1 / 35

Research Partnerships, Horizontal Integration and Knowledge Building

Research Partnerships, Horizontal Integration and Knowledge Building. Daniel Hughes, Ph.D., CEAP Raquel Warley, M.A., LMSW. A Collaborative Effort. NYC Chapter of the Employee Assistance Professional Association (EAPA) Mt. Sinai Medical Center, EAP Core Technology Utility Study.

glyn
Download Presentation

Research Partnerships, Horizontal Integration and Knowledge Building

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Research Partnerships, Horizontal Integration and Knowledge Building Daniel Hughes, Ph.D., CEAP Raquel Warley, M.A., LMSW

  2. A Collaborative Effort • NYC Chapter of the Employee Assistance Professional Association (EAPA) • Mt. Sinai Medical Center, EAP • Core Technology Utility Study

  3. EAP Research: A Rich Tradition • Harrison Trice • Paul Roman & Terry Blum • Jack Erfurt & Andrea Foote • Bradley Googins • Sam Bacharach and Bill Sonnenstuhl

  4. Mt. Sinai EAP and Practice Based Research • Reasons and Resources 1995 • Work and Family in East Harlem (MCNY) Private Foundation 1994- 1996 • EAP Comparative Interventions Study (BU) NIAAA 1995-1997 • Financial Literacy (BU) AARP 1999-2001 • ISA Partnerships 1998 & 2005 • Long Term Counseling Project 2002 • Utility Study (NYC EAPA) 2004-2005

  5. The Utility Project • Develop a Descriptive Profile of Local Members and Respondents • Delineate Three Domains of Contemporary EAP Practice • Evaluate Member Perceptions (NYC EAPA) of the Utility of Core Technology • Explore Implications of Findings

  6. Training Assessment Constructive Confront Referral Services Consult. to Work Orgs Substance use/abuse Mental & Behavioral Health Work-Life Technologies Domains

  7. Primary Hypotheses • Perceptions of the Utility of Core Technology Will Shift across Domains • This Shift Will Reflect a Decreased Perception of Utility as One Moves from Drugs and Alcohol to Work/Life • Constructive Confrontation Will Be the Core Technology Most Sensitive to these Shifts

  8. NYC EAPA Chapter 06/05 • N=156 • Female 59% (n=92) Male 41% (n=64) • EAP Practitioners 42% (n=65) • Private Practitioners 37% (n=59) • Substance Abuse Tx 21% (n=32) • Approximately 70% Grad School (n=107)

  9. Degrees/Certification • Social Work 79% (n=85) • Psychologist 17% (n=18) • Other 4% (N=4) • Doctorates 15% (n=16) • CEAP • CASAC

  10. Design • Descriptive/Exploratory • NYC Chapter EAPA • Non-probability Sample • Mail Survey • Phone Follow-up

  11. Respondent Profile

  12. Area of Activity & Tenure • 52% EAP Practitioners (n=41) • Range: 1 – 36 years in the Field • Median Length of Time 11 yrs • 48% Non-EAP Practitioners (n=38) • Range: 6 months – 25 years in the Field • Median Length of Time 9 yrs

  13. Work Settingn = 41 • Medical/Hospital 10% • Financial 7% • Transportation 12% • Law Enforcement 2% • Academia 2% • Municipal 2% • Corporate 5% • Other work settings 15% • Multiple industries 44%

  14. CEAP Statusn = 81 • 44% CEAP • EAP-Practitioners More likely to report CEAP (27: 8, p < .001, df = 1, phi = .44)

  15. Agen = 76 • Range: 27-76 yrs • Median 54 yrs • Baby Boomers 60% (bet 41-59 yrs)

  16. Sexn= 78 • Female 58% • Male 42%

  17. Race/Ethnicityn = 79 • European/Caucasian/White 89% • African Am/Caribbean-Am/Black 8% • Bi-cultural/Multicultural 3% • Hispanic/Latino 1% • Asian/Pacific Islander 1%

  18. Educationn = 78 • Some College/No Degree 4% • Undergraduate Degree 5% • Graduate Degree 80% • Doctorate Degree 12%

  19. Incomen = 77 • Under $30,000 3% • $30K-$39,999 9% • $40K-$49,999 4% • $50K-$59,999 19% • $60K-$69,999 21% • Over $70,000 46% • CEAPs more likely to report incomes $50,000+ (34:31, p < .01, df = 1, phi = .32)

  20. Social Work 60% Substance Abuse Txmt 14% Psychology/Psychiatry 12% Business/Management 3% Nursing 3% Other Professional Training 9% No Professional Training 1% Professional Trainingn = 77

  21. Study Findings Measures of Central Tendency & Chi-square Analysis

  22. Self-Knowledge “Quite a bit” or “A lot” • Referral services 90% (n=79) • Assessment 84% (n=80) • Training 73% (n=78) • Constructive confrontation 65% (n=79) • Consultation to work org 48% (n=77)

  23. Consultation to Work Orgs

  24. Use of technology • Referral services 94% (n=77) • Assessment 93% (n=73) • Constructive confrontation 82% (n=65) • Training 70% (n=74) • Consultation to work org 68% (n=60)

  25. Frequency of Use “Frequently” • Assessment 77% (n=73) • Referral services 70% (n=77) • Constructive confrontation 36% (n=64) • Training 28% (n=74) • Consultation to work org 27% (n=60)

  26. EAP self-reported more knowledge EAP more likely to use training and CC in their practice EAP more likely to report frequent use of training, assessment, referral, and consultation to work org Training 34:21, p < .05, phi = .28 Assess 38:27, p < .05, phi = .24 CC 32:17, p < .01, phi = .32 Referral 40:28, p < .01, phi = 29 Consult 26:11, p < .01, phi = .36 Training 36:14, p < .001, phi = .53 CC 36:15, p < .001, phi =.43 Training 17:4, p < .001, phi = .49 Assess 36:18, p < .01, phi = .36 Referral 34:18, p < .05, phi = .33 Consult 13:3, p < .05, phi = .38 Group Differences

  27. Hypothesis Testing Independent-Samples T-test

  28. Perception of Core Tech Shifted

  29. Perceptions Differed by Groupp < .001

  30. EAP Practitioners • Rated the utility of core technologies much higher • Rated training, constructive confrontation, and consultation to work org “somewhat useful” work-life • Rated assessment and referral services as “very useful”  work-life • Rated all other tech “very” or “extremely useful” x 3 domains

  31. Non-EAP Practitioners • Rated constructive confrontation & consultation to work org “not at all useful” x 3 domains • Rated training “not at all useful” substance & work-life issues • Rated training “somewhat useful”  behavioral health issues • Rated assessment & referral “somewhat useful” x3 domains

  32. Elements of Professional Practice • Specific Knowledge/Practice Base • Training Standards • Links to Educational Programs • Values/Ethics • Knowledge Building

  33. Summary Description • Low Diversity • Increasingly Gray • Well Educated • Relatively Well Compensated • Among the Respondents There Were significant differences between EAP Practitioners and Non Practitioners in Their Perception of Core Technology Utility

  34. Questions for Consideration • Should EAP Core Technology Expand? • Should EAP Core Competencies Expand? • How will Boomer Retirement influence the Field? • How Do We Train the Next Generation of EA Professionals? • How Can We Encourage and Promote the Process of EA Knowledge Building?

  35. Discussion

More Related