Abstract
The demand for school-based mental health care is rapidly increasing. This qualitative study explores how school social workers navigate barriers in delivering accessible mental health support within the school setting. Drawing on interviews with 13 school social workers, the study examined their experiences and strategies for maintaining service delivery amid challenges. Findings were organized into two main themes: (a) barriers to school social workers providing services to students and (b) overcoming barriers to service. Participants identified key obstacles to providing services, such as challenges collaborating with school staff, difficulties engaging caregivers, and evolving state laws. Despite these challenges, school social workers described successful approaches to providing services. This study highlights the critical role of school social workers and offers insights into improving service delivery across school settings.
Keywords
Introduction
The rising demand for accessible, school-based mental health support has significantly increased the need for school social workers. Between 2016 and 2021, the prevalence of mental health conditions among youth aged 3 to 17 increased from 25.3% to 27.7% (Leeb et al., 2024). A nationwide study surveyed youth aged 12 to 17 and found that 20.9% experienced a major depressive episode, while 36.7% of high school students reported feeling sad or hopeless (Bitsko et al., 2022). In Utah, where this study took place, recent research found that 46.6% of youth aged 12 to 17 were diagnosed with a mental health condition (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2021). Mental health conditions are magnified for youth of color in Utah, evidenced by caregivers being 7 to 9 percentage points more likely to report higher levels of concern about their child’s mental health compared to white caregivers (CDC, 2021).
Students with untreated mental health conditions are more likely to experience worsening symptoms, which can negatively affect their educational experience and lead to poor academic outcomes (Lyon & Bruns, 2019; M. L. Teasley et al., 2017). Certain groups of students, such as those with disabilities, students of color, and those from low-income families, are at an increased risk for mental health challenges, yet they are less likely to access and receive appropriate services (Massat et al., 2015; M. L. Teasley et al., 2017). According to Murphy and Colleagues (2025), this disparity may stem from community-level barriers that make it harder for students to find and access services, including limited access to transportation, stigma surrounding mental health, and/or the inability to afford mental health care.
Schools are a central hub for students seeking mental health support. The majority of students who require mental health services access them through public schools, with reports indicating that approximately 80% of youth who need support services receive them within their school (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2021). Offering mental health services in schools enables students to access care more easily and without the barriers that often hinder access to external services (Murphy et al., 2025). However, a 2022 NCES study found that 87% of U.S. public schools providing mental health services do not feel adequately equipped to meet the needs of all students requiring support.
School social workers play a central role in implementing a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS). MTSS is a nationally recognized, evidence-based framework that organizes support into three tiers to improve student academic and behavioral outcomes (Bohanon et al., 2021). At Tier 1 (universal support), school social workers teach classroom lessons that revolve around schoolwide social–emotional learning (SEL) instruction, often aligned with school climate initiatives and behavioral expectations. At Tier 2 (targeted support), school social workers facilitate small-group interventions focused on areas such as peer relationships, conflict resolution, and coping with grief and loss. At Tier 3 (intensive support), school social workers provide individualized, one-on-one mental health services tailored to students’ specific needs.
In addition to direct service, school social workers function as liaisons between schools and the broader community (Richard et al., 2019). Through partnerships with community organizations and service providers, school social workers connect students and families to resources that extend beyond the school setting. Sustained community engagement enables school social workers to remain informed about available support while fostering collaborative relationships that enhance service accessibility and continuity of care (Richard et al., 2019).
Caregiver engagement is another central dimension of school social work practice. By cultivating trusting relationships with caregivers, school social workers strengthen the alignment between school-based interventions and home environments (Povey et al., 2016). Such partnerships not only reinforce students’ skill development but also facilitate engagement in services, as caregivers might be more likely to consent to their students participating in school-based mental health when rapport and trust have been established (Povey et al., 2016).
School social workers routinely collaborate with other school staff as part of their professional responsibilities (Murphy et al., 2025). Working alongside administrators, teachers, school counselors, and other student support personnel, school social workers contribute to coordinated service delivery. In settings where school social workers and counselors are co-located, collaboration often includes jointly identifying students in need and coordinating interventions to ensure timely support. While this overlap in responsibilities can enhance responsiveness, it may also lead to role ambiguity, emphasizing the need for clearly defined professional boundaries and responsibilities to optimize team functioning and service effectiveness (Murphy et al., 2025).
School social workers are uniquely positioned to help reduce barriers that limit student access to mental health services. School social workers receive training that enables them to identify factors that influence student mental health and behavior (i.e., environmental factors in the student’s family, classroom, school, and community) and incorporate knowledge of those influences into school-based interventions, fostering safe and successful learning environments (M. Kelly, 2020). However, to meet the increasing demand for services, school social workers must navigate challenges including the lack of available professional development opportunities, caseload size, and role ambiguity (Kelly et al., 2016; Lucio et al., 2024; Richard et al., 2019). For instance, Kelly and colleagues (2016) conducted a national survey and found that many school social workers struggle to implement evidence-based practices, largely due to a lack of access to professional development and training. More recently, Richard and colleagues (2019) found that as school social workers’ caseload size increased, the quality of social work services tended to decline and that large caseloads are a significant barrier to effective school social work practice. Finally, scholars have found a lack of a cohesive, unified description of the school social worker’s role (Lucio et al., 2024) which hinders effective service delivery, as school social workers and other school staff are often uncertain about the scope of the social worker’s responsibilities.
Although the existing literature on barriers to school social work service delivery often draws from large-scale national samples and provides broad insights, it offers relatively limited qualitative exploration at the local level, which could help deepen understanding of quantitative findings. In addition, while existing qualitative studies have primarily focused on perceived barriers faced by school social workers, they have paid less attention to firsthand solutions and strategies school social workers use to navigate and overcome these challenges (Binks et al., 2024). We seek to extend understanding of perceived barriers while also contributing to the literature by highlighting practical approaches employed by school social workers in the field.
Current Study
To better understand the challenges that school social workers encounter while delivering services and how school social workers persevere through these challenges, this study explored the following research questions: (1) What barriers do school social workers face when providing services to students? (2) And how do school social workers navigate service barriers? The current study draws on interviews with 13 school social workers from Valley School District (VSD, pseudonym) in Utah.VSD serves roughly 19,000 students in an urban area of Utah. Approximately 10% of VSD families have an income that falls below the poverty line, and roughly 8% of families receive government assistance such as food stamps (NCES, 2022).
VSD is a unique setting as its school social workers primarily focus on providing Tier 3 mental health services to students. VSD intentionally tasks school social workers with offering accessible, no-cost mental health care within schools to not only increase access to mental health support for students but also allow other student support staff, like school counselors, to concentrate on Tier 1 (schoolwide) and Tier 2 (targeted support) interventions. VSD receives state funding to hire school social workers who provide school-based mental health services.
We employed ecological systems theory (EST) (Bronfenbrenner, 1977) to examine how relationships, environments, and policy contexts shape school social work services. School social workers operate across micro, mezzo, and macro systems by collaborating with educators, caregivers, and community partners to support students’ academic and social–emotional outcomes (Tan et al., 2020). Situating this research within EST aids in understanding both in-school relationships and external factors affecting students’ needs, while accounting for cultural, social, and temporal influences on students and their broader contexts.
Methods
Positionality
The first author, then a doctoral student, led this study as part of her dissertation. The first author has professional experience as a school social worker, and the second through sixth authors, all faculty members on the dissertation committee, hold professional and research experience in housing, social work, and education. The third, fourth, and fifth authors bring extensive research experience focused on education policy, history, and educational inequities. In addition, the fifth author has prior experience as a public high school teacher. Team members analyzed the interview data in conjunction with the lead author, and we acknowledge that our diverse experiences might have influenced the research process and interpretation of the findings.
Study Design
We employed a qualitative inquiry approach given its suitability for conducting an in-depth exploration of the firsthand experiences of school social workers in delivering mental health services to their school communities (Butler et al., 2021; Ellis & Hart, 2023). To gain firsthand experiences, participant recruitment included the first author intentionally selecting a sample whose knowledge and expertise aligned with the study’s focus. School social workers possess a nuanced understanding of their school environments and can speak on both the strengths and limitations of the current school social work model, offering valuable insights into future improvements in practice, policy, and research. VSD’s Research Review Committee approved this study and the university’s Institutional Review Board deemed the study exempt.
Participants
We used purposive and snowball sampling strategies to recruit school social workers from VSD. Participants were eligible to participate if they were actively serving in at least one public school in the district. Participants worked in elementary, middle, and/or high schools in VSD. Thirteen school social workers, aged 28 to 60 years old, participated in this study. A sample of 13 participants was considered reasonable, as some qualitative research suggests that saturation may often be reached with 9 to 17 interviews when working with a homogeneous study population (Hennink & Kaiser, 2022). Most participants were female (84%, n = 11). Participants’ longevity in their current role varied from 1 to 18 years. Six participants (46%) identified as Hispanic, while seven (54%) identified as white. Ten (42%) of the 24 schools represented in the study received Title I funding. A school that receives Title I funding serves at least 40% of students from low-income households. This federal funding supplements state and local funds and allows schools to provide targeted academic support and hire additional staff, such as paraprofessionals, social workers, and counselors.
VSD typically assigns school social workers to two or more elementary and/or middle schools, whereas those serving high schools are generally assigned to a single school. The district aims to balance school social worker assignments by pairing one high-needs school (such as a low-income, Title I school) with one low-needs, more affluent school. At the time of the study, the school district employed 16 school social workers to provide school-based mental health services. The National Association of Social Workers recommends a staffing ratio of one school social worker per 250 students. However, Utah schools operate far beyond this standard, with an average ratio of one school social worker serving 2,443 students (HCR006, 2023).
Data Collection
The first author developed an interview protocol to better understand the barriers school social workers face and how barriers are navigated. Exemplar questions included: “What are your most common challenges when working with students and their families?” “How does the school environment (e.g., policies, culture) impact your ability to provide support to students?” “How do you navigate these challenges?” and “What community-based resources do you receive?” Semi-structured interviews lasted approximately 1 hour (40–75 minutes) via Zoom.
Interviews were audio-recorded and subsequently transcribed using Zoom transcription. All participants provided consent prior to recording. The transcripts were reviewed by the first author against the recordings and made revisions as needed to ensure the transcripts matched. The first author maintained an audit trail, which included written field notes after each interview, to enhance the trustworthiness of the data and reflexivity. Trustworthiness and reflexivity are fundamental to qualitative inquiry, as they help ensure credible and consistent data while critically examining the authors’ influence on the research process (Bingham, 2023).
Data Analysis
The first author used NVivo software to facilitate the organization and management of interview data and employed Braun and Clarke’s (2021) six-stage reflexive thematic analysis approach. The first author became familiar with the data by reading through each transcript multiple times. Following data immersion, the first author identified topic patterns within the data and transformed them into preliminary codes. Next, the first and second authors reexamined codes and used them to identify themes by constructing a thematic map using an online whiteboard (Miro board) to aid in visualizing how each code related to a theme. When disagreements arose regarding codes or themes, the authors met to discuss and resolve them. After consensus was met, the first and second author reviewed the organization of themes to determine if the codes assigned to each theme were conceptually similar to one another. Next, the first author defined and named each theme and all co-authors reviewed themes and provided feedback, contributing to the refinement and finalization. Finally, the first author wrote up a report of the findings which all co-authors critically reviewed, edited, and approved.
Findings
Data were organized into two overarching themes in alignment with the study’s research questions: (1) barriers to school social workers providing services to students and (2) overcoming barriers to service. The findings highlight the barriers to service, particularly the challenges school social workers face in collaborating with school counselors, engaging with students’ caregivers, and providing services amid role-altering state legislation. The findings also suggest that, despite facing barriers, school social workers find effective ways to overcome challenges and provide effective mental health support. School social workers aim to build rapport, buy-in, and trust with caregivers, ensure the continued delivery of accessible mental health care within the school environment, and leverage community resources to address the needs of students and their families.
Barriers to School Social Workers Providing Service to Students
Three primary barriers that school social workers face when providing mental health services to students were identified: (1) difficulty collaborating with school counselors, (2) challenges engaging with students’ caregivers, and (3) navigating state legislation.
Difficulty Collaborating With School Counselors
Most participants (n = 11) described that one barrier to serving students is the reluctance of school counselors to engage in collaborative relationships with the school social worker, hindering their ability to identify students who could benefit from social work services. In this school district, school counselors identify students who may benefit from school-based mental health services through their own observations or referrals from teachers and administrators. Counselors then refer these students to the school social workers, who contact caregivers to initiate enrollment in the services.
Participants reported that they rely on school counselors for student referrals, but if school counselors are unfamiliar with services or the relationship is fragile, referrals are less likely to occur:
Sometimes, when I’m there . . . the school counselor isn’t there, and that’s where the referrals are supposed to come from, and I don’t know, I kind of wonder if the school counselor just feels like she can do it and doesn’t need help. It’s never really felt like they really needed or maybe wanted me there. (Participant 11, school social worker at an alternative school)
Some participants (n = 10) noted a challenge in the referral process due to limited collaboration with school counselors, who are responsible for screening calls with families. When this step is missed, caregivers may feel unprepared when contacted by social workers, reducing their willingness to engage in services. Several participants described having unintentionally “cold called” a caregiver, assuming that the school counselor had spoken to them first:
When the counselors send a referral . . . you have to get permission from the parent first so that we’re not the first ones calling them and they’re like, “Who are you? Why are you calling me?” or “I don’t want this,” or “I don’t know,” or the parent is just like “no.” (Participant 12, high school social worker)
Overall, participants reported that they could provide more effective mental health services to students if they had more collaborative relationships with school counselors, whose roles closely align with their own. However, each profession has distinct roles in ensuring that students are receiving individual and schoolwide support.
Challenges in Engaging With Students’ Caregivers
Nearly all (n = 11) participants described challenges engaging with students’ caregivers (i.e., parent, family member, guardian), including difficulty completing the requisite intake process for a student to receive services, as well as caregiver concerns about working with social workers and cultural beliefs surrounding mental health. More than half (n = 10) of participants spoke about the difficulty they experienced when trying to complete a caregiver intake. School social workers add students to their caseload by first conducting an intake session with caregivers to gather background and medical history. Without this intake, school social workers are not allowed to conduct mental health sessions with students. Participant 8, who splits her time between a Title I and a low-need affluent school, discussed the specific challenges they face in completing intakes, citing that scheduled intakes will often fall through:
They [caregivers] have to do an intake with me, and they have a really hard time scheduling, or we schedule 3 or 4 times, and then, you know, I’ll let them know, “Hey It doesn’t seem to be working, if you decide this is what you want to do, please reach out to me or your student.”
Expanding on the difficulty of scheduling a caregiver intake meeting, several participants said that some caregivers’ work schedules or access to transportation make it difficult to complete intake appointments during business hours. Participant 6, who works at three elementary schools, stated,
It’s just hard during the day, you know, we’re here during school hours primarily, and that’s hard for people to adjust work, schedules, or transportation. Sometimes I have parents that are like riding the bus for an hour to get here for a parent meeting with me. And so that’s just hard.
Participants also described how caregivers’ negative perceptions of school social workers can sometimes complicate engagement. Several participants (n = 4) mentioned that for some caregivers, the term “social worker” provokes apprehension due to its association with child welfare services, including the Department of Children and Family Services. These fears can hinder the willingness of caregivers to enroll their children in social work services. Participant 7, who works at a Title I elementary school and an affluent middle school, explained how some caregivers’ negative experiences with social workers can be a barrier to providing services to students:
When we think about mental health and just families’ understanding of mental health and fear around social workers is a huge barrier that comes up a ton. Like a lot of our families have had interactions with child protective services and when they hear the word social worker, it’s really scary and threatening and intimidating.
A final challenge to engaging caregivers reported by participants (n = 8) was the stigma caregivers have surrounding mental health. More than half of participants cited mental health stigma as a barrier to engagement. Participant 10 works at a Title I elementary school and said, “There’s still this cloud of, like, ‘this isn’t a real thing, and we don’t believe in this.’” Serving three elementary schools, one of which is a Title I school, Participant 13 also discussed this in her interview, noting “Sometimes it’s a cultural piece where parents are like, ‘No . . . mental health isn’t a thing.’”
Caregiver engagement was identified as crucial to school social workers’ ability to provide mental health services to students. Per school policies, mental health services cannot begin until an intake is completed. In addition, participants need to secure caregiver buy-in surrounding their student’s mental health. Factors such as beliefs about mental health and negative perceptions of social workers can significantly impact this buy-in. Improving caregiver engagement is important in increasing access to school-based mental health services.
Challenges Navigating State Legislation
A final barrier to providing services to students reported by participants is the need to navigate the influence state legislation has on school social workers’ roles. These challenges include not being able to be transparent about the services school social workers provide, reformulating the school social worker role, and the restriction of using only the gender listed on a student’s birth certificate to provide services.
Participants (n = 7) discussed recent state legislation that imposes restrictions on discussions in public institutions regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and limits the scope of mental health services provided in schools. Over half of the participants voiced trepidation about state legislative policies, which were reported to undermine the role of school social workers, making it difficult to be transparent with school staff, students, and caregivers about the services they provide. Specifically, Participant 4, who works at three elementary schools, two of which are Title I schools, shared how recent legislation impacted her ability to be transparent with school staff and families:
One of the interesting things is, like, we can’t say that we provide therapy. So, we have to say, “social work support” or we can call it “counseling.” So that’s kind of a weird policy thing that makes me feel like we’re not that transparent.
Related, Participant 6 noted that due to the recent legislative changes, they are having to redefine their role: “It’s just interesting because I was gonna say, two weeks ago I might have said, ‘I provide therapy in the school,’ and now we’re reformulating how to describe it.”
A handful of participants also described how restrictions on what they can discuss with students can be a barrier to the services provided. For instance, Participant 2, a school social worker who serves two Title I schools, shared how state policies limit discussions related to gender identity and restrict the ability to support students in an inclusive and affirming way:
There are still some policies that can sometimes get in the way, like around students who identify with a different gender than what’s on their birth certificate. That comes up in our work a lot and policies around that. Yeah, comes up a lot.
Recent legislative changes were identified as having created significant challenges for school social workers in delivering effective school-based mental health care and serving students. Restrictions placed on discussions regarding DEI have had a particularly detrimental effect on undermining the ability of school social workers to provide affirming and inclusive care.
Overcoming Barriers to Service
Although school social workers encounter barriers in service delivery, they also reported ways in which they have developed effective strategies to overcome barriers, including: (1) building rapport and buy-in with caregivers and (2) addressing student resource gaps.
Building Rapport and Buy-In With Caregivers
Nearly half (n = 5) of participants described building rapport with caregivers as a strategy to overcome barriers to providing school-based mental health care. These efforts included attending family events, being physically present at the school, organizing informational sessions for caregivers, and making intake sessions more accessible for caregivers to complete.
Participant 8, working at one Title I and one affluent elementary school, shared her commitment to finding various ways to build rapport with caregivers and establish a presence within the school. She emphasized that being visible to both caregivers and students by attending family events plays a crucial role in building trust:
I think that trusting relationship also decreases the barrier. And I just personally try and go to as many of the family events as I can, just so that parents can put a face with the name, so that when I call, I can say, “Oh, yeah, you know, we talked to each other at this,” and their kids might know me also. So, I try and be in the hall in the mornings, you know, after school be outside and just telling, you know, telling kids goodbye and parents goodbye and hello, and interacting as much as I can. I wear my school social work T-shirt as often as I can stand it. So, I do think there’s a huge trust factor that lowers the barrier for school and some families when they hear social worker.
Participant 2 described how she offers intake sessions later in the evening to lessen barriers for caregivers completing intakes:
. . . Even just the ability for parents to come into intakes . . . it’s like a lot of the parents are working really long hours or working two jobs. And so, it’s like doing parent intakes by phone at 6 or 7 pm.
Participants emphasized the importance of building rapport and gaining buy-in from caregivers as a way to overcome barriers to serving students, sharing various strategies they use to foster these relationships. Establishing connections with caregivers through multiple means allowed participants to more effectively deliver mental health services to students.
Addressing Student Resource Gaps
Amid obstacles to securing resources for students, most participants reported finding ways to connect students with the necessary supports, even if, as Participant 1, a school social worker at a low-needs affluent elementary school, remarked, “It just gives me a little bit of extra digging to do.” Some participants (n = 3) emphasized their commitment to providing the highest quality mental health care within the school to compensate for the deficit in existing community-based mental health care. Others (n = 2) noted the importance of fostering their current community partnerships while actively seeking opportunities to establish new connections and resources.
Participant 2 explained that school social workers “tend to keep students a lot longer than the typical eight to 12 sessions” to address the scarcity of community-based mental health services. Participant 10 expanded on this:
Most of us also strongly believe . . . it’s more efficient and helpful for families to access services in a school then it is for them to actually get to an appointment [elsewhere]. Especially when we think about our families that are undocumented, or have two jobs, or don’t have transportation or even access to where these offices are.
Some participants discussed the need to stay informed about available resources and new opportunities that arise within the community. Participant 3, who serves a Title I elementary school, described the effort she makes to ensure that all of her students receive Thanksgiving dinners, noting her ability to connect with community partners in case of increased demand:
Next week, we’re going to have a hundred Thanksgiving dinners. They’re [community partner] coming in and they’re building the kits, and it comes with a pan for the turkey, and everything is in that one kit. And if there are families that don’t get one that need one, there’s going to be other people that I can reach out to make sure that they’re getting that help.
In addition, participants (n = 5) described collaborating with other school staff and community partners to identify different methods of securing resources for their students. Participant 6 described working with other school social workers to secure resources for her students:
You kind of have to talk to other schools about what they’re doing. So, like when our need here increased, I was reaching out to people at [school] to say like, “How is it that [school] got those backpacks full of food?” Because every Friday I would distribute backpacks to kids so that they could have, you know, nonperishable food over the weekend . . . You have to kind of tap in and find those things or network with other counselors, other schools to say, like, “What are you doing to meet this need?”
Extending outside of the school and into the community, Participant 13, a school social worker serving three elementary schools, one of which is a Title I school, recounted a situation in which she identified grant opportunities to provide her students with the resources and supplies needed to implement a mindfulness group:
At [school], because they’re a Title I school, I got money from [organization A], and then there was a grant opportunity with [organization B], so I wrote in and I got more funds from them. And then I wrote another grant to an organization and I got funding for my student [therapy] group.
When school social workers encountered service barriers or resource gaps, they actively sought ways to support their students. Some emphasized maintaining the highest possible standard of mental health care within their schools, while others described reaching out to colleagues or community members to ensure students’ needs were met and support remained consistent.
Discussion
Authors explored the barriers to providing accessible mental health care that school social workers face and the strategies they employ to overcome these challenges. Findings suggest that participants faced difficulties in collaborating with school counselors, engaging caregivers, and navigating the impact of state legislation. The results also highlight that building trust and rapport with caregivers, continuing to provide accessible mental health care within the school, strengthening existing community partnerships, and seeking new opportunities to obtain and allocate resources for students are essential for delivering effective school-based mental health services.
Participants emphasized that the strength of their relationships with other school professionals played a crucial role in connecting students with services. Strong collaboration with school staff allowed social workers to provide more cohesive and effective student support, which aligns with previous research highlighting the importance of collaboration in delivering effective services and enhancing student learning experiences (Murphy et al., 2025; Sherman, 2016; M. Teasley et al., 2012). Within the social worker-counselor relationship, participants reported that challenges arose when the roles of counselors and school social workers overlapped, as both school counselors and social workers are focused on supporting students’ social and emotional well-being. Prior research on multidisciplinary school teams echoes this dynamic, showing that school social workers frequently encounter “turf battles” with other student support staff (Altshuler & Webb, 2009; Sherman, 2016). This overlap may contribute to school counselors feeling a strong sense of stewardship over their role and the students they serve.
Participants also reported challenges engaging with caregivers, particularly communication challenges, caregivers’ perceptions of social workers, and their views on mental health. Difficulties in the school social worker-caregiver relationship can be especially important, as students rely on caregivers to find and secure mental health resources (Lu et al., 2021). While the barrier to engaging caregivers is well-documented (Groton et al., 2013; Hornby & Blackwell, 2018; Tan et al., 2020; M. Teasley et al., 2012), participants in this study frequently encountered resistance from caregivers due to beliefs surrounding mental health and previous adverse experiences with social workers, which is a topic that has received less attention in school social work research. Participants described the stigma caregivers have surrounding social workers and pursuing support for mental health as factors contributing to difficulties in engaging with parents. School social workers and counselors may find opportunities to collaborate in addressing caregivers’ stigma surrounding mental health. Participants noted that counselor collaboration is particularly important when contacting caregivers to obtain consent for student services. Working together can aid in building strong rapport with caregivers and clarifying how school-based mental health services are delivered.
Study findings highlighted the negative impact that recent state legislation has had on school social workers’ ability to deliver services. While prior research has examined barriers related to district- and school-level policies (Binks et al., 2024), the influence of state-level policies represents a relatively new challenge for school social workers and adds to the literature on barriers to effective practice. Utah’s legislation has emerged as the current federal administration seeks to dismantle DEI initiatives by imposing implications for DEI-related language, hiring procedures, funding, and inclusive programs in public schools (H.R.2712, 2023). This legislation would alter school-based mental health services by upending the inclusivity, accessibility, and effectiveness of mental health services within schools, jeopardizing the role schools serve as an accessible place for mental health support, particularly for students who lack access to care in their communities. Against the backdrop of a significant political shift in the United States, participants noted that these policies have left them uncertain about what they can or cannot communicate regarding their services.
The results of this study also shed light on how school social workers navigate the challenges they face in providing services. Participants described overcoming barriers by increasing efforts to engage and connect with caregivers and addressing resource gaps when linking students to services. Participants made a concerted effort to engage and build connections with caregivers, which, according to participants, led to increased trust and rapport and, in turn, caregiver engagement. Since caregiver involvement is a crucial factor in student success and well-being (De Gaetano, 2007; Povey et al., 2016) it is essential that school social workers prioritize developing strong relationships with families.
Finally, participants emphasized the importance of identifying students’ needs and described dedicating significant time to securing resources for them. Identifying and securing resources is a unique aspect of the school social worker’s role, and this finding contributes to existing literature on the profession (Sherman, 2016; M. Teasley et al., 2012). Social workers play a vital role in integrating community resources into the school setting, distinguishing them from other specialized educational support staff (M. S. Kelly, Thompson, et al., 2015; Murphy et al., 2025). Participants noted the value of thinking creatively and constantly seeking opportunities to connect students with necessary resources.
Implications for Practice
There are several implications for policy and social work practice. First, providing real-world experiences of school social workers, the results from this study might better equip legislators to make informed decisions that have the potential to minimize harm and promote student well-being. Second, this study highlights the importance of accessible school-based mental health care and the critical role of social workers in its delivery. A school-based mental health model might encourage other states or school districts to adopt similar approaches in their schools. Third, regarding social work practice, amid the limited access to training and professional development experienced by school social workers (M. S. Kelly, Frey, et al., 2015; M. S. Kelly, Thompson, et al., 2015; Sherman, 2016; M. Teasley et al., 2012), schools could aim to provide evidence-based training opportunities for current practitioners seeking to enhance their skills and service delivery. Training could include strategies for engaging with caregivers, effective approaches for working on multidisciplinary teams, and the importance of understanding and practicing cultural competency, particularly within the school setting. Fourth, this study illustrates how state legislation related to DEI policies influences school social work practice and highlights how school social workers navigate the tension of complying with district, state, and federal regulations while trying to uphold professional values and ethics to provide equitable support to all students. Study findings may provide professional organizations, school districts, and school social workers with an example of school social workers navigating the balance between legal and policy compliance and adherence to professional values and ethics, offering insights that extend beyond Utah to inform practice and policy nationwide.
Limitations
Our study has some limitations. Our study was conducted within a single school district with specific local conditions, policies, and practices, which may limit the transferability of the findings to other school districts and regions. Yet, results from prior research largely align with participants’ reports and add qualitative depth to better understand what might be driving the effects seen in the prior quantitative literature. Future research should aim to recruit more heterogeneous samples, with the aim of better understanding differences across contexts such as location, school type, or school district. In addition, future research could expand to explore social workers’ perceptions in a wider geographic span, which could increase transferability to other regions and to provide a more robust comparison of barriers faced by school social workers across contexts. Comparing different states or school districts could offer a deeper understanding of the efficacy of different practices that school social workers use to navigate barriers to service. Participants were also interviewed only once, which limited the depth of engagement. More prolonged engagement with participants, such as conducting multiple interviews over time, could have deepened our understanding of both the barriers to service school social workers face and how they overcome those barriers to enhance youth mental health. In addition, future research could broaden the scope of participant perspectives by including individuals who seek school-based mental health services, such as students and caregivers.
Conclusion
As the demand for school-based mental health services continues to rise, school social workers play a vital role in bridging the gap between students and accessible care. This research contributes to the school social work literature by elucidating the barriers a sample of Utah-based school social workers encounter in delivering services and providing accessible mental health care in schools, and strategies used to overcome these barriers. Despite facing challenges, participants implemented strategies to build trust with caregivers and secure additional resources, helping ensure consistent and effective mental health support for students. The results from this study can inform policy and social work practice, particularly in education and school settings.
Footnotes
Disposition editor: Cristina Mogro-Wilson.
Funding
The author disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported, in part, by the University of Utah College of Social Work’s Dissertation Grant.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.