Between Expectations and Reality: Service Provider Perspectives on Barriers In Refugee Integration and Resettlement

Background:
Refugee resettlement in the United States (US) continues to evolve in response to shifting immigration policies, funding structures, and global displacement trends. Refugees are the most highly vetted immigrant group, often undergoing years of screening by multiple federal agencies, and many arrive having experienced trauma, loss, and prolonged instability. As a result, they present with distinct and complex social, economic, and mental health needs (Van den Boogaard, 2025; Betancourt et al., 2017). Tennessee has long been a key resettlement site; however, recent federal-level changes have created new challenges for refugee communities and the service providers supporting their integration. This study examines service provider perspectives on these challenges to inform more responsive and equitable service delivery systems for refugee populations.

Methods:
This study employed a mixed-methods (survey and follow-up interview) design. Targeted sampling strategies were used to recruit providers (n=13) from refugee-serving agencies across Tennessee. Through closed- and open-ended questions, the survey gathered information on populations served, services provided, most pressing client needs, and current challenges. Analyses examined frequency variables to describe refugee service provider organizations. Interviews explored provider perspectives in greater depth. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis, with two coders reviewing each transcript. Constant comparative techniques were applied, and themes and subthemes were finalized collaboratively. No discrepancies arose in the coding process.

Results:
Quantitative: Most organizations (n=11) had been providing services for 10 or more years, providing individual (n=13), family (n=11), community (n=7), and advocacy (n=10) services. Services were provided in diverse languages (e.g., Arabic, Pashto, Russian, and Spanish). Participants indicated a desire to strengthen services specific to trauma (n=5), and building relationships with similar organizations (n=10). Regarding top priorities, providers identified transportation and jobs (n=6) and housing (n=4). Language barriers were the most prevalent challenge (n=9).

Qualitative: Analysis identified five key themes shaping refugee integration and access to services: structural constraints, service system limitations, expectation–reality mismatches, diverse cultural and pre-migration experiences, and resilience. Subthemes included policy instability, funding limitations, system misalignment, organizations' inability to meet diverse service demands, and reliance on inconsistent or informal sources of information. Despite these challenges, both refugees and providers demonstrated resilience through adaptive service approaches, community networks, and in-house training. The findings highlight the need for more integrated, culturally responsive, and sustainable systems of care to support refugee integration.

Implications:
The findings indicate that structural constraints, service gaps, and mismatches between expectations and available services shape refugee integration and access to care. These outcomes point to fragmented systems and inconsistent provider training. Implications for practice and policy include strengthening cross-sector coordination, expanding culturally responsive and trauma-informed services, and standardizing ongoing training. Strengthening culturally responsive, trauma-informed services and improving communication processes is essential for social workers in both practice and policy contexts.