Abstract: (see Poster Gallery) Battling Inequities through Antiracist Research Methods (Society for Social Work and Research 27th Annual Conference - Social Work Science and Complex Problems: Battling Inequities + Building Solutions)

All in-person and virtual presentations are in Mountain Standard Time Zone (MST).

SSWR 2023 Poster Gallery: as a registered in-person and virtual attendee, you have access to the virtual Poster Gallery which includes only the posters that elected to present virtually. The rest of the posters are presented in-person in the Poster/Exhibit Hall located in Phoenix A/B, 3rd floor. The access to the Poster Gallery will be available via the virtual conference platform the week of January 9. You will receive an email with instructions how to access the virtual conference platform.

153P (see Poster Gallery) Battling Inequities through Antiracist Research Methods

Friday, January 13, 2023
Phoenix C, 3rd Level (Sheraton Phoenix Downtown)
* noted as presenting author
Allison De Marco, PhD, Advanced Research Scientist, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Carrboro, NC
Background and Purpose: Critical Race Theory calls researchers to include the voices of the most marginalized or traditionally excluded in all aspects of our work, as well as to link findings to policies and practices that address injustices (Bell, 1995; Daftary, 2018). Since 2019, the Research and Evaluation (R&E) Division of the interdisciplinary Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute (FPG) has implemented professional learning activities to infuse more equitable practices across all research phases. This programming has included exploring how we are complicit in upholding white supremacy culture, methods for building authentic community voice, equitable data visualization, and antiracist strategies for data collection, analysis, and dissemination. To understand our progress and guide future programming, we conducted a process evaluation to examine 1) where we have experienced impacts and 2) which practices have been or are still to be incorporated.

Methods: The R&E Division is composed of 65 research staff across a variety of job titles. Approximately 30 regularly participate in programming. All members were invited to participate in two data collection procedures: 1) a ripple effects mapping (REM) process and 2) an on-line self-assessment tool of antiracist practices. Conducted like a focus group, REM is a participatory approach to evaluating complex interventions across levels – personal, team/interpersonal, organization/community, and policy across phases of a research project (Emery et al., 2015). The REM resulted in a visual representation of impacts across levels and helped participants complete the self-assessment tool. The tool was completed by individuals or teams (n=10). Items on the tool were rated on a 4-point scale: Haven't Started Yet (1), Plans Exist to Use (2), In Place and Evidence of Use (3), and Part of our Routine and We Could Model for Others (4).Descriptive statistics were used to analyze tool results.

Results: The REM process revealed that so far most impacts of the antiracist methods programming have been at the personal (seeking additional training) and team/interpersonal (including a community PI) levels across study phases. The most infusion of equitable practices has been at the analysis/meaning-making phase and the least at the dissemination phase. However, the dissemination phase saw more activity at the policy “ripple:” policy briefs and including equity expectations in RFAs. Results from the self-assessment tool showed implementation highest in the study formation section (include communities), where the modal response was 3. The study follow-up section (efforts made to act, track action, share back) received the lowest ratings, with a modal response of 1.

Conclusions and Implications: The FPG R&E Division is making strides in infusing antiracist methods into research practices across all study phases. So far, these practices have largely impacted individual research staff and teams. There have been fewer impacts rippling out to communities and to policy change. More equitable practices are also being implemented in earlier research phases, while less so in terms of data collection, dissemination, and follow-up. Subsequent programming should target these areas for additional learning. Next steps will include inviting assessment participation from community partners and tracking change over time in practices.