Understanding Workload Pressures in ABA Practice

Workload is more than a staffing concern—it directly shapes the quality of care clients receive. This study offers a detailed look at how many hours behavior analysts and trainees are actually working, what tasks fill those hours, and how often that work goes unpaid. The findings have real implications for clinical decision-making, supervision quality, and ethical practice.

What is the research question being asked and why does it matter?

This study asked a straightforward question with significant clinical stakes: how many hours are behavior analysts and trainees working, what tasks fill those hours, and how often is that work unpaid? It also explored whether heavier workloads are linked to stress and problems in work and personal life.

This matters because an overloaded clinician may make rushed decisions, miss follow-ups, provide weaker supervision, or delay necessary treatment changes. Overwork also leads to illness, burnout, and turnover—all of which disrupt service continuity for learners and families.

The study also examined a fairness question: do caseloads get smaller when cases are more complex? Many clinics claim they adjust caseloads for severe behavior, medical needs, travel, and other demands. If real-world assignments don’t match that principle, clinicians may be set up to fail even when they’re trying to act ethically.

What did the researchers do to answer that question?

The researchers used an online survey, collecting responses from 322 practicing behavior analysts and ABA trainees. Participants reported their average weekly work hours, number of clients, and time spent on different task types—indirect work (paperwork, admin, collaboration), direct client work, supervision, and travel. They also reported how they were paid and whether specific tasks were fully paid, partly paid, or unpaid.

Participants described the learner needs they worked with, such as severe problem behavior or medical fragility. The researchers then used regression analyses to examine whether certain types of client complexity predicted more assigned cases or more hours worked. A smaller group answered questions about stress and work-life concerns, allowing comparison between average and high workload groups.

This was a descriptive study based on self-report, not an experiment. Not everyone answered every question. The survey was author-created and reviewed for face and content validity, but it was not described as a fully validated measure.

How you can use this in your day-to-day clinical practice

Start by treating workload as a clinical variable that affects client outcomes—not just a staffing issue. Behavior analysts in this study reported working about 46 hours per week on average, with some reporting much more. They also reported overseeing about 15 clients on average, with some far exceeding that number. If your hours and caseload look similar, don’t assume you’re simply bad at time management. Use it as a signal to check whether your service model expects more than one person can deliver with quality.

Look closely at what’s consuming your time. Participants reported that nearly half their work time went to indirect tasks—admin, paperwork, planning, data review, and collaboration. Quality care depends on this indirect time being real, scheduled, and protected. Build your schedule so indirect work isn’t pushed to after-hours. If you can’t find time for graph review, plan updates, caregiver coordination, and staff training within your paid hours, you’re at risk of making late or weak clinical decisions.

Use task categories—not just client counts—to guide caseload decisions. High travel demands, heavy authorization and report writing, or intensive staff training needs are real workload drivers. The study found that travel and personal training time were often not fully paid, which can push clinicians to squeeze these tasks into nights and weekends. That raises burnout risk and can lead to cutting corners. A practical step: track your week for two weeks using simple blocks (direct, supervision, indirect, travel). Compare your actual week to what your employer expects, then bring that data to supervision or leadership to support a workload change request.

Be cautious about assuming complex cases mean fewer cases. The study found that clinicians supervising more clients with severe behavior were actually assigned more clients overall. Medically fragile clients were linked with fewer assigned cases, but severe behavior was not. Use this to advocate for better case assignment practices. In case review meetings, don’t accept “severe behavior” as a vague label. Spell out what it requires: higher supervision frequency, more safety planning, more caregiver training, more staff practice with feedback, and more coordination with other providers. Request workload adjustments based on those required actions, not just diagnosis or setting.

For trainees and supervisors, treat trainee workload as a quality and ethics issue—not a rite of passage. Trainees reported working about 33 hours per week on average, but some reported up to 60. Most tasks beyond direct service were often unpaid, including travel, writing plans, and reading research. Supervisors should verify that a trainee’s fieldwork tasks are realistic and supported, especially if the trainee is also completing coursework. Large amounts of unpaid indirect work can quietly pressure trainees to rush, copy templates, or avoid asking for help—all of which harm learning and client care.

Use stress signs as early warning indicators for service drift. Many respondents reported mental stress, reduced job satisfaction, personal life problems, and decreased work quality tied to workload. If you notice more missed deadlines, unfinished graphs, postponed plan updates, or less time observing sessions, treat that as a system signal. Respond by narrowing priorities to what protects learners first: safety plans, data integrity, timely program changes, and meaningful caregiver and staff training. Then identify what can be delayed, delegated, automated, or stopped.

When discussing ethics, connect it to client protection—not guilt. Many respondents didn’t label workload as an ethical dilemma, even when reporting decreased work quality. Build a team culture where it’s normal to say, “My workload is affecting my ability to do X for this client.” That kind of statement supports client dignity by pushing the team to fix the system rather than blame the clinician or lower care standards.

Finally, keep your limits tied to competence and continuity. This study can’t tell you the right number of clients or hours for every clinician, setting, or funding model. But it does support a clear next step: make workload visible, measure it in time and tasks, and adjust it when quality risks emerge. Use your clinical judgment, document your workload constraints, and request changes that match the actual work required to serve clients well.

Works Cited

Schreck, K. A., Padron, C., Caldwell, T. D., & Wilson, S. J. (2025). Behavior analyst & trainee workloads: Baseline reports, ethical implications, and practical solutions. Behavior Analysis in Practice. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-025-01113-5