Characterizing Supervision-as-Usual: Findings From Two Provider Surveys

Although clinical supervision is widely seen as critical for professional training and for safeguarding and promoting client well-being in mental health care, it is understudied, particularly in publicly funded services. In surveys of two large samples of youth mental health service providers (a state sample of providers billing Medicaid [N = 1,057] and a national sample of professional guild members [N = 1,720]), we examined the amount of time providers reported spending in supervision and consultation in a typical workweek and its covariation with characteristics of providers' caseloads and work settings. Across both samples, providers reported spending an average of 2-3 hr per week in supervision. Serving higher percentages of low-income clients was associated with significantly more supervision time. Working in private practice was associated with less supervision, while community mental health and residential facilities were each associated with more supervision time. The national survey also measured providers' perceptions of their current supervision. On average, providers endorsed feeling comfortable with the amount of supervision received and supported by their supervisors. However, working with more low-income clients was associated with greater need for supervisor approval and oversight and with less comfort in the amount of supervision received. Those working with more low-income clientele may benefit from additional supervision time or more focused supervision coverage of the specific needs of clients with low-income. More in-depth research on critical processes and content in supervision is a much-needed future direction for supervision research. Impact Statement In two large provider samples, providers reported spending 2-3 hr per week in supervision on average, with those serving more low-income clients reporting more supervision time. Providers also reported feeling generally comfortable with the amount of supervision they received, but less so when they served more low-income clients. This adds to the sparse literature describing supervision in usual care settings and provides context for those working to improve supervision for publicly funded services.