Supporting Community Development through Research

1. Supporting Community Development through Research Adje van de Sande, MSW, PhD Karen Schwartz, MSW, PhD School of Social Work Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario, Canada June 2014

2. History of Course • Since 1997-98 Carleton University School of Social Work has structured the MSW research course so that students in small groups engaged in research with community agencies. • Each year, approximately 50 MSW students are divided into two sections of 25 students in each. • There are two instructors, each covering one section.

3. Organization of the Course • A letter is sent out in June inviting community organizations in Ottawa to submit a request for research. • In August, the two instructors review the requests and select a short list of projects based on appropriateness in terms of learning opportunities. • The instructors make themselves available to community organizations to help them draft the request. I

4. Organization Of Course (2) • In September, the students are invited to select from the approved projects, their first, second and third choices. • Students are them assigned to projects based on their choices. • There are normally three or four students assigned to each project. • Approximately 12 research projects are carried out each year, representing over 100 projects since the course began.

5. Organization Of Course (3) • Still in September, a member of the team then contacts the community organization and sets up an initial face to face meeting. • During this meeting a contract is developed which spells out the details of the research project, (which tasks will be undertaken and by whom) and the timelines. • The instructor attends this initial meeting.

6. Organization Of Course (4) • The team then develops a detailed research proposal for the approval of the instructors and the community organizations. • The proposals are presented in class for discussion and feedback. • The teams also submit an ethic review proposal for approval by the Research Ethic Board of the university.

7. Organization Of Course (5) • In January, once the proposal has cleared ethics, a second face to face meeting is held between the community organization, students and the instructor. • The teams start gathering and analyzing data. • The teams then write the final report which is presented in class for discussion and feedback. • The final step is that teams and present their final report to the community organizations.

8. Satisfaction Survey Methodology (1) • Agencies were asked to complete a questionnaire where they discussed whether the research carried out by the students promoted individual and organizational change and contributed to a research-minded culture.

9. Methodology • Half of the organizations were multi-service health and community resource centers. • The rest included a variety of agencies service clients with developmental, mental health, health, immigration and addictions issues. • We had a very broad range of participating organizations.

10. ResultsWas the Research Useful? • Did you feel that the research project carried out by the Carleton University Master of Social Work students for your organization was useful?  Please explain.

11. Results Was the Research Useful? • …the project reflects a university-community initiative in which organizations benefit from university activities and the university benefits from the organization’s context. • The report in my opinion was useful in the sense that it provided a number of key points such as health statistics of Aboriginal Seniors, cost of rent is expensive especially for low income Seniors, retirement living is too costly, similar models of assisted living for Seniors is successful and references being made to other studies on affordable housing.

12. Results Was the Research Useful? • The research is super useful to our organization! The MSW students working with us did a program evaluation of one of our three core programs, which entailed going back through the program evaluations we've done over the years as well as conducting an online survey with program participants, volunteers and staff. They did an excellent job and were able to pull out some strong themes about aspects of the program that are working really well, and aspects that need a bit of work.

13. Results Initial Meeting • Did you feel that the initial meeting between yourself, the students, and the course instructor was helpful in clarifying the research project? • All of the organizations felt that having the instructor present during the initial meeting with the organization was very helpful. • Many of the students had overly ambitious ideas of what could be accomplished and were ready to agree to much more extensive projects. The instructors’ role was to ensure that what was agreed to was realistic.

14. Results Initial Meeting • It was helpful to clarify the nuances of each perspective. • Yes, it laid the groundwork for the project. • Absolutely. They (students) conducted themselves with great professionalism and demonstrated commitment to the project. They engaged in constructive dialogue with our team as the project evolved and integrated our stated needs in their overall project.

15. Results Were you able to make use of the results and the recommendations? • On the question as to whether the participating organizations were able to make use of the information, all stated that they were able to use some or all of the information. Several stated that they would use the information in funding applications. • Some organizations plan to use the results as a spring board to future research.

16. Results Use of Research • We will be using the findings in our application for funding from the ministry. • We will take the results to the volunteers to discuss what can be dome to address the challenges raised. • The Literature Review was helpful because they received up to date information on why they are doing what they are doing.

17. Results Use of Research • Yes. Our committee is moving forward with the development of our Model or Practice and the students’ findings will be integrated in our process . • The results & recommendations will be used to form work plans for both the Tenant Association and Community House Board, which will determine programming in the house.

18. Results What suggestions would you make to improve the process? • Some of the suggestions had to do with communication difficulties. • We would have wanted more check ins with the students. • One group suggested including a schedule of meeting with students in the initial contract. • Another meeting in January with the prof present would have helped.

19. Results What suggestions would you make to improve the process? • We would have like more input in the development of the final report. • We would have liked more discussion on the interpretation of the data. • We need an agency point person that the students go to. • Better communication on both our parts. …monthly, or even bi-monthy meetings would have served us well and cleared up what was lost in email communication.

20. Challenges • Time: Trying to complete the study in 2 semesters (8 months) including a full ethics review and recruiting service users for the Advisory Committee is time consuming. • PAR: While we are fully committed to involving service users, recruiting them and keeping them fully involved has been a challenge.

21. Challenges • Cost: There is usually very little money available to cover expenses incurred by students such as travel, parking, copying and printing. • Team Work: Helping student team members negotiate division of labour issues, conflicting schedules, and the occasional personality conflict can be a challenge.

22. Challenges • Ethics: Getting ethics approval for community-based participatory research projects can be a challenge. Community organizations are not familiar with the demands of an ethics review and research ethics boards may be uncomfortable approving projects where the community is the principal investigator.

23. Challenges • Difficulty using translators • Who owns the data? • Pressure from agency for positive results for funders • Doing qualitative research from a quantitative mindset • Communication with agencies • Snowstorms • Be realistic- mixed methods, what the h*ll were we thinking”

24. Conclusion • Tremendous opportunity for students • Enriching learning experience • Marketable skills • Presenting at conference can launch academic career • Partnership between university & community • Mutually beneficial • Increase agency capacity for funding, etc.

25. Questions