Factors Influencing the Uptake of Research Evidence in Child Welfare: A Synthesis of Findings from Australia, Canada and Ireland

Abstract

This paper draws on three studies conducted in Australia, Canada and Ireland which explore the factors influencing research utilisation in the child protection sector in each country. The paper recognises that research uptake is complicated by a number of factors. It also acknowledges critiques which cite the equally significant influence of ideologies, context, unpredictability, time constraints and political expediency. However, all three studies recognised the increasing importance of evidence-based practice. The methods used in the three studies were not identical but the frameworks used were sufficiently similar to enable the classification of both common and dissimilar barriers and facilitators to research use. Those which they identified were categorised into four types: individual, organisational, environmental and characteristics relating to the nature of research material. Implications were identified for policy makers, service providers and research producers. The point was made that we now live in a period where unprecedented means of knowledge transfer and exchange provide unique opportunities to improve the lives of children and families.

Organizational supports used by private child and family serving agencies to facilitate evidence use: a mixed methods study protocol

“…Research evidence can be costly for practitioners to access. The quality of available evidence and its perceived relevance to local organizational and practitioner needs can also vary considerably [40, 43, 90]. In particular, many EBTs are developed and tested with specific client populations in relatively resource rich settings; however, the contexts in which practitioners are expected to translate these EBTs are often significantly more heterogeneous in terms of available resources, client characteristics, and supportive infrastructure [91–93].…”

Making Research Count: What Australian Social Work Researchers Think

“…But with evidence-based practice gathering momentum, there is increasing pressure on social workers to base their practice on sound "best available" research evidence in the interests of accountability, efficiency, and effectiveness in social service provision (Pope, Rollins, Chaumba, & Risler, 2011). According to Buckley, Tonmyr, Lewig, and Jack (2013), social workers are increasingly recognising the unique opportunities that research translation and exchange provide for improving the lives of service users. In fact, Butler (2003) optimistically noted "it is difficult to remember a time when interest in social work research was so widespread, so urgent, and so apparently full of possibilities" (p. 19).…”

Cumulative harm in the child protection system: The Australian context

“…Spratt () notes that child protection services are typically more involved with incident‐focussed assessments rather than the broad brush of all children experiencing maltreatment, with less focus on the experience of multitype maltreatment, or chronic victimization. Munro () confirms that England's child protection system seeks to reduce complexity and associated uncertainty around child maltreatment using proformas and assessment instruments that do not always reflect what is happening at the “street level” of practice (Hood, ), suggesting proscriptive policy and procedure constrain practice and reduce worker autonomy (Buckley, Tonmyr, Lewig, & Jack, ).…”