Examining the Acceptability and Adoption of Mindfulness Practices Among Child Welfare Professionals

Background and Purpose: Evidence suggests that mindfulness practices may reduce trauma responses (Ortiz & Sabinga, 2017). While mindfulness practices have been established as promising practices to address traumatic stress, few studies have examined these practices in work settings where exposure to trauma is high. Given the severity and prevalence of STS among child welfare staff (Rienks et al., 2020), mindfulness practices may be useful tools for improving workforce well-being. This study examined the early implementation outcomes (Proctor et al., 2011) of mindfulness practices among child welfare staff. The primary research questions were: (1) To what extent were mindfulness practices adopted by child welfare staff? (2) How acceptable were mindfulness practices to child welfare staff?

Methods: This study utilized a mixed-methods design to evaluate early implementation outcomes of mindfulness practices delivered as part of an adapted version of Resilience Alliance (RA), a 12-week psychoeducation group-based curriculum. RA sessions were held weekly for 60-90 minutes. Each session included a 10–15-minute mindfulness practice. The analytic sample included 352 participants representing six public and private child welfare agencies in one Midwestern state. Adoption (Proctor et al., 2011) of the mindfulness practices were quantitatively measured through descriptive statistics related to the prevalence of practice uptake. The acceptability (Proctor et al., 2011) of the mindfulness practices were examined from the perspectives of participants. Utilizing a semi-structured interview guide, seven focus groups were conducted to explore study participants experiences with the mindfulness practices (n=49 direct service providers, supervisors, and administrators). Focus groups were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were uploaded to Dedoose and analyzed using Thematic Analysis (Clark & Braun, 2021). Rigor and trustworthiness were addressed with multiple reads, paired coding, audit trail, and peer debriefing.

Results: Results indicated mindfulness practices were highly adopted by child welfare staff. On average, 94% (n=331) of participants in attendance engaged in weekly mindfulness practices delivered during the RA groups. Among those who did not participate, the most frequently selected reasons for not doing so were because the participant had to leave early, or an emergency arose. While participants reported high adoption of in-group mindfulness practices, fewer participants reported practicing independently outside of the RA group. On average, 75% (n=264) reported independent mindfulness practice at least once. Qualitative findings resulted in two themes related to how acceptable mindfulness practices were to child welfare staff: (1) Mindfulness and meditation practices supported child welfare professionals in developing self-awareness, managing difficult emotions, and maintaining presence; (2) Some child welfare professionals felt initial resistance to mindfulness and meditation practices; many overcame this.

Conclusions and Implications: Results from this study contribute an initial understanding of the adoption and acceptability of mindfulness practices among child welfare professionals. Taken together, the quantitative and qualitative findings demonstrated positive implementation outcomes, showing that child welfare professionals use and find mindfulness practices beneficial. Additionally, results suggest child welfare professionals practice mindfulness in directed settings more frequently than they do independently. Additional research is needed to further investigate factors that may support child welfare professionals in independent mindfulness practice.