Research Partnerships, Horizontal Integration and Knowledge Building

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
Technologies Domains

• Training
• Assessment
• Constructive Confront
• Referral Services
• Consult. to Work Orgs

• Substance use/abuse
• Mental Behavioral Health
• Work-Life

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

• N156
• Female 59 (n92) Male 41 (n64)
• EAP Practitioners 42 (n65)
• Private Practitioners 37 (n59)
• Substance Abuse Tx 21 (n32)
• Approximately 70 Grad School (n107)

9
Degrees/Certification

• Social Work 79 (n85)
• Psychologist 17 (n18)
• Other 4 (N4)
• Doctorates 15 (n16)
• 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 (n41)
• Range 1 36 years in the Field
• Median Length of Time 11 yrs
• 48 Non-EAP Practitioners (n38)
• 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 lt .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
  (3431, p lt .01, df 1, phi .32)

20
Professional Trainingn 77

• Social Work 60
• Substance Abuse Txmt 14
• Psychology/Psychiatry 12
• Business/Management 3
• Nursing 3
• Other Professional Training 9
• No Professional Training 1

21
Study Findings

• Measures of Central Tendency
• Chi-square Analysis

22
Self-Knowledge

• Quite a bit or A lot
• Referral services 90 (n79)
• Assessment 84 (n80)
• Training 73 (n78)
• Constructive confrontation 65 (n79)
• Consultation to work org 48 (n77)

23
Consultation to Work Orgs
24
Use of technology

• Referral services 94 (n77)
• Assessment 93 (n73)
• Constructive confrontation 82 (n65)
• Training 70 (n74)
• Consultation to work org 68 (n60)

25
Frequency of Use

• Frequently
• Assessment 77 (n73)
• Referral services 70 (n77)
• Constructive confrontation 36 (n64)
• Training 28 (n74)
• Consultation to work org 27 (n60)

26
Group Differences

• 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 3421, p lt .05, phi .28
• Assess 3827, p lt .05, phi .24
• CC 3217, p lt .01, phi .32
• Referral 4028, p lt .01, phi 29
• Consult 2611, p lt .01, phi .36
• Training 3614, p lt .001, phi .53
• CC 3615, p lt .001, phi .43
• Training 174, p lt .001, phi .49
• Assess 3618, p lt .01, phi .36
• Referral 3418, p lt .05, phi .33
• Consult 133, p lt .05, phi .38

27
Hypothesis Testing

• Independent-Samples
• T-test

28
Perception of Core Tech Shifted
29
Perceptions Differed by Groupp lt .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 x 3
  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