Evidence for Practice: Challenges, Opportunities, and Access

In this issue's lead article, Aaron Rosen addresses the challenges and promise of implementing evidence-based practice in routine practice. This article provides readers with content first presented in the inaugural Aaron Rosen lecture, delivered at the 2002 meeting of the Society for Social Work and Research (SSWR). This lecture provides a forum for a scholarship to advance the field in terms of integration of practice and research. The Society's decision that Professor Rosen himself should deliver the first lecture further signals his legacy of scholarship on research for practice. Given the importance of the lecture's focus and its congruence with the purpose of this journal, Social Work Research welcomes papers from subsequent Rosen lectures at the SSWR. Professor Rosen's article identifies two challenges inherent in the application of research to professional practice: (1) the problems we tackle professionally so closely resemble those we face in our personal lives that we risk approaching professional tasks habitually rather than on the basis of empirical evidence, and (2) applying generalizations from research is inherently challenging. Rosen proposes that practicing on the basis of evidence requires the development and dissemination of research findings in ready-for-application practice guidelines, decision-support protocols to guide practitioners in selecting and applying such guidelines, and evaluation procedures that are practice-friendly. Rosen's analysis and suggestions reflect the multiple players involved in the production, dissemination, packaging, and use of research for practice. Who are the players in the challenge of increasing evidence-based practice, and what are their respective roles and responsibilities? There are producers and consumers of research, and the social work discourse has traditionally focused on researchers and practitioners as key players in the quest for evidence-based practice. Researchers, of course, select topics for their scholarship, and the research-practice gap has long been attributed (and often justly so) to the focus of research on topics that seem irrelevant to practice. Clearly, we need more research that addresses concerns of the social work profession, the social problems it addresses, and the social programs and policies through which it strives for effect. Auslander's article in this issue focuses on a new and innovative social program for older adults--the supportive community. Supportive communities can occur naturally, or they can be structured through social programs. Guided by the Andersen model of service use, Auslander addresses the questions, "Why do people join supportive communities?" and "what influences their use of the services available through such communities?" Findings point to the importance of need and enabling factors that can be influenced to help facilitate service use. Hoping and expecting that practice will be based on research does not mean that all research will, or should, have an impact on practice. Some research will have impact only over the long haul, shaping theory that in turn informs hypotheses for further study. Addressing the very practice-relevant problem of homelessness, Eyrich, Pollio, and North tested prevailing theories about social networks. This study used a large sample of people experiencing homelessness, randomly selected from shelters and day centers and recruited systematically from city streets. People who experienced long-term homelessness had smaller family support networks and perceived that they could not count on family and friends for help. The study's findings both confirm and fail to support prevailing theories. For example, the data do not support the popular notion that individuals experiencing homelessness are socially isolated. Respondents reported substantial contact with family and friends, and very few homeless people had no such contact. …