This is the html version of the file http://tricanserver.trican.com:8080/52310/52310%20Ann%20Westhues%20reading.rtf.
G o o g l e automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.
These search terms have been highlighted: social policy practice 
SOCIAL POLICY  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

SOCIAL POLICY

PRACTICE 

Anne Westhues 
 

Of all aspects of social work practice, social policy analysis is the most firmly grounded in the Canadian context. While policy analysis is the primary practice modality selected by only a small number of social workers, it is an integral part of the work that the rest of us do. In recognition of the critical role that policy plays in shaping how effectively we can meet the needs of our clients, the most recent version of the Canadian Association of Social Workers' Code of Ethics includes a section on ethical responsibilities of professional social workers with respect to social change. The introduction to this section reads: "A social worker shall advocate change (a) in the best interest of the client, and (b) for the overall benefit of society, the environment and the global community" (CASW Code of Ethics, 1994, 24). The Code then goes on to mention specific areas that are to be addressed, such as elimination of discrimination; equal distribution of resources; advocacy for equal access of all persons to resources, services, and opportunities; advocacy for a clean and healthy environment; and the promotion of social justice.

    In this chapter; 1 will provide a fuller understanding of this area of practice, and in particular why it is necessarily so culturally specific. To do this, I will first explore what is meant by social policy, and social policy analysis. This will be followed by a discussion of the dimensions of social policy, how one would go about influencing policy development, and the skills required to be an effective policy analyst. In closing, I will discuss the limitations of policy analysis as a means of effecting change in the best interest of our clients. 
 

DEFINING SOCIAL POLICY AND POLICY ANALYSIS

There has been a longstanding debate within the literature as to what is meant by the term "social    policy." The central issue that frames this discussion is how inclusive is the domain of social policy. Does it encompass only those areas that have been described as the "personal social services" like income security, child welfare, and counselling, 1979)? Does it include related human services like education and health care, or an even broader range of 
 

237

238  Part 4: Modalities of Practice in Canada 
 

what some consider economic policies such as labour legislation, decisions with respect to the reduction of the budget deficit, or free trade agreements with the United States and Mexico? Does it include only decisions made with respect to the allocation of rights and resources by governmental bodies, or does it also include decisions made by transfer payment organizations or by nongovernmental collectivities such as unions? Is the role of the policy analyst that of the detached, dispassionate observer, or do they have a responsibility to advocate for a value-based position? While the debate may seem somewhat esoteric, the position that one takes defines how broad is the range of policy issues about which you believe social workers have a responsibility to be informed, and on which we have an ethical obligation to try to effect change.

    Canadian authors have tended to emphasize a broader definition of social policy, though a few have taken a midpoint on the spectrum. Yelaja (1987), for instance, offers this definition: "Social policy is concerned with the public administration of welfare services, that is, the formulation, development and management of specific services of government at all levels, such as heath, education, income maintenance and welfare services" (2). In the same vein, Brooks (1993) says; "Many of the most expensive activities carried out by the state in advanced capitalist societies are associated with the area of social policy. These functions include public education, health care, publicly subsidized housing, and the provision of various forms of income support to such segments of the population as the unemployed, the aged, and the disabled" (184). At the opposite end of the spectrum, in keeping with Rimlinger and Wilensky and Lebeaux, McQilly (1990) suggests; "The least misleading simplification of social policy is to define it as society's struggle to keep up with the consequences of advancing industrialization" (12). This broader definition, which recognizes the unequivocal linkage between social policy and economic policy, is reflected in the writing of Canadian social workers such as Alan Moscovitch (1981, 1991), Glenn Drover (1981), Ken Collier (1995), Andrew Armitage (1988), Graham Riches and Gord Ternowetsky (1 99()), Frank Tester (1991, 1992), and Ernie Lightman (1991). As we have unmistakably shifted into a global economy over the past twenty years, it has become clear that social policy can no longer be discussed in a meaningful way without understanding the economic context of policy decisions.

    At the same time that there has been a shift to defining policy issues in a more global context, there has been a parallel shift to thinking about policy as it relates to practitioners locally. Pierce (1984), writing from a social work perspective, suggests that there are eight levels at which social policy is made that shape our work as practitioners. These include the three levels of federal, provincial, and local government, which political scientists such as Pal (1992) and Brooks (1993) include in the domain of public policy. Pierce also suggests that they include "small scale policy systems" (Flynn, 1992) like social service organizations and professional associations. This reflects his understanding that an integral part of practice is the development of operation~ policies that define how a client will experience a policy which is generally set at a larger system level, for instance "minimum intervention" into the jives of families with children, "normalization" for people who have disabilities, or a commitment to the equality of women.

    Pierce (1984) includes the family and the individual practitioner as relevant system levels to understanding social policy as well. He argues that decisions made by the individual practitioner in relation to the implementation of public policy define how clients experience social services and the social policies which shape those services. Every worker has some

discretion in how they interpret policy. For instance, a social assistance worker may or may not choose to accept, as part of a recipient's work requirement, volunteer time at their child's school. Or a childeare worker determining the eligibility of clients for social assistance may choose to advise them on how they could become eligible for subsidy by buying a refrigerator on credit rather than saving for it. How the worker chooses to act in these instances gives a very different message to clients about the social policies affecting them. Similarly, decisions taken by a family with respect to the care they are willing to provide to an elderly family member or a child with a disability will have an influence on social policy.

    Flynn (1992) reinforces the importance of this broader perspective for the social work practitioner. Citing Kahn, he says that policy shapes and delineates what the practitioner does, how he or she relates to the client group, and the manner in which discretion is allowed or exercised. Further, he argues that understanding how policies at the agency, or even individual, level affect what the practitioner may or must do, and how they can be changed, is a way to empower practitioners.

    Another important issue discussed in the current literature is the role of the policy analyst. Mirroring the debate in the social sciences about whether positivist, constructivist, or critical theory approaches are most appropriate for social science research today (Newman, 1994; Maguire, 1987; Kirby & McKenna, 1989; Strauss & Corbin, 1990; Cresswell, 1994; Lincoln & Guba, 1985), the question explored is whether the role of the policy an~yst is to provide information to decision-makers that will help them make more informed decisions (Friedemann, 1987), or whether the analyst has a responsibility to engage in some form of social action with his or her analyses (Moscovitch, 1991). As we saw above, this latter p0sition is consistent with the Canadian Association of Social Workers' Code of Ethics.

    So what is social policy? Following Pal (1992), I would define social policy as "a course of action or inaction chosen by public authorities to address a given problem or interrelated set of problems" (2). My definition of "public authorities" would be very broad, however, including decisions taken not only at the various levels of government, but also by the social service organization, and collective agreements, in order to implement policies intended to address social problems. Further, I would add the phrase "which deal with human health, safety or well-being" (Flynn, 1992) to the end of the definition to differentiate social policy from the broad range of public policy issues that governments address.

    If social policy is action taken to address a given problem, policy analysis is "the disciplined application of intellect to public problems" (Pal, 1992, 38). Pal differentiates between academic policy analysis and applied policy analysis, the domain of social work practitioners. The academic is primarily concerned with theory, explanation, understanding policies and how they came into being, and attempts to retain some objectivity in making the analysis. The practitioner, by contrast, is more interested in specific policies or problems than theory, in evaluation rather than explanation, in changing policies, and in advocating for the interests of our clients (Pal, 24). Moroney (1981) explains this. difference in orientating between the traditional academic approach to policy analysis and the practice-based approach as being about making value-based choices. In support of this p0sition, Kelley (1975, cited in Flynn, 1992) suggests that there are three criteria that must be considered in all policy analyses. These include adequacy, the extent to which a specified need or goal is met if program objectives are carried out; effectiveness, the extent to which the outcomes obtained are a result of policy intent and program activity; and efficiency, the measure of goal attainment in terms of the expenditure of the least amount of resources.

I

countries. While ideally that may have meant that American and Mexican social policy would come to look like Canadian social policy, in fact the safety net that was so carefully woven over~ period of at least fifty years in Canada is gradually being weakened, taking on the appearance of its less sturdy American cousin.

    United Nations agreements like the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989 also shape social policy initiatives in Canada. Article 8 of the Convention, for instance, says that "State Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawfill interference." This entitlement, which Canada had agreed to by becoming a signatory to the Convention, has implications for international adoption, for instance. If children have a right to maintain their identity, Canada must now ensure that information is gathered on the children's background, and that there is a mechanism for passing this information on to them at some specified age, in both nonidentifying and identifying forms.

    Policy at the international level may be made in each of the four subsystems identified above. The strategic framework includes development of a vision/mission statement, goals and objectives, and is associated with what we have come to call strategic planning. The legislative framework includes legislation and the regulations, directives, and guidelines that are intended to facilitate its implementation. The program framework involves program design, the service delivery structure, and the implementation plan. This area of policy is sometimes called program planning. Lastly, the internal management framework includes human resources policies, budgeting and defining an operating structure, the policy domain that we have traditionally associated with administration. (Ogilvie, Ogilvie & Company, no date). This policy may be set through bilateral or multilateral agreements such as free trade legislation, or through administrative agreements between Canada and individual countries with respect to a policy issue such as international adoption. international policy may also be made by international organizations like the United Nations or the newly formed World Trade Organization.

    Social policy in Canada is shaped by what is called the "divided sovereignty" (Van Loon & Whittington, 1976) of the British North America Act of 1867, and now the Constitution Act, 1982. This means that jurisdiction has been given to the federal government for some areas of policy development and to the provinces for others. Provinces are responsible for "the establishment, maintenance and management of public and reformatory prisons ii) and for the provinces," and "the establishment, maintenance and management of hospitals, asylums, charities, and eleemosynary institutions" (Splane, 1965). While it is generally agreed that the intention of the legislation was to limit the role of the provinces, and to create a strong federal government, judicial interpretations of the legislation have, over time, limited the role of the federal government in the direct provision of human services.

    Depending upon the policy area of concern, then, the federal government may play a greater or lesser role. Legislation pertaining to young people in trouble with the law, the Young Offender's Act, for example, falls within the federal jurisdiction. Each province has enabling legislation to serve as an implementation guide, however. In all cases this is a section of their provinces' child welfare legislation. By contrast, the federal government has no jurisdiction within the area of child welfare. This means that it cannot pass legislation that will shape the provision of child welfare services. The one way in which the federal government has influenced child welfare is through the provision of federal funding for approved child welfare services. The Canada Assistance Plan was the mechanism for this

242  Part 4: Modalities of Practice in Canada~ 
 

provision until recently It allowed for the federal government to match provincial spending on approved child welfare services, a so-called cost-sharing agreement. This federal-provincial agreement was replaced in 1996 with the Canada Health and Social Transfer. This new legislation will still allow for the transfer of federal funds to the provinces, but the transfer is now in the form of a block grant, meaning that the provinces will have more control over how the funds are allocated within the areas of health, education, and social services than under the Canada Assistance Plan or the Established Programs Financing Act, which facilitated the flow of money to the provinces in the areas of health and education. In addition to policy being possible within the legislative framework at both the federal and provincial levels, policy may also fall into the areas of the strategic framework, program framework, and internal management framework.

    Local governments have a limited policy jurisdiction with respect to social services (Tindal & Tindal, 1984). Their primary areas of responsibility include land use, water, roads, and recreation. In most provinces local governments do not deliver any social services, and so not only have no legislative jurisdiction, but therefore have no reason to set policy within the strategic, program or, internal management areas. hi Ontario and Nova Scotia, municipalities have a limited jurisdiction in the area of social services because they are the service deliverers for social assistance, child care, homes for the aged, and sometimes nonprofit housing. In addition, in Ontario local government must contribute 20 percent of the spending on social assistance, homes for the aged, child care subsidies, and child welfare services. This means that local governments play a key role in determining the annual budget in these areas. Policy initiatives at the local level are primarily in the strategic, program, and internal management areas.

    Service delivery in all provinces is through some mix of government offices and transfer payment agencies; that is, organizations that enter into purchase of service agreements, generally with the provincial and local governments. A few small agencies provide service without government funding. The programs of these agencies are shaped by the legislative framework defined by the province, or sometimes the federal government. The domain of their policy work tends to fall within the strategic, program, and internal management frame-works, though they may assume a responsibility to advocate for policy changes within the legislative framework set by the provincial or federal governments. These dimensions of social policy (analysis) are summarized in Table 1. 
 

INFLUENCING POLICY DEVELOPMENT

Social work practitioners, as noted above, have a responsibility to advocate for social change that will improve the well-being of our clients. A key way in which this can be done is by attempting to influence the policies that shape their experience of the services we deliver. To be able to do this effectively, one must first identif~ which is the appropriate system to be addressed for the policy issue of concern. If you are interested in changing some aspect of child welfare legislation, making it easier for an adopted person to obtain identi~ing information about his or her birth parents, for instance, the appropriate system would be the provincial government, not the local Children's Aid Society. While it may be useful to have child welfare organizations supporting your efforts, they are not the decision-makers on this issue.

    Once the appropriate system has been identified, it is necessary to understand the policymaking process within that system. Figure 1 outlines this process in detail for the provincial

       I ¬…  .  ¬… .

Policy System Policy Domain

international ¬… Strategic

        ¬… Legislative

        ¬… Program

        ¬… Internal Management

Federal Government ¬… Strategic

’Δ’Τψͺ‘υ‘΅‘„‘Ό¦Ι‘ͺ‘±¦Ρ‘Ό¦ρ‘΅

’Δ’Τψͺ‘έ¦Ε‘ψ‘„¦Ε‘±‘Ί

        ’Δ’Τψͺ‘τ‘‡¦Ρ‘΅¦Ε‘‡‘±‘ͺΤψͺ‘ϊ‘±‘‡‘±‘„‘΅‘Ί‘΅‘‡¦Ρ

‘έ¦Ε‘ψ¦ρ‘Ό‘‡¦α‘Ό‘±‘ͺΤψͺ‘μ‘ψ¦ρ‘΅¦Ε‘‡‘Ί‘΅‘‡¦Ρ ’Δ’Τψͺ‘£¦Ρ¦Ε‘±¦Ρ‘΅‘„‘Ό¦α

’Δ’Τψͺ‘υ‘΅‘„‘Ό¦Ι‘ͺ‘±¦Ρ‘Ό¦ρ‘΅

’Δ’Τψͺ‘έ¦Ε‘ψ‘„¦Ε‘±‘Ί

        ’Δ’Τψͺ‘τ‘‡¦Ρ‘΅¦Ε‘‡‘±‘ͺΤψͺ‘ϊ‘±‘‡‘±‘„‘΅‘Ί‘΅‘‡¦Ρ

‘υ‘ψ¦α‘±‘ͺΤψͺ‘μ‘ψ¦ρ‘΅¦Ε‘‡‘Ί‘΅‘‡¦Ρ ’Δ’Τψͺ‘£¦Ρ¦Ε‘±¦Ρ‘΅‘„‘Ό¦α

        ’Δ’Τψͺ‘έ¦Ε‘ψ‘„¦Ε‘±‘Ί

        ’Δ’Τψͺ‘τ‘‡¦Ρ‘΅¦Ε‘‡‘±‘ͺΤψͺ‘ϊ‘±‘‡‘±‘„‘΅‘Ί‘΅‘‡¦Ρ

‘λ‘„‘΅‘‡¦α¦ΰ ’Δ’Τψͺ‘£¦Ρ¦Ε‘±¦Ρ‘΅‘„‘Ό¦α

        ’Δ’Τψͺ‘έ¦Ε‘ψ‘„¦Ε‘±‘Ί

        ’Δ’Τψͺ‘τ‘‡¦Ρ‘΅¦Ε‘‡‘±‘ͺΤψͺ‘ϊ‘±‘‡‘±‘„‘΅‘Ί‘΅‘‡¦Ρ 
 
 

level. Figure 2 provides even more detail on this process, specif~ing.the approvals required for each type of policy change: whether a change to legislation, regulations, or operational policy, procedures or guidelines. W~at is striking about these two figures is how many approvals are required before any change can be effected.

    At the federal level, the process of effecting change is even more complex, with the additional approval of each of the provinces required. At the local level, it is much simpler, generally requiring only the approval of the social services department, the commissioner of social services, the social services committee, and regional or municipal council. At the agency level, the process is similar, with approvals required by the program unit, executive director, and the board of directors. Depending on the model of board governance, approval may be required by a standing committee of the board and the executive committee before the matter is presented to the board of directors itself (Carver, 1990).

    What these models fail to convey is the p~itical1y charged environment in which many policy decisions are made. While Bell and Pascoc (1988) identi~ the first step in the policymaking process as the ministry initiating a policy submission, in fact there is often considerable political activity, sometimes over a prolonged period of time, before a ministry sees an issue as a sufficient priority to address it. These political efforts are sometimes conceptualized as social advocacy, or community organizing (Ross, 1967; Taylor & Roberts, 1985; Tropman, Ertich & Rothman, 1995), and planning and policy analysis are described as more rational processes. Further, it is important to understand that both internal and external politics are influential in this process, that is, not only various stakeholders, but the bureaucrats making decisions themselves will promote different interests (Tindal & Tindal, 1984).

    Efforts to educate the general public about wife assault are a good case example of this political process, one which is lucidly described by Gillian Walker (Walker, 1990). Through the women's centres. set up to raise consciousness about women's rights in the early 70s, it soon became evident that a major concern of women experiencing marital difficulties was being assanlted by their partners. In response to this concern, women's shelters began to spring up~across the country as places for women to take reflige when they were under at tack. To obtain flinding for these shelters, it was necessary to convince the United Way, and local and provincial governments that wife assault was a sufficiently widespread problem that funding was warranted for shelters. Walker makes an insightful analysis of the process of defining the problem of wife assault, and the conflicting politics of feminists 
 

and professionals in defining the issue. For feminists, it was an instance of women's oppression, grounded in the patriarchy, which influences family relationships and social institutions likc the law. The only possible remedy, for them, was fundamental social change, with the objective being a system that supports social, political, and economic equality for women. For professionals, by contrast, the problem was defined as that of outdated sex roles, traditional attitudes, and inadequate institutional procedures. Their remedy was to develop programs that educate men and women about gender equality, and therapeutic interventions to deal with the trauma of assault. 
 

SKILLS REQUIRED

Whether policy analysis is a social worker's primary job responsibility or a secondary one, two sets of skills are required: what have been called process ( Rotliman and Zald, 1985), interpersonal (Tropman, 1995) or interactional (Perlman & Gurin, 1972) skills; and task (Rothman and Zald, 1985), intellectual (Tropman, 1995), or analytic (Perlman & Gurin, 1972) skills. Figure 3 outlines both the analytic and interactional skills required at each stage in the policy development process. The analytic skills identified draw heavily from an earlier article by Pancer and Westhues (1989).

    In addition to the general skill of thinking analytically, at the initial stage of the policy development process, when the problem is defined, analytic skills are needed in two areas:

values analysis and needs assessment. To complete a values analysis, the analyst must know how to conduct opinion polls or to cull useful information from opinion polls conducted by others; carry out key informant interviews; use group techniques like the nominal group technique, the Delphi, and community forums; and do preference scaling. To complete a needs assessment, the analyst has to know how to identify and interpret social indicators; carry out surveys; and use the group approaches identified above. Interaction skills required at this critical first stage of the process include leadership in setting up a process that will allow for the exchange of ideas on the issue; the ability to create a safe environment so people feel they can express their feelings about the issue; skills for ensuring that all stakeholders have an opportunity to participate in the process of constructing the problem; active listening skills, to ensure that the nuances of different stakeholder perspectives are not missed; pub~c speaking skills if one is going to advocate for a particular policy position; and clear, concise writing skills, whether one is playing the role of neutral internal policy analyst at some level of government or that of community-based advocate.

    At the next stage, agi~eing on goals, analytic skills are again needed in two areas; goal formulation and priority sefting. To formulate goals, skills are needed to carry out surveys; conduct community forums; and rate goal characteristics. Procedures like the estimate-discuss-estimate procedure, the Q-sort, paired comparisons, multiattribute utility measurement, and decision theoretic analysis can be used to set priorities. To support the analytic tasks, interactional skills are needed which permit the analyst to engage stakeholders in the process of reaching agreement on goals, as well as skills in clari~ing, brokering, and mediating. If the analyst is acting as an advocate, she or he will also need to be skilled in persuasion.

    Policy logic analysis, a variant of program logic analysis, can be used to facilitate the ident~~cation ofpohcy alternatives which, in light of a specified theory of causation of the identified problem, could be expected to achieve the policy goals agreed upon A review of any outcome evaluations of these policy alternatives would identify empirical evidence that could either support the implementation of a particular alternative, or suggest that it would not, in fact, achieve the anticipated outcomes. Theory often precedes practice, so another skill required by the analyst is the ability to discern the practice implications of a particular theoretical perspective for policy development. The interactional skills required at this stage include being able to summarize and share knowledge in a way that is both interesting and concise; and the ability to facilitate discussion to generate alternative ideas.

    Feasibility studies provide information which assists in choosing among policy alter-natives. Assessing feasibility includes determining whether funds would be available for the various alternatives; completing cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness analyses on each alternative; completing a political feasibility assessment using a technique like PRINCE; and assessing the administrative feasibility of the alternatives. Good skills in presenting information in an interesting and concise way are required at this stage as well. In additi~,}he analyst must be able to giude the process in such a way that it is possible to reach a decision with respect to which alternative to select.

    An implementation assessment permits the analyst to identify how much time would be required to implement the alternative selected, which jurisdictions would need to be involved, and which approvals would be required. Pressman and Wildavsky (1973) alerted us to the importance of this stage twenty years ago when they discovered that many policies never have their intended effects because they fail to make it through the long string of decisions necessary for the policy to be implemented Analyzing these approval processes beforehand, and identifying potential blocks will provide greater assurance that the policy will, in fact, be implemented. The primary interactional skills required at this stage arc the ability to gather

248  Pai~ 4.. Modalities of Practice in Canada 
 

information on complex systems, and to manufacture commitment on the part of service providers to the new policy alternative so that it will, in fact, be implemented as intended.

    Finally, any policy must be systematically evaluated to assess what has happened in light of its intended effects. Process evaluation includes a review of who has been served, for what reasons, and what service they have received. Peer reviews are made of cases to determine whether defined standards of care have been met. Client satisfaction surveys assess whether the client received the service expected, in a timely fashion, and whether they found it helpful. Outcome evaluations may focus on individual goals or program goals, and are intended to assess the extent to which the changes that are intended to occur for the client have, in fact, occurred. The interactional skills required of the policy analyst as evaluator include the ability to share his or her knowledge about how evaluations may be designed; to create a feeling of safety with respect to the evaluation; to ensure that all those affected by the evaluation participate in its design; often to engage service deliverers in the data collection process; and to communicate the results of the research to all those involved. 
 

LIMITATIONS OF POLICY ANALYSIS

With all of its promise for improving the well-being of our clients, what are the limitations of policy analysis as an area of practice? First, the process may be exceedingly slow. Even within an agency setting, to make a change in policy may take a year or longer from the point that a concern is identified until a new policy has been implemented. If the local, provincial, or federal government are the focus of change, it is likely to be much longer yet. This means that a commitment to effect change must be a long-term one.

    Second, efforts to make changes in policy can be very resource-intensive. It takes time, energy, and money to raise awareness about an issue. The more complex and controversial the issue, the more resources will be required. It is essential to learn to build coalitions, to create organizations where none exist to advocate for an issue, and to identify and link with existing ones which might share your concern. It may also be necessary to raise funding to support your policy change initiatives. This means that a commitment to effect change is an opportunity to develop a set of social work skills that are quite different from those within the clinical domain.

    Third, even with the investment of considerable resources, it may not be possible to effect changes that are consistent with social work values at a particular time in history. In Ontario and Alberta, just now, for instance, the governments in power have introduced mandatory workfare. While most social workers support the development ofjob training op portunities for people on assistance, requiring people to work in return for benefits is in conflict with the value we place on self-determination. Data are abundant that show~ that most people work when given the opportunity. Job readiness programs offered by the various 1ev-els of goverrrnent in Canada have typically been oversubscribed. In spite of this empirical evidence, the ideology continues to exist that people on assistance are lazy, and that we need to be coercive to get them to accept work. As long as a goverriment is in power which holds this belief, and reflises to alter it in light of evidence to the contrary, efforts to change this particular social policy are unlikely to be fruitful. This means that a commitment to effect change may not always be successful, and can be the source of considerable discouragement. 

Finally, for the policy anal~st working within an organization or at some level of govemment, it is essential that there is a clear understanding between the policy analyst and their employer about which kinds of political activity are acceptable. Traditionally, the role of government employee was defined as that of a rational, apolitical analyst. Political activity was not only discouraged but could be the grounds for dismissal. While that has now changed, there may still be limits on what is allowed. An employee at the local government level may be free to engage in efforts to change provincial legislation with respect to regulation of social workers, for instance, but not to lobby their member of parliament to with draw the mandatory aspect of the workfare program. This means that a commitment to effect change requires a careful assessment of one's work environment, and clear communication about the boundaries on political activity. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Social workers have come to accept social policy development as an essential component of our work as professionals. While the prospect of trying to change legislation, the vision of an organization, or agency policy with respect to service delivery may seem daunting, our Successes in these efforts not only provide us with an opportunity to develop a set of skills that are complementary to those we use as clinicians, they also teach us that it can be done. Whether we choose to focus on issues at the international, federal, provincial, local, or agency level, our efforts improve the well-being of individual clients, build a sense of community, and empower us as individuals and as a profession. Ultimately, the values we stand for, infused in social policy, will shape and give definition to the vital, ever-changing culture that we know as Canadian. 
 

REFERENCES