social workers are involved in which are not reflected in this report. This includes internal agency administrative and program studies, studies carried out as part of classroom instruction in social work education programs, and contract evaluation studies of individual service programs. Moreover, such research studies are only one part of the scholarly enterprise that social work practitioners and social work educators are regularly engaged in.
 
 

Significance of Social Work Research

In appointing The Task Force on Social Work Research in 1988, Dr. Lewis L. Judd, M.D., Director of the National Institute for Mental Health, said:

• Problems affecting the development, safety and well-being of children and adolescents;
• Problems of mental illness;

• Problems of persistent household poverty;
• Problems of substance abuse;
• Problems of acute and chronic illness, including HIV-AIDS;
• Problem conditions particularly affecting women;
• Problems associated with race and ethnicity;
• Problems associated with the processes of aging.

SECTION 1

RESEARCH RESOURCE DEVELOPMENTS

Investment in Research Development by the National Institute of Mental Health

"NIMH should provide support for research development in social work comparable to the support it has provided for research development in other mental health professions." (Task Force Report, 1991)

NIMH has responded to the 1991 Task Force Report in a very substantial manner. NIMH has supported the establishment of research development centers, the creation of a national research support infrastructure, increased funding for research training and for research curriculum development, together with increased support of individual competitive research proposals. The NIMH initiatives have been matched by a major effort by professional associations in social work and social work education programs to strengthen and expand research support structures and the body of practice-relevant research in social work.

Steven Hyman, M.D., Director of the National Institute of Mental Health, stated in July 1996:

The most dramatic proposal in the Task Force Report was the call for the creation of 10 Social Work Research Development Centers. In the period since The Task Force Report, seven Social Work Research Development Centers have been funded. Each center has received initial support for the development of research center infrastructure and the establishment of a multi-disciplinary research development plan, as well as support for at least one major research project. The Social Work Research Development Centers and their major research foci are as follows:

1. George Warren Brown School of Social Work Washington University

• Access to mental health care, integration of mental health services, and effectiveness of mental health care.

1. The College of Social Work, University of Tennessee

• Organization and delivery of mental health services to children and adolescents.

1. The School of Social Work, University of Michigan

• Poverty, risk and mental health.

1. The School of Social Work, Portland State University

• Organization and provision of mental health care to children and adolescents.

1. The School of Social Work, University of Washington

• Mental health prevention services.

1. The School of Social Work, University of Pennsylvania

• Care of persons with severe mental disorders.

1. The School of Social Work, University of Pittsburgh

• Patient ecology, adherence and treatment effectiveness.

National Social Work Research Support Structure

In 1992, five professional organizations in social work created The Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research (IASWR):

• Association of Baccalaureate Social Work Program Directors (BPD)
• National Association of Deans and Directors of Schools of Social Work (NADD)
• Group for the Advancement of Doctoral Education (GADE);
• Council on Social Work Education (CSWE);
• National Association of Social Workers (NASW).

A Board of Directors, appointed by the five participating organizations, govern IASWR. An eleven-member Technical Advisory Committee was also established for IASWR in 1996. There have been four Executive Directors:

• Betsy Vourlekis, Ph.D. (Interim)
• Patricia Mrazek, Ph.D.
• Kathleen Ell, DSW
• John L. Lanigan, Jr. Ph.D.

Research Training and Research Dissemination

NIMH has provided support for a series of research training workshops and research institutes as well as funding pre-doctoral and post-doctoral training grants in social work education programs. This includes:

An extended Research Training Workshop held at the University of Wisconsin in 1992-1993 with 20 faculty participants.

Research Dissemination Workshops, held in 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998 at the University of Michigan. The topics were:

• In 1997, four 2-day research dissemination workshops were held in California for social work faculty members and social work practitioners with 80 participants.
• During the six years from 1992 to 1997 there were a number of pre-doctoral research training grants from NIMH and 2 post-doctoral training grants. In addition, individual grants have been made to pre-doctoral and post-doctoral students in social work education programs. The Council on Social Work Education Minority Fellowship Program received funds from NIMH during these years for 20 students each year. Undergraduate research trainee grants have also been made during this period.

There have been no social work applications, and therefore, no awards made, for NIMH K-O8 Research Scientist Development Awards for Clinicians. These awards provide a major opportunity for junior faculty members in social work education programs to acquire the research expertise needed to establish a long-term program of research.

Research Curriculum Development

NIMH has supported the development of research curriculum guides and curriculum components:

• A grant from NIMH to GADE resulted in the preparation of Guidelines for Quality in Social Work Doctoral Programs (1992). This report was distributed to the 55 graduate programs in social work, which offer a doctoral degree in Social Work.
• A grant from NIMH to the Association of Baccalaureate Social Work Program Directors resulted in the preparation of Research and Undergraduate Social Work Education: A Report to the Profession (1995).
• In the summer of 1997, an Intensive Bachelor of Social Work Faculty Development Workshop, Focusing on Mental Health Research for Generalist Social Work was held at Cornell University. The focus of the workshop was the development of research curriculum modules for BSW programs with publication in the Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work. In 1998, a second research curriculum workshop for faculty members in BSW programs was held. Forty faculty members participated in these workshops.
• Research curriculum modules for doctoral programs have been prepared through a GADE program coordinated by Dr. James Moran.
• In 1998, at the request of CSWE and NADD, an MSW research curriculum development workshop was held at Syracuse University with 20 faculty participants.

Technical assistance has been provided to individual social work researchers through NIMH staff members and through the contract between NIMH and IASWR.

• Technical Assistance Workshops have been held by the Director of IASWR and NIMH staff members in connection with the Annual Program Meeting of the Council on Social Work Education, the NASW Annual Professional Conference and at other social work conferences. In 1995 and 1997, one-day workshops on research proposal development were held which included 25 social work faculty members. In 1997 and 1998, one-day workshops were held for doctoral students on dissertation grant proposal development which included 52 students.
• Individual technical assistance has been provided by NIMH staff members and through the NIMH contract with IASWR.

In FY 1993, there were 38 research awards by NIMH, for $9.5 million, made to social work education programs or Principal Investigators with social work degrees. In FY 1995, there were 54 awards for $15.4 million, and in FY 1997, there were 60. In FY 1993, there were 5 new/competing research awards to faculty and students in social work education programs. In FY 1995, there were 14 and in FY 1997, there were 23.

During FY 1997, the most recent federal funding period, NIMH made:

• 6 new and competing RO1 research grants
• 2 R29 new investigator awards
• 7 small grants including 3 dissertation research grants
• 3 research enhancement projects at social work research developments centers
• 2 research training grants

Summary

During the period since 1991, The National Institute of Mental Health, guided by The Task Force Report recommendations, has provided major support for the development of mental health research resources within the professional field of social work. There has been a continuous and effective working relationship with national leadership associations in social work, individually and through IASWR, as well as with a very large number of individual social work education programs. Funding for practice-relevant research has increased both through the social work research development centers and through grants to individual researchers. Most important, there has been a continuous emphasis on the importance of the development of high quality social work research for the provision of effective mental health services to individuals, families and communities by social work practitioners, and by other mental health professionals.

Other National Research Development Initiatives

"Research development requires concerted action by the major associations in social work and social work education" (Task Force Report, 1991).

In addition to the initiatives supported through NIMH there have been other national research resource developments initiated through the organized profession of social work.

National Social Work Research Infrastructure: IASWR

• Each of the five participating professional associations has provided funding support (currently $160,000 per year) for the Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research (IASWR) over the past six years. In 1997, the Ford Foundation made a grant of $300,000 for support of IASWR over two years, replacing the funding support initially provided by NIMH.
• In 1997, IASWR was awarded a Cooperative Agreement by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for $1.6 million to coordinate the support of a four-year, three-site study of social work primary health care interventions. This project will involve collaboration with three social work education programs in carrying out the on-site research.
• In 1994, researchers in social work created the Society for Social Work and Research (SSWR). In 1998 the Society had some 600 individual members. The first national conference of the Society, co-sponsored by IASWR and with funding support from NIMH, was held in 1995. The second national conference of the Society was held in January 1998 with a program that included the presentation of roughly 80 research papers. The third Society Conference will be held in January 1999 in Austin, Texas.
• The Quantitative Methods Interest Group, which has been meeting for nine years in connection with the Annual Program Meeting of the Council on Social Work Education, has provided a forum for the exchange of information among faculty members teaching research methodology.
• The Task Force on Administrative Research Infrastructures within Social Work Programs, created by NADD, prepared a report titled Challenges and Opportunities for Promoting Federally Funded Research in Social Work Programs (April 1997).
• A workshop on Developing Research Infrastructure in Social Work Schools/Programs was held at The George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University, in October 1996, with co-sponsorship by IASWR and NIMH. Seventeen schools were represented. A Summary Report from the Workshop was issued in 1997.
• A Leadership Development Institute, Building Research Infrastructure Among Social Work Programs co-sponsored by IASWR and NADD, was held at the 1997 Bi-annual Meeting of NADD.

Members of the profession, through IASWR, have participated in a series of national research development initiatives:

• Establishment of the Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research (OBSSR) within the National Institutes of Health.
• Preparation of the Report, Enhancing Social Work Research on Military Women’s Health (DOD, 1996) with funding from the Defense Women’s Health Research Program.
• Organization of the Trans-NIH Symposium on Psychosocial Intervention: Social Work’s Contribution (1996).
• Preparation of A Report from the Ad Hoc Committee on Prevention Research in Social Work (1997) for the Work Group on Mental Disorders Prevention Research of the National Advisory Mental Health Council, NIMH.
• Participation through IASWR and NASW in the establishment of the NIH Working Group on Child Abuse and Neglect. Five NIH Institutes were called upon to develop a research agenda related to child abuse and neglect. In 1997, NIH released the report of the Working Group; NIH Research on Child Abuse and Neglect: Current Status and Future Plans (1997). An NIH training workshop for child welfare researchers was held in 1998.
• Participation in the development of the United States Air Force Family Advocacy Program Post-doctoral Fellowship - School of Social Work, University of Maryland at Baltimore;
• Participation in the organization of a Technical Assistance Seminar and Workshop on Substance Abuse Research (1997) supported by the National Institute of Drug Abuse.

The opportunities for research dissemination within the profession have been expanded.

Research Publications

There have been two specialized social work research journals established since 1991:

• Research on Social Work Practice, initiated by Sage Publications
• Social Work Research, initiated by NASW

Dr. Janet Williams and Dr. Kathleen Ell have edited a textbook on mental health research findings of the last 20 years that are relevant to social work practice; Williams, J., & Ell, K. (1998) Advances in Mental Health Research: Implications for Practice. Washington, DC: NASW Press. In the forward, Dr. Steven E. Hyman, Director, NIMH states:

"Information drawn from many basic disciplines makes clear that all brain activity (and, in turn, the onset of mental disorders and their treatment) reflects the impact of disparate environmental influences on genetic and molecular processes. This insight argues strongly for NIMH’s support of research on matters of profound interest to the discipline of social work."

Research Conferences

The conferences of the Society for Social Work and Research have become a major opportunity for the presentation of significant research findings. However, the audience is largely composed of research specialists. There is no established channel for bringing the results of these conferences systematically to the attention of the professional practitioner community. There have also been specialized national conferences in the 1990’s on research-related subjects:

• Knowledge for Practice: Practitioners and Researchers as Partners, Center for the Study of Social Work Practice, Columbia University School of Social Work (November, 1993).
• National Symposium on Outcomes Measurement in the Human Services, Center for the Study of Social Work Practice, Columbia University School of Social Work (November, 1995).
• National Conference on Research and Services in Support of Children and Their Families, Research and Training Center on Family Support and Children’s Mental Health, Graduate School of Social Work, Portland State University (May, 1997).

Professional Conferences

The annual conferences of the MASW and the CSWE are the largest gatherings of social work practitioners and social work educators. There is an increased awareness of the significance of knowledge-building research in the planning of these conferences. This includes the creation of a specific empirical research category in the CSWE Call for Papers, and the involvement of IASWR in the development of research meetings at the 1997 NASW Annual Conference. However, neither organization has made the annual conference a major showcase for significant, knowledge-building, practice-relevant research.

Social Work Research Resource Development in Social Work Education Programs

"Social work education programs are responsible for strengthening research education and research development . . . "(Task Force Report, 1991).

The information that follows came from:

• A survey of social work education programs by NADD in 1995
• An e-mail inquiry in 1997 to the members of the SSWR as part of this report
• An inquiry to deans and directors of social work education programs in 1997 as part of this report
• The NIMH
• The IASWR
• CSWE Statistical Reports

In 1991, the Report of the Task Force on Social Work Research reported that some 10-12 social work education programs had either organized programs of research with a formal research support infrastructure, or a significant cadre of individual researchers (five or more) with nationally funded research projects. Currently there are 16 social work education programs that fit this description, including the 7 programs with an NIMH Social Work Research Development Center grant. All of these social work education programs include doctoral education programs.

In 1991, there were additional 10-15 schools with the beginnings of an organized research infrastructure or at least two nationally funded researchers. Currently there are 13 schools in this category. These social work education programs also have doctoral education programs.

Hence, there are approximately 29 social work education programs with sustained research development, including nationally funded research, in comparison with some 25 programs in 1991. There are currently 25 other social work education programs with at least one nationally funded researcher. Some of these programs have vigorous research activities, including program evaluation studies, with state and local funding that is both governmental and non-governmental.

Today, there are over 200 scholar/researchers with some form of national funding, governmental and foundation, in roughly 55 social work education programs. In addition, there are other active researchers with funding support from state and local sources, or from internal university sources, or who are engaged in personal research as a part of their academic activities without financial support.

Research Domains

An examination of the reports of on-going research in social work education programs, including research centers and institutes and the activities of individual funded researchers, indicates a clustering of current research in the following areas. The number of individuals who reported this as one area of personal research activity or research interest and some examples of the specific research topics which have been reported follow:

1. Families/children/adolescents/child welfare/child abuse (over 300 researchers identified this as an area of research interest):

• Teenage parenting
• Children with drug exposure
• Children’s exposure to violence
• Mental health of children
• Child abuse
• Children in residential treatment and therapeutic foster-care
• Health conditions among Puerto Rican children
• Kin and non-kin foster care
• Open adoptions
• Community-based services and the prevention of child abuse
• Family preservation services
• Permanency planning for abused children
• Healthy Start programs
• False reports of child abuse
• Illness among children
• Grief in childhood
• Poverty, depression and child health
• HIV Prevention and Life Options for Youth in Foster Care

• Community-based mental health services
• Pre-adolescent suicidality
• Child and adolescent diagnosis
• Psycho-education and maintenance of community living
• Children’s exposure to violence and mental health
• Organization and financing of mental health services
• Mental health help seeking by African Americans and Caucasian Americans
• Peer-support groups and mental illness
• Use of mental health services by children in state custody
• Mental health services for the elderly
• Access to mental health services
• Effectiveness of mental illness treatment services
• Costs of public mental health services

• Women’s health issues
• Economic and political influences on state health policy
• Managed health care and Medicaid
• Hypertension in the elderly population
• Impact of nutrition education programs in congregate meal sites
• Prostrate cancer prevention
• Child/Teen health program
• Children’s health
• Children with HIV-AIDS
• Occupational health hazards
• HIV-AIDS and substance abuse
• AIDS-related street out-reach

Evaluation and planning of services for older adults

Alzheimer’s Disease

Aging processes

Quality assurance in long-term care

Social support among Korean and Mexican-American elderly

Care-giving for community-dwelling frail elderly

Interdisciplinary geriatric team training

5. Poverty/income maintenance/social policy (~ 60 researchers identified this as an area of research interest):

• Poverty law
• Welfare reform
• Employment training programs
• Poverty and violence
• Poverty and mental health
• SSI and mental health policy
• General assistance
• Child support

• Women criminal offenders
• Women and HIV-AIDS
• Grandmothers raising children
• Mental health and mental illness among women
• Birth mothers and adopting mothers
• Women and substance abuse
• Domestic violence and survivors
• Women and homelessness
• Adolescent mothers

• Homelessness and substance abuse
• Services for drug-abusing women and drug exposed children
• Substance abuse treatment for individuals with HIV-AIDS
• Motivational counseling for detoxification patients
• Prevention of substance abuse

Among 67 researchers who responded to an individual e-mail questionnaire to members of the Society for Social Work and Research, the following were the primary areas of research interest. These rankings are consistent with the pattern of existing research activities in social work education programs indicated above. They are listed in rank order based on the number of respondents indicating the domain as a current or a future research interest:

1. Issues affecting children
2. Mental health
3. Health
4. Gerontology
5. Poverty
6. Issues affecting women
7. Substance abuse

Doctoral programs in social work are the major resource for the preparation of researchers in social work, although a number of social work researchers receive advanced training in research through social science disciplines. However, over a period of nearly two decades there has been little change in the number of doctoral graduates. Moreover, substantial numbers of these doctoral graduates pursue advanced professional practice careers, or become faculty members in social work education programs that do not have a research support infrastructure. Given the current wave of retirements among persons with research interests, who obtained doctorates in the 1950s and 1960s, it appears likely that current doctoral programs are not contributing significantly to an expansion of the total number of active scholar/researchers in social work.

In 1991, The Task Force Report pointed out that the majority of doctoral students enter doctoral education programs in their mid-30’s after completing an MSW degree and an initial period of professional experience. They are, therefore, older than graduate students in most academic fields, have an extended career as a doctoral student with only a limited period of full-time study and, in general, begin academic and research careers in their early 40’s. There is no indication that this pattern has changed since 1991.

• The number of doctoral programs in social work has increased:

• The number of doctoral graduates has remained quite stable over an extended period:

• Since 1980-‘81, the annual number of reported doctoral graduates has varied from a low of 181 (1984-85) to a high of 332 (1987-88). There has been only one year when the number of doctoral graduates was above 300. (MSW graduates have gone from 9,750 to 14,484 in the same period.)
• The average number of doctoral graduates across all programs during the

• Among the most recent doctoral students (1996-1997):

• Among doctoral graduates:

23% were from these groups.

Research Funding Support

"Support for research training and research development should also come from federal agencies other than NIMH that are responsible for service programs in fields of social work practice" (Task Force Report, 1991).

There have been discussions with the National Institute of Drug Abuse about the establishment of a research development program, similar to the initiatives supported by NIMH. There are currently no other federal agencies that have considered a national strategy for research development in social work.

There are a wide variety of national sources that are identified as providing research project funding by at least one social work education program. These include federal agencies and organizations and also national foundations. Members of the SSWR reported in 1997 that 46% of their funding for research came from federal sources and 37% came from private foundations (SSWR News, February 1997).

There is, at present, no systematic information about the level of research funding support across all social work education programs. However, among the sources of research funding reported by social work education programs and individual researchers are the following:

Federal

• National Institute of Mental Health
• National Institute on Drug Abuse
• National Institute of Nursing Research
• National Institute on Aging
• National Cancer Institute
• National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
• National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
• National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
• National Institute of Dental Research
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Administration for Children and Families
• National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect
• DHHS, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
• DHHS, Office of Human Development Services
• Children’s Bureau
• Center for Social Services Research
• DHHS, Administration on Aging
• DHHS, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
• SAMHSA, Center for Mental Health Services
• SAMHSA, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention
• Health Care Finance Administration (HCFA)
• Medicaid
• U.S. Department of Justice
• U.S. Department of Education
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
• National Academy of Science
• National Science Foundation
• Veterans Administration

• Andrus Foundation of AARP
• Annie E. Casey Foundation
• Aspen Institute
• Carnegie Corporation of New York
• Charles Stewart Mott Foundation
• Danforth Foundation
• Dewitt Wallace-Reader’s Digest Fund
• Edna McConnell Clark Foundation
• Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation
• Ford Foundation
• Foundation for Child Development
• George Gund Foundation
• John A. Hartford Foundation
• John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
• John S. and James L. Knight Foundation
• Joyce Foundation
• Lilly Endowment
• Milbank
• New York Community Trust
• Pew Charitable Trusts
• Pfizer Foundation
• Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
• Rockefeller Foundation
• Spencer Foundation
• Stuart Foundation
• Urban Institute
• W.K. Kellogg Foundation

Significant efforts are being made to expand the base of support for social work research among federal research organizations. However, there is not a national-level approach across the social work profession to strengthening the base of support for social work research among major national foundations, many of which are concerned with those social conditions with which social work researchers are already engaged.

Summary

There has been a substantial expansion of research resources within the organized profession of social work since the 1991 Task Force Report, primarily in connection with social work education programs. The response of NIMH to the Report has been very significant, given the wide range of research commitments facing the Institute. NIMH has supported the development of a national infrastructure for research development, funded Social Work Research Development Centers, and supported improvements in research training. In addition, there has been an increase in the number of social work researchers receiving competitive research funding. The IASWR has established an important precedent of collaboration among the four professional education associations and the NASW in pursuit of common goals. Future development of research resources within social work will depend very heavily on the continuation of that collaboration.

Primarily through IASWR, the profession of social work has participated in developments in fields beyond mental health. This included the NIH Working Group on Child Abuse and Neglect and the National Institute for Drug Abuse. Both may help to broaden the support base for social work research development. There have been other significant developments at the national level including the creation of the Society for Social Work and Research. Potential sources within social work for dissemination to the practitioner community, and the community-at-large, of knowledge-building research findings have increased. However, it is not clear that such communication with the current practice community is actually taking place.

The challenge of competing for a Social Work Research Development Center grant, or even the consideration of developing an application for such a grant, has resulted in the strengthening of research infrastructures within individual social work education programs and increased the number of social work education programs with an organized research infrastructure. There has been systematic attention to strengthening research education throughout the professional curriculum, including BSW, MSW and doctoral programs. An important series of research training workshops and technical assistance institutes have been held for faculty members in social work education programs.

However, there appears to be little change in the scope of specialized research training across social work education programs. The number of doctoral graduates remains essentially static and there has been very limited use of post-doctoral research training opportunities, in part as a result of the high demand for teaching faculty with doctoral qualifications as enrollments in existing social work education programs expand and new programs are established. Those social work education programs with a strong commitment to research are drawing support for individual research initiatives from a wide variety of national funding sources, both governmental and non-governmental. However, to date, the National Institute of Mental Health is the only source that has provided broad based funding support for research resource development in social work.

The resources devoted to research development in social work have increased markedly. There has been a substantial increase in the attention given to research development by national leaders within the profession, and within individual social work education programs. Yet, an intensified effort is required. Social work practitioners are involved with many of the most critical human problems in our society. They need tested information as to the most effective forms of professional intervention.

The development of research resources, more than any other aspect of professional development, requires national level initiatives. The primary funding sources for knowledge-building, practice-relevant research are at the national level, federal research agencies and national foundations. The continued development of research resources within social work requires collaborative relationships with federal agencies in addition to NIMH, national organizations in other human service professions, and leadership foundations.

While much of the attention in this Report on Progress has been focused on specific developments that have taken place in social work professional education programs, it is essential to remember that the purpose for expanding research resources is to improve the quality of the professional practice services provided by the several hundred thousand practicing social workers who are "the profession".

SECTION 11

Issues for the Future

The first section of this Report on Progress describes specific developments that have taken place since 1991. It also points to critical issues that continue to require attention from members of the organized profession, including both practicing professionals and participants in social work education programs. The emphasis in the following discussion is on strengthening the contributions of research in social work to the development of the practicing profession. This is in contrast to the career advancement of individual researchers, or the improvement of the relative status of social work education programs within academic communities, although these are also relevant objectives.

The 1990’s have been a period when the importance of practice-relevant research for social work practitioners has become a crucial issue in professional survival. There are demands from all directions for research-based practice guidelines and for evidence of professional effectiveness, including agency-based practice and practice in the world of managed health care and managed behavioral health care. Almost equally important are demands for evidence that professional interventions are not actively harmful. Research on the effectiveness of service interventions is a major form of representation of the profession to the larger society. The most important issue for the immediate future is to bring the practice effectiveness concerns of social work practitioners together with the resources represented by social work researchers.

Research Development

The current pattern of research activities includes a great deal of diversity and the involvement of a substantial number of individual researchers in individual studies. However, it is crucial to distinguish between studies that are 1). an interesting, career-building, intellectual activity, or a response to a local funding opportunity, (studies which often result only in an unpublished report to a funder or a single journal article), and those studies which 2). address a central professional practice issue and that become part of a cumulative knowledge building process through publication. In particular, this means well conceptualized, well designed, replicable studies of practice interventions. It is such studies, in particular, which are part of a larger knowledge building process which justifies systematic and substantial support from within the organized profession and from national funding sources.

The Summary Report of the Workshop on Developing Research Infrastructure in Social Work Schools/Programs (September, 1996) and the National Association of Deans and Directors Report (April, 1997) have identified critical elements in establishing a sustained, knowledge building research endeavor in social work education programs. These include:

• Leadership by the academic dean or director in research development
• Strengthening research training in doctoral programs and actively involving doctoral students in on-going research initiatives
• Development of post-doctoral research training opportunities
• Building collaborations with the practice community and human service agencies
• Establishing a research culture which stresses the importance of research in all aspects of the social work education program and creates public visibility for research
• Establishing a research culture which stresses interactions among research, teaching and service
• A core of seasoned researchers
• Establishing non-tenure research positions which are given equal recognition in the academic community
• The development of a research team model, including interdisciplinary participation, rather than relying primarily on a solo researcher model
• Carrying out pilot studies, and publishing from pilot studies
• Use of an internal peer-review process before proposals are submitted to external funding sources
• Strengthening the role of research mentors together with the connection of junior researchers with senior researchers
• Building collaborations with social work researchers in free-standing research institutes or centers and involving multiple social work education programs
• The provision of technical and administrative support for research.

• NIMH infrastructure grant as a Social Work Research Development Center
• Pilot studies
• Consultations from nationally recognized multi-disciplinary specialists
• A series of research projects funded through NIH and additional proposals under review at NIH
• Development of an intervention study to be funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
• NIMH funding for pre-doctoral research training
• Minority supplement to an existing research grant
• Dissertation research grant
• Sponsorship of a National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors post-doctoral fellow
• Publication of a Center Newsletter to inform interested constituencies of research developments.

Doctoral Education

The period since the 1991 Task Force Report has brought little change in the development of new research scholars through doctoral and post-doctoral studies. While the number of doctoral programs has increased, the number of doctoral graduates has not changed significantly nor has the level of post-doctoral research training opportunities (there being only two schools with NIMH institutional funding for post-doctoral students). Among social work doctoral education programs only two-thirds define their primary objective as the preparation of scholar/researchers. The remaining one-third define their primary objective as the preparation of advanced practitioners. The proportion of women among doctoral graduates and doctoral students has remained relatively constant at 70%. The proportion of doctoral graduates who come from African American, Latino, American Indian, and Asian American backgrounds has decreased, although a recent survey of Ph.D. programs suggests that some 25% of current students are from such backgrounds.

Social work doctoral education programs continue to face the problem of recruiting social workers with practice experience as doctoral students while providing limited financial support. Limitations in financial support may be one contributing factor to the gap between the proportion of doctoral students from Latino, African American, American Indian and Asian American backgrounds (25%) and the proportion of such individuals among doctoral graduates (16%).

The practice experience expectation for doctoral students is reinforced by the CSWE accreditation requirement for two years of practice experience for faculty members who are to teach professional practice methods. This limits the opportunity for MSW graduates with a strong research interest, regardless of the amount of their pre-MSW practice experience, to pursue doctoral studies in social work immediately following the completion of MSW studies.

This requirement may, in general, have positive implications for the quality of teaching in professional degree programs. However, it has not been matched by appropriate levels of financial support for doctoral students who do bring practice experience. This has had the effect of largely eliminating from doctoral studies many of the individuals with successful practice careers, and/or with substantial household financial responsibilities, as well as those persons who have large educational loan burdens at the end of their MSW education. Moreover, the limitations on financial assistance encourage extended, part-time programs of study, which are not consistent with the development of well-qualified research scholars. Critical decisions on doctoral support levels will have to be made within individual social work education programs, even if some modest increase in support from governmental sources for doctoral/post doctoral students in particular fields of research could be obtained.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation 1

That the level and duration of financial support for doctoral students who are preparing for careers as scholar/researchers be substantially increased through action by individual schools of social work, and that this issue be given high priority by the National Association of Deans and Directors of Schools of Social Work and the Group for the Advancement of Doctoral Education.

Dissemination

It is not clear that systematic dissemination of research-based information to the practitioner community is actually happening, although the opportunities for research dissemination have increased since the 1991 Report. Both CSWE and NASW give some attention to research-based presentations at national conferences but such presentations have not been a priority as reflected in major invitational all-conference presentations.

The publication programs of both NASW and CSWE are potentially a critical resource to the extent that they deal specifically with practice-relevant research. A major issue in providing knowledge building research and information to the practice community through peer-reviewed journals has to do with access to cross-disciplinary research for which a social work researcher is not the principal investigator or lead author. There is also a persistent issue as to whether general professional journals in social work, as in other professional fields, are intended to serve primarily as publication outlets for the diverse interests of members of the academic faculty, rather than as consistent sources of tested information for the practitioner community. It may be that cross-disciplinary research journals with a specialized focus in a specific practice domain are more relevant for both researchers and practitioners than multi-topic journals limited to a single professional or academic discipline.

There is a need to explore ways in which contemporary forms of communication including the Internet and the World Wide Web can be used to develop a community of researchers in particular domains as well as to make the results of research accessible to individual social work practitioners. The information available through such networks should include developments in other professions as well as in social work.

Recommendations 2 - 4

2). That CSWE and NASW establish a priority for the presentation of research-based, practice-relevant reports at annual conferences, including invitational, all-conference presentations.

3). That the publication policies of the National Association of Social Work be reviewed in order to determine the specific relevance of its publications to the social work practice community, and to examine the potential inclusion of research-based knowledge from other professions and disciplines in such publications.

4). That CSWE and NASW provide leadership in exploring the potential contribution of creating electronic channels for information sharing networks in relevant social work research domains.

Research Development Domains

It is clear that research dealing with issues related to problematic conditions affecting children, adolescents, families with children, and the child welfare/child protective services system, and research dealing with mental health/mental illness are, at the moment, the most substantial domains of research development in social work. Many of the current studies in these two domains also crosscut other issues of research interest, including issues involving women and issues involving race and ethnicity. The pattern of presentations at the l998 Society for Social Work and Research Conference is consistent with this pattern. Research reports dealing with mental health issues and issues affecting children, adolescents, and child welfare accounted for 50% of the presentations. Another one-third dealt with health, including HIV-AIDS, substance abuse, and issues affecting women. The balance dealt primarily with issues in research methodology. Ten per cent of the presentations dealt explicitly with race, ethnicity or cultural competence issues.

Each of the major social work research domains reflected in the current pattern of research initiatives among social work researchers involves different opportunities and constraints.

• Mental Health. Mental health research is marked by the existence of a major federal agency, NIMH, with a long history of research funding. There is a large mental health research establishment that is supported by funding from pharmaceutical firms as well as by governmental and foundation sources. NIMH has been the major source of increased institutional support for research development in social work since 1991, as well as a source of support for many years before that for the development of professional education in social work. However, there are a number of critical issues involved in the future of support for mental health/mental illness research in social work.
• The institutional context of mental health services is changing dramatically, and, in turn, the nature of critical research questions. First, the use of medications to control biologically based forms of mental illness will continue to expand. This may mean there will be less attention to psychosocial interventions to "prevent" serious and chronic mental illness, such as schizophrenia, and much more attention to psychosocial interventions to support on-going treatment of a chronic illness condition. Indeed, research indicates that psychosocial interventions in addition to medication increase the effectiveness of treatment programs.

• Beginning in 1998, the question of renewing or extending the infrastructure support of the initial social work research development centers will arise. Future continuation of support for research infrastructure in existing centers may compete with funds for additional research development centers. However, there should be a sustained effort to establish additional research development centers. These centers have proven to be a potent method of stimulating and encouraging the development of multidisciplinary research infrastructures.
• Applications for extended support of current research development centers will require serious examination of the results from the initial funding. Specifically, this will involve consideration of how many research proposals have been funded and, equally important, what results have been realized from the initial studies that contribute to the knowledge base of social work practice in mental health.
• NIMH has announced a general program for funding Specialized Mental Health Intervention Research Centers. Serious attention might be given by existing Social Work Research Development Centers, or other programs with an established research infrastructure, to submitting proposals under this program.
• It is important to determine which findings about intervention methods are relevant for systematic presentation to the field of social work. This process has begun with the publication of Advances in Mental Health Research: Implications for Practice, edited by Dr. Janet Williams and Dr. Kathleen Ell. Peer testing of the findings, and research replication, is essential.

That the Social Work Research Development Centers provide leadership in the assessment of the existing body of social work research dealing with mental health/mental illness. They must then determine those findings that are substantial enough to test in multi-site studies. Subsequently, there must be effective communication of such findings to the current practice community, as well as to other professional disciplines.

• Services for Children, Adolescents, Families, Child Abuse, and Child Welfare Services; Child welfare/child protective services, and residential services for children, constitute the most distinctively social work professional practice sector. Child welfare/child abuse services, particularly the public services, are also in a state of almost total crisis. A 1997 Government Accounting Office Report (WHICH IS?) begins by saying "The [Child Protective Service] CPS system is in crisis, plagued by difficult problems, such as growing caseloads, increasingly complex social problems underlying child maltreatment, and ongoing systemic weaknesses in day-to-day operations." The report identifies several "new strategies" which were identified in a study of four states, but it then adds, " . . . there is little or no research to assess whether these new strategies effectively solve the problems of abused and neglected children and their families."

Unlike mental health there is no clearly focused institutional support system for child welfare research. While there has been support for individual research initiatives through the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect and the Children’s Bureau, there is no national research strategy in these agencies. As the GAO report states, "The members of our expert panel believe the federal research agenda is too broad . . . .the major research questions that are relevant to [state] CPS units are inadequately addressed because the total amount of funds authorized for research is low and spread among too many other projects."

The NIH Task Force on Child Abuse and Neglect brought together 5 NIH Institutes, with leadership by NIMH. But none of the Institutes have this as a central, or priority, research issue, although NIMH is the major source of funding for research dealing with child and adolescent mental health issues. The NIH Child Abuse and Neglect Work Group (1997: 21) reported:

If social work does not provide research leadership in child welfare a serious knowledge building program of intervention research may not ever develop (in contrast to a repeated series of descriptive and explanatory studies documenting the characteristics of child abuse and of system problems). As a society, we could drift towards a public child protective services system that deals with only the most extreme situations and relies largely on the removal of children and criminal punishment of parents as the standard operating procedure.

Recommendation 6

That a social work initiative be established in cooperation with relevant organizations within the US Department of Health and Human Services to:

a). carry out an assessment of existing research dealing with services that support families and communities, (services that respond to child abuse and neglect) and the child welfare/child protective services service system, to

b). develop a national research agenda, and to

c). create the national resources required to support such a research agenda.

• Health and Illness, HIV-AIDS. Social work research in health is part of a large, complex, and competitive multi-disciplinary research field similar to mental health. Individual researchers are more likely to be part of interdisciplinary research networks than to be part of a distinctive social work health research network. Unlike mental health the national funding structures for health and illness are spread across all of the National Institutes of Health as well as many of the national foundations. It is a research area that cuts across all age groups and all economic levels. It is a research area in which issues relevant to women and to persons from diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds are particularly important. Research development in social work health research is likely to depend primarily on initiatives by a single researcher, or by a research team in a single social work institution, collaborating with researchers in other fields and other disciplines. In addition to studies dealing with specific health conditions, it is important that there be increased social work participation in policy studies dealing with issues in the organization of managed health care and the provision of health care services. This is particularly true for individuals and families who have been served by public health care programs in the past.

That the Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research supports the development of a network among researchers particularly interested in issues related to health and social work, information exchange, development of collaborative, multi-site studies, and identification of relevant sources of research support.

• Gerontology - Worldwide the population over 65 and outside of the labor force will increase dramatically over the next several decades. User preferences, and improvements in personal health and in medical care, indicate a sharp increase in community-based service arrangements, and a need for research on the effectiveness of alternative service arrangements. This also includes research on the long-term effects of care giving on family caregivers. Moreover, the increase in the economic resources of many older adults, and their adult children, indicates that this is an area of services which may support both agency-based and marketplace services, a factor that should be considered in research development.

Recommendation 8

That the Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research, in cooperation with social work researchers in gerontology, initiate an exploration of potential opportunities for research collaboration involving the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aging, the National Institute on Aging, the Administration on Aging, HCFA and SSA.

• Poverty and income assistance - Historically this has been a central policy focus of interest in social work education. However, social work involvement in substantive research, other than historical research, has generally been limited to a few institutions, where social work has been a partner in nationally recognized multi-disciplinary research programs, or a participant in international, comparative policy studies. The limited involvement of social work researchers in this domain was reflected in the general absence of presentations dealing with such policy research in the 1998 Conference of the Society for Social Work and Research. Poverty/welfare reform research requires collaboration with social science researchers in economics, political science, sociology, anthropology, history, and/or public policy, a pattern of collaboration that requires crossing disciplinary turf barriers. It also requires long-term, multi-site studies to examine the full effects of these policy changes as well as intensive small-scale qualitative studies of particular sub-groups among the persons most directly affected. The University of Michigan School of Social Work Research Development Center does address the connections between poverty and mental illness, including the consequences of the recent changes in welfare policy.

Recommendation 9

That a consortium of social work research centers dealing with public policy issues, involved in the problems of poverty and welfare reform initiatives, begin discussions with national foundations and organizations involved with similar research efforts; and to develop a plan for the contribution of social work research to the future public policy discussions dealing with this issue. Moreover, such centers should include an examination of the interface between public policies in income assistance and public policy in the provision of health care services.

• Issues affecting women - Research dealing with problems affecting women is a central focus in studies of poverty and welfare reform and child abuse and neglect. In other areas such as health and mental health, corrections, and substance abuse, conditions specifically affecting women have often been overlooked until recently. Research on issues affecting women has become increasingly visible across the academic community, involving a large number of different disciplines and professional education programs. There is no single research funding source for which this is a primary focus, including psychosocial conditions as well as health conditions, although research on health conditions affecting women has been given a priority status in NIH. Social work has historically been concerned with social and economic problems affecting women but often with a limited, specialized focus. Research dealing with economic conditions affecting women who are single parents is separated from research on care giving responsibilities of such women involving both children and parents. Research on the experience of women from one type of cultural background is separated from research on the experience of women from other backgrounds. Social work has an unusual opportunity to bring together research on the many factors affecting the experience of women in American society, including, but not limited to, women in very low-income households. Even more important would be the development of studies of interventions that are designed specifically to deal with conditions that directly affect women.

That the Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research support the development of a network among researchers particularly interested in issues directly affecting women for information exchange, for the development of collaborative, multi-site studies, and for the identification of relevant sources of research support.

• Substance Abuse - Substance abuse, including nicotine addiction, is linked with nearly every other social work concern- child abuse, family violence, mental illness, HIV-AIDS, health and illness, corrections, and adolescent development. It is an area with two major federal research funding sources, the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, as well as research support programs in the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). It is a domain in which there is currently a substantial amount of biomedical research as well as psychological research. But it is area in which there are few conclusive answers either about effective treatment or prevention. It is a service area that many practicing social workers are involved in. The development of more effective models of intervention is a considerable priority. This is also an area in which the development of a research network within social work and the establishment of a national research development strategy, with an emphasis on intervention research, should be a high priority. With new research support initiatives being developed by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, including a National Drug Treatment Clinical Trials Network, responses from the research institutions within social work becomes very important. According to Dr. Alan Leshner, Director of NIDA, the Network "will provide the infrastructure to ensure that all potential addiction treatments are tested in real life settings."

That the Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research actively promote the continued development of new substantive social work research initiatives in cooperation with the National Institute on Drug Abuse, with active support from each of the five IASWR participating organizations.

Each of these substantive research domains requires a different developmental strategy to strengthen the relevant research base in social work. Some primarily require continued research development leadership through IASWR. Others require a national research strategy developed by the entire social work community, as in child welfare. Some primarily require research design initiatives by individual researchers and individual social work education programs in interdisciplinary fields with multiple funding sources such as health, illness and HIV-AIDS. Others require a combination of national initiatives and initiatives by individual research programs to establish working relationships with national foundations such as poverty/welfare reform.

Recommendation 12

There is a need in each of these domains for:

• an assessment of the state of knowledge from social work and related disciplines;
• an identification of critical knowledge gaps;
• the identification of research needs, and of opportunities to fill these knowledge gaps.

Funding

Funding issues involve: 1) the support of research development by the organized profession of social work and by national research centers; and 2) the development of strategies for expanded, on-going funding support for practice-relevant intervention research from both governmental and non-governmental sources.

The establishment of the Social Work Research Development Center competitive grant program by the National Institute of Mental Health and the funding of 7 social work research development centers has had a very dramatic impact on the development of mental health research resources within social work. It is critical that this grant program be continued, with an opportunity for new grant proposal submissions, together with the technical assistance services that have been essential to its current effectiveness. Similar support from other national research centers in critical areas of social work research is also essential for broadening the base of research development within social work.

Recommendation 13

That the National Institute of Mental Health continue its funding support of the Social Work Research Development Center program with opportunities for new grant proposal submissions; and that other national research centers, such as the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute on Aging, establish similar competitive grant programs.

IASWR is a critical instrument for the entire field of social work if there is to be a long-term strategy for strengthening funding support for research resource development as well as for individual research projects. It is essential that financial support for IASWR continues to be a high priority for each of the participating professional associations.

Recommendation 14

That the National Association of Social Workers, the Council on Social Work Education, the Association of Baccalaureate Social Work Program Directors, the National Association of Deans and Directors of Schools of Social Work, and the Group for the Advancement of Doctoral Education continue to provide funding and institutional support for the Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research, and that they also seek permanent endowment expanded support for IASWR from foundations and individuals so that it can take on the leadership responsibilities recommended above.

The 1991 Task Force Report recommended that NASW establish "an Office to educate the profession about the importance of research to the future strength, advancement, creditability and influence of the profession". The Task Force also recommended that CSWE establish "an Office to promote and facilitate research education and research development within social work education." CSWE has included the following recommendation in its Strategic Plan for 1998-2000:

15). That CSWE, consistent with the 1991 Task Force recommendations, establish a fully funded staff position in support of the integration of research-based practice-relevant knowledge into the professional curriculum at all levels.

16). That NASW, consistent with the 1991 Task Force Recommendations, establish a fully funded staff position to support application of research-based practice-relevant knowledge by the present body of professional practitioners.

The major external source of developmental funding for research in social work since 1991 has been NIMH. It is critical that a broader, more diverse base of funding support for research development in social work be established. There have been initial discussions through IASWR with the National Institute on Drug Abuse about a program of support for research development relevant to its mission, with preliminary initiatives now underway.

It is of the highest priority that a strategy for financial support of a multi-institution program of social work research dealing with children and adolescents and with child welfare/child protective services programs be created. A precedent has been established with the multi-institution funding structures involved in child welfare training. Potentially, the development of such a program should involve the Office of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the NIH Working Group on Child Abuse and Neglect, the National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect, and the Children’s Bureau.

Social work researchers in individual social work education programs are being supported by a number of national foundations, as well as many state and local foundations. However, it is essential to gain greater recognition by national foundations of the potential contributions of social work research to their research objectives.

The development of a framework of expanded and sustained funding support for research, in particular replicable intervention research, will require national leadership and national resources. The National Association of Social Workers and Council on Social Work Education are the major national leadership centers for the profession.

Recommendation 17

That NASW and CSWE, in cooperation with IASWR, develop a national strategy for developing a sustained funding base for practice-relevant, replicable intervention research in social work.

CONCLUSION

The profession does not control the position and status of the profession of social work within the American society. They are largely determined by the perceptions of other individuals in other institutions. Both the process and the content of research in social work are major forms of communication, and representation, of social work to the broader society. There have been many very important developments in social work research since 1991, primarily as a result of support through the National Institute of Mental Health. But there are weighty challenges. The strengthening of doctoral and post-doctoral research training programs is essential. The development of a research strategy that is relevant to the challenges facing the entire field of child welfare/child protective services is crucial. There is an urgent need to broaden the funding base for social work research through the involvement of additional federal research agencies and national foundations.

Among the social work education programs that have established a significant research infrastructure, the issue now is one of developing investigations of social work intervention initiatives, studies that go beyond descriptive and explanatory research. Such research requires that the intervention procedures be specified in detail so researchers in other settings can replicate them. The study of social work interventions must, in turn, be directly connected with strengthening the processes through which the results of social work research become incorporated in the social work curriculum. They must be disseminated to the practice community in order to help the individuals, families and communities that social work serves. Only as research contributes systematically to the knowledge base that will improve professional practice, in all of its forms, can there really be a justification for expanded financial support for such research.

July, 1998

We appreciate and recognize the assistance provided by Kenneth Lutterman, NIMH, Associate Director, Division of Services and Intervention Research & Juan Ramos, NIMH, Associate Director for Prevention

SOURCES:

1. CSWE (1998) Council on Social Work Education Strategic Plan: 1998-2000. Social Work Education Reporter, Vol. 46,1: 15

2. GAO (1997) "Child Welfare: States Progress in Implementing Family Preservation and Support Services." HEHS-97-34 (Feb 18, 1997) Washington, D.C.: Government Accounting Office

3. NIH (1997) "NIH Research on Child Abuse and Neglect: Current Status and Future Plans." Department of Health and Human Services: Washington, D.C.

4. Procter, E. and Rosen, A. (1998) "Social Work in the United States: Social Work Research and the Quest for Effective Practice" Society for Social Work and Research, January, 1998, Miami, Florida

5. Task Force on Social Work Research (1991) Building Social Work Knowledge for Effective Services and Policies - A Plan for Research Development. Austin: School of Social Work, The University of Texas at Austin
 
 

What readers have to say about David Austin’s Report on Progress in the Development of Research Resources in Social Work:

Professor Austin’s timely report shows how much can be accomplished when the social work education and practice work together to strengthen the research capacity of the profession. It also challenges us to redouble our efforts and provides a number of important recommendations for future action.
Donald W. Beless, Executive Director CSWE

"David Austin’s assessment of progress reinforces my belief that we can make a difference in the area of social work research if we make the commitment to achieve that goal. This report clearly illustrates that we have expanded the research resources within social work in the last 8 years with much to be done. Doctoral educators need to take particular note of Austin’s conclusion that a crucial issue for the future will be to increase the numbers of well-prepared social work researchers."
Ann Nichols-Casebolt, Chairperson of GADE

"Social work educators should be encouraged by the progress that has been made in social work research as documented in this report. Yet it is apparent that our research activities and achievements are not at the level we would desire. Social work education programs- BSW, MSW & PhD/DSW- are challenged to increase their efforts to prepare students to be more than consumers of research findings, but producers of new knowledge. Without this intensification of effort, social work will lag behind other disciplines in the research arena."
Frank B. Raymond lll, Dean, University of South Carolina, College of Social Work

"BPD appreciates the efforts of Dr. David Austin in his "Progress Report on Research". We appreciate including information about the efforts of BPD to create mental health research "curriculum modules" as well as to include and integrate more research content in the BSW curriculum."
Jack Sellers, President & Gloria Duran Aguilar, Past President, BPD

"This well-balanced report notes both the remarkable strides social work research has taken in recent years and the formidable tasks that still lie ahead. The profession should heed David Austin’s call for strengthening doctoral education in social work and for launching a systematic program for research on practice effectiveness."
Shanti K. Khinduka, Dean, George Warren Brown School of Social Work

"Dr Austin’s report reflects the strides made recently largely stimulated by a tremendous investment of the NIMH. We are all especially grateful to IASWR’s board and its indefatigable executive, John Lanigan, for their role in coordinating our efforts and leading us in fruitful directions."
Mary Ann Quaranta, Dean Fordham University, Graduate School of Social Service

"The report is a timely analyses of critical events in the evolution of a research agenda for the profession of social work. It calls our attention to new and exciting possibilities that will enhance the credibility & effectiveness of the profession in serving people."
Paula Allen-Meares, Dean & Professor, School of Social Work, University of Michigan

"Professor Austin has done a remarkable job of capturing the issues related to research facing social work educators and the profession. His recommendations for future actions are right on target. This progress report is a ‘must read’ for all of us interested in moving our profession forward."
Dianne Montgomery, Dean & Professor, Florida State University