What Is It?
Workforce development is defined as a multifaceted approach, which addresses the range of factors impacting on the ability of the alcohol and other drugs (AOD) workforce to function with maximum effectiveness. Workforce development is not just a traditional approach to the AOD workforce with emphasis on education and training, but rather a holistic approach to address the entire workforce from clinical supervisors to front line workers with emphasis on individual, organizational and structural factors.
The workforce development approach is now being emphasized in order to contend with the increasing challenges present in the field between newly emerging treatment protocols, as well as staffing issues, such as turnover and shortages. Research conducted for the Drug Evaluation Network System (DENS) indicated that counselor turnover is as high as 49% within a six month time period and that the average time a counselor will work at their position is four years. In the past the emphasis for the AOD field was experiential expertise and real-world applicability, whereas now the field is evolving toward an education-based licensure process with an emphasis on the science of AOD and evidence-based practices.
These developments allow the field to raise its profile among other social work and therapy fields, but make it difficult for the average AOD professional to remain certified and stay current on areas of research and new treatment and intervention protocols. The new
sis also does not take into account the vast majority of the workforce situated at a agency or in a rural situation with high caseloads and little or no money for training and education. This heightens the importance of workforce development strategies across the spectrum for systematic sustainable changes and the continued vitality of the field throughout key organizations and agencies.
Factors Impacting Work Practice
Various factors which impact on work practice include:
- Education, training and workforce development strategies which address knowledge, attitudes and skills
- Support strategies for skills and knowledge (e.g. information systems, mentoring, discussion opportunities and research)
- Strategies to effect workplace structure and policy (e.g. incentives, performance monitoring, job specifications, resource allocation and management priorities
The three level of workforce development pivotal to its success are:
| Level |
Descriptor |
Example |
| Level I: Systems |
Workforce development aims to improve the functioning of the entire AOD workforce through addressing the systems and structures that shape it. While it includes activities that impact on individuals, its focus is much broader. It involves creating environments and systems that support the full range of workforce development strategies. |
Examples of systems and structural factors include:
- legislation
- policy
- funding
- recruitment and retention
- resources
- support mechanisms
- incentives
|
| Level II: Current Workers |
At the individual level, workforce development encompasses methods of improving individual professional functioning. It means ensuring that opportunities to develop individual skills, knowledge and attitudes are of high quality, effective and well utilized. |
This can include:
- formal education
- training
- workplace training
- mentoring
- on-the-job learning
- on-line learning
- best practice guidelines
|
| Level III: Future Workforce |
Development of the workforce also involves ensuring a sufficient pool of skilled workers for the future. A range of important factors and strategies need to be considered for future planning in this regard. |
These might include:
- recruitment strategies
- offers of education and training
- affordable and accessible education and training
- ensuring adequate service funding to employ staff
- support and facilitate policies.
|
Capacity Building
Inherent to the ability of workforce development to efficiently transform and improve the working conditions for the workforce is capacity building. Capacity building aims to distill the theoretical and practical knowledge developed and applied by a research team and transmit this information in a manner responsive to the needs and interest of policy makers, managers and workers. Capacity building involves using resources to change the delivery system and building the capacity of that system to maintain programs and deliver new ones. This resource change must focus on thinking of change in terms of investment, not monetary loss, and the strength of organizations and systems. Key items in capacity building include:
- Development and maintenance of partnerships
- A continuous and reciprocal transfer of knowledge
- Flexible and innovative problem solving
- Infrastructure emphasis - investment in social, human and economic capital
This focus is vastly different than traditional deficits models often encountered in development work and education and training needs assessment. Deficits models are prevalent and often top-down driven with little front line personnel buy-in and focus on weaknesses and problems that need to be rectified, whereas capacity building focuses on enhancing the entire process and strengthening core competencies.
Translating Research Into Practice
During the 1990s and 1980s it was believed that professionals in the substance abuse field were recovering addicts and experience was all that was needed to counsel. Now, the focus of effectively meeting the needs of clients and proving that line staff is adequately credentialed has pushed the field toward higher levels of training and education, though not to the exclusion of experience. A study in the Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment found that nearly 80 percent of professionals have bachelor's degrees, and nearly 49 percent have master's degrees. Research has highlighted a number of challenges faced by the substance abuse workforce, including:
- Aging workforce
- Unrepresentative of client population served
- High turnover
- Staff shortages
- Lack of general education
- Inadequate specialized training and continuing education
- Workplace stress and burnout due to high caseloads
- Barriers to organizational change and training
- Commitment to outdated treatment models
The translation of cutting edge research into practical application for professionals across the AOD field is a slow and difficult process exacerbated by information overload and changing criteria for certification. Evidence-based practices are necessary to transforming the latest research findings into practical interventions and strategies that can be disseminated to front line personnel. Emerging research should be available not just to front line personnel, but also supervisors and policy makers who must access and read academic literature with the potential to inform practice.
Organizations such as the Addiction Technology Transfer Centers (ATTC) attempt to keep the field up-to-date on changes in policy and certification through their certification web site http://www.nattc.org/getCertified.asp and emphasis on attaining core competencies through heightened attention to research and training while attempting to stay in-tune with needs of the workforce.
Your agency, as many others, may be faced with a shortage of adequately prepared leaders. Many agency directors and senior level personnel who are now providing leadership in community-based addiction treatment agencies are approaching retirement age. There have been few educational opportunities to groom successors for leadership positions. Developed by the Southern Coast Addiction Technology Transfer Center in Florida, the Leadership Institute is designed to facilitate the development of leaders for the future of our industry. The Pacific Southwest Addiction Technology Transfer Center (PSATTC) has stepped forward by piloting this Leadership Institute and making it available to addiction professionals in Arizona, California and New Mexico (the Pacific Southwest region). The PSATTC is piloting this program in the Pacific Southwest region to determine its feasibility for training future addiction professional leaders.
Treatment Gap
Representative of trends nationwide, states throughout the West are grappling with issues relating to the treatment gap and trying to enable workforce development and capacity building to remedy these problems. According to estimates from the 2002 National Survey on Drug Abuse, 2.7 percent of persons aged 12 or older nationwide (about 6.3 million persons) needed but did not receive treatment for an illicit drug problem. New Mexico had the highest percentage (3.5 percent) of persons aged 12 or older who needed but did not receive treatment for an illicit drug use problem in 2002. Among the 10 States in the top 20 percent for needing but not receiving treatment for an illicit drug use problem, 7 States were in the West (New Mexico, Arizona, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, Nevada, and Montana). The other states in the top quintile were Vermont, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia. California was not in the top fifth, but it had the largest total number of persons aged 12 or older who needed but did not receive treatment for an illicit drug use problem in 2002 (approximately 819,000 persons, or about 13.0 percent of the total number of persons who needed but did not receive illicit drug treatment in the Nation).
This treatment gap occurs partially due to the fact that these Western states generally employ less than the national average of 2.2 counselors per 10,000 people according to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. In light of these figures, more detailed information about the challenges, barriers, and needs of the substance abuse workforce is critically needed, so that supervisors and policy makers can work toward changing the system. This change can be facilitated by increasing line staff's exposure to evidence-based research and new treatment modalities and offering and encouraging courses that synthesize best practices in the field. Agencies and programs should continually work to ensure high quality care even amidst staff turnover periods though continuing education and training.
- Addiction Technology Transfer Center. (2004). The Change Book: A Blueprint for Technology Transfer. www.nattc.org. http://www.nattc.org/resPubs/changeBook.html
- Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. (2002). Addiction Counseling Competencies: The Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes of Professional Practice - TAP 21. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Association. http://www.treatment.org/taps/tap21/TAP21Toc.html
- Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. (2000). Changing the Conversation. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Association. http://store.health.org/catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductID=15863
- McDonald, J. (2002). Mentoring: An Age Old Strategy for a Rapidly Expanding Field. Adelaide, Australia: National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction. http://www.nceta.flinders.edu.au/publications/workforce_dev/resources.html
- Mulvey, K.P., Hubbard, S., Hayashi, S. (2003). A National Study of the Substance Abuse Treatment Workforce. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 24, 51-57.
- Roche, A.M. (2002). What Is This Thing Called Workforce Development. Adelaide, Australia: National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction. http://www.nceta.flinders.edu.au/publications/workforce_dev/resources.html
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2004). State Estimates of Persons Needing But Not Receiving Substance Abuse Treatment. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Applied Studies. http://oas.samhsa.gov/2k4/stateGaps/stateGaps.htm