"We are not stray leaves blowing about in the wind": exploring the impact of Family Wellbeing empowerment research, 1998-2021.

BACKGROUND: An Aboriginal-developed empowerment and social and emotional wellbeing program, known as Family Wellbeing (FWB), has been found to strengthen the protective factors that help Indigenous Australians to deal with the legacy of colonisation and intergenerational trauma. This article reviews the research that has accompanied the implementation of the program, over a 23 year period. The aim is to assess the long-term impact of FWB research and identify the key enablers of research impact and the limitations of the impact assessment exercise. This will inform more comprehensive monitoring of research impact into the future. METHODS: To assess impact, the study took an implementation science approach, incorporating theory of change and service utilisation frameworks, to create a logic model underpinned by Indigenous research principles. A research impact narrative was developed based on mixed methods analysis of publicly available data on: 1) FWB program participation; 2) research program funding; 3) program outcome evaluation (nine studies); and 4) accounts of research utilisation (seven studies). RESULTS: Starting from a need for research on empowerment identified by research users, an investment of $2.3 million in research activities over 23 years produced a range of research outputs that evidenced social and emotional wellbeing benefits arising from participation in the FWB program. Accounts of research utilisation confirmed the role of research outputs in educating participants about the program, and thus, facilitating more demand (and funding acquisition) for FWB. Overall research contributed to 5,405 recorded participants accessing the intervention. The key enablers of research impact were; 1) the research was user- and community-driven; 2) a long-term mutually beneficial partnership between research users and researchers; 3) the creation of a body of knowledge that demonstrated the impact of the FWB intervention via different research methods; 4) the universality of the FWB approach which led to widespread application. CONCLUSIONS: The FWB research impact exercise reinforced the view that assessing research impact is best approached as a "wicked problem" for which there are no easy fixes. It requires flexible, open-ended, collaborative learning-by-doing approaches to build the evidence base over time. Steps and approaches that research groups might take to build the research impact knowledge base within their disciplines are discussed.

Impact through research in education and studies in human society: A review of Australian Research Council 'high-for-impact' case studies.

Research impact is an important measure of the effective transmission and ongoing contribution of research beyond the scope of initial research publication outputs; however, determining what constitutes 'high-for-impact' research can be difficult for specific fields of study. This review of the Australian Research Council's Engagement and Impact Assessment 2018 analyses high-for-impact case studies submitted in the fields of Education (n = 17) and Studies in Human Society (n = 11) with the aim of understanding and explicating how high impact research has been evidenced in these fields. The review was guided by three research questions that concern the identification of the key characteristics of high-for-impact case studies, their reported impacts, and the evidence researchers cite to support claims of impact. The review highlights an important limitation in how impact is defined and understood by researchers, particularly cultural and social impact. Half of the analysed case studies involved international engagement, with minimal partner collaboration in the global south and countries in the Indo-Pacific, despite the region's strategic geo-political importance for Australia. Our findings draw into question the distribution of funding to universities and where investment might best be made for the highest potential return on research impact. Another key finding is that reported impacts across the domains of economy, society, culture, national security, public service, health, environment and quality of life offer little satisfactory evidence of impact, despite affording valuable insights into the nature of impact claimed. Accordingly, we conclude that to enhance the value of research and demonstrate impact in Education and Social Sciences, improved impact literacy is required among researchers. We assert that a better understanding of what constitutes impact and how it can be evidenced will support more impactful research designs. Wider adoption of the holistic anthropological definition of culture, which integrates values, practices and products, would enhance impact case studies by expanding their focus to include the broader cultural changes that underpin sustained social change. While the ARC engagement and impact agenda is a step in the right direction, improving the value of research for society will require a radical reconceptualisation of research and its funding, well beyond the current assessment framework. The Lowitja Institute's research-for-impact framework [1] is proposed as an alternative approach to research priority-setting based on explicit evidence gap analysis.

A Systematic Review of Social Work in General Practice: Opportunities and Challenges.

PURPOSE: This study identified the nature of social work practice in primary health care and described the reported patient outcomes, benefits, challenges, and enablers of social work in general practice [GP] settings. METHOD: A systematic literature review applying the Prisma framework was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. Social work practice in GP assists in delivering positive health outcomes for patients, improved patient care, offers value for money, and supports interdisciplinary teams. Identified challenges include funding impediments, organizational barriers, and a lack of understanding of and undervaluing the social work role. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The review outlined the benefits of social work practice in GP practices; however, these must be further evidenced. Funding for social workers in primary health care was identified as a challenge when it was lacking, and as an enabler when it was available. Further research to evidence the patient outcomes and overall benefits, the fiscal value of social work and funding pathways in primary health care is recommended.

Strategies for facilitating social work placements in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Hosting social work placements within general practice can provide opportunities to extend interdisciplinary skills, increase the ability to meet patient needs and improve understanding of social work as a discipline. OBJECTIVE: This paper is based on an Australian pilot project involving social work students being placed in general practice for their 500-hour placements. Collaboratively written by academics and practitioners from social work and general practice, it provides key strategies guiding practices to optimise implementing social work student placements. It identifies strategies to design the placement, select students and to prepare practices, supervisors and students to benefit student learning and the general practice. DISCUSSION: Preparing key stakeholders, providing targeted supervision, longer appointments for social work students and involving all stakeholders are key strategies to successfully facilitate social work placements in general practice. Hosting social work students effectively can further develop multidisciplinary practice, connecting general practices even more with best practice, research and community.