User:Bljones1/sandbox

Social work program design is a method of program design that stresses community participation, cross cultural sensitivity, and worker-client collaboration. Social work program design follows an empowerment model, and differs from other methods of program design by shifting the emphasis away of designing programs and organizations to help clients, and to working with clients through the process of realizing their own potential to help themselves and others.

I. Program Construction
In social work, “practitioners often have opportunities to develop services in response to emerging needs of clients." Social work program design should be influenced by the needs of populations served by the agency. “Such services may be educational programs (e.g., immigrants or unwed pregnant teenagers), support groups (e.g., for rape victims, adult children of alcoholics, and victims of incest), and skill development programs (e.g., stress management, parenting, and assertiveness training groups)." This axiom speaks to the diversity of social work design and practice given the multiple interest and needs of select groups and clients practitioners seek to simultaneously assist while informing their professional competence. To facilitate the process of program development a fundamental, “conceptualization of good social work practice require[s] three essential components: knowledge, values and skills."

First, according to Dr. Patricia Reid-Merritt, “The social and behavioral sciences provide the foundation for social work practice." She adds, “Traditional theories in psychology, sociology, political science and economics have provided the foundation for understanding social and human interaction." However, with respect to working with diverse populations that possess a distinct history, culture and experience she states, “While these theoretical perspectives, most often grounded in a European worldview, offer some general insights about human need, they may prove inadequate and/or inaccurate..." Social work practice, and practitioners, must involve the expansion of its collective knowledge base when working with these diverse populations if it is to engage in praxis devoid of oppression and privilege.

Second, in working with diverse client groups’ social work values must be grounded in the collective values and ethics of the client group practitioners seek to serve. For example, the National Association of Black Social Workers derived their code of values and ethics from the historical and cultural lineage of the African American population in which, “the code of ethics speaks to the linkages between the Black social worker and the African American community." The client group’s collective values and code of ethics function as the, “guidelines for professional practice and personal conduct." Finally, despite practical development of basic social work competencies and skills (assessment, active listening, engagement, communication, etc.) that serve all practitioners, “the ability to develop effective intervention skills for practice with culturally unique groups has been lacking." For developing culturally competent skills social workers must, “gain proficiency in helping skills that are valued, appreciated and understood” for working with diverse client groups or populations.

Given our fundamental understanding that program conceptualization, development and intervention requires a culturally and experientially based lens for eventual practice with diverse groups we will explicate the development of a culturally-tailored intervention model utilizing, ironically, a program development outline as a guide. The program development outline consists of five core dimensions which are:


 * 1. Indicate Target Group/Client
 * 2. Indicate Target Issue/Concern
 * 3. Engage in Sustainable and Appropriate Research
 * 4. Construct Purpose, Process and Desired/Expected Outcomes
 * 5. Culturally-Based methodology
 * 6. Utilized Evidence-Based Practice(s)
 * 7. Target Funding Source

II. Program Implementation
The social work profession is often divided into three primary levels of work: micro-level, mezzo-level, and macro-level practice. Although there is a significant amount of overlap in each area of social work, it is most often macro-level practitioners that are responsible for the design, implementation and evaluation of programs. These social workers are often charged with the task of securing funding for program implementation, through a variety of means available to nonprofit and human service agencies including charitable giving and grant writing. An essential function of the social worker involved in program design and its implementation is to set objectives to measure the effectiveness of the agency’s program. “Program objectives flow from mission statements and inform how organizational resources are utilized to target a specific need or population,” and are often tied to the funding of a program. This step should be accomplished prior to program implementation. Additionally, research has shown that programs are best implemented and most effective when clients actively participate, and are not members of the program involuntarily.

III. Program Operations
Program operations in social work program design draw from Paulo Freire's notions of education as liberation, emphasizing understandings of social workers as both teachers and learners in the process of engaging with clients. Program operations have several tools through which to assess and measure post-positivist social work program components:


 * 1) Iron Rule of Organizing:

“Never do for others what they have the ability to do for themselves”


 * 1) “Not about us, without us:”

When designing your program, it is important to welcome and encourage the participation of those in the population that you serve in the organization. This is particularly important in respect to culture competency, and when working with marginalized and vulnerable populations. For example, if you are designing a program which works with ex-offender reentry, it is recommend the inclusion of ex-offenders in the process of program design. This is particularly true if you do not have similar experiences yourself. Likewise, if you are operating a program that targets youth, it is highly advisable to include youth in the operations of your program. The phrase “Not about us, without us” is used in this context as a mantra for those seeking to include the populations they work with in the work they are doing. This assessment tool may be measured by a written percentage in the organization’s bylaws, i.e. “At least 60% of the staff/executive board must be ex-offenders.”


 * 1) Measuring Meaningful Participation:

Clients and recipients of services from the organization through social work program design must be engaged in meaningful participation in the organization’s services and operations. One assessment tool of meaningful participation can be seen in Arnstein’s Ladder of Citizen Participation, who emphasizes the liberating nature of citizen participation:

“Citizen participation is a categorical term for citizen power. It is the redistribution of power that enables the have-not citizens, presently excluded from the political and economic processes, to be deliberately included in the future.”

Arnstein’s Ladder demonstrates a hierarchy of meaningful participation from least to most effective in the redistribution of power:


 * 1) Manipulation – The participation of the citizens is solely for the use of the powerholders, who use the participation of the citizens to impress or sway public opinion.
 * 2) Therapy – Involving a selected group in extensive participation so as to therapize them and cure them of problems as perceived by the powerholders. (e.g. “Good Mother” classes for new recipients of TANF)
 * 3) Informing – Powerholders inform the citizens of rights, responsibilities, and options, while still providing little opportunity for real influence or voice.
 * 4) Consultation – Calling on citizens to voice their opinions to the powerholders on matters that affect them. Participation, in this sense, is measured through methods designed by the powerholders (e.g. through surveys, neighborhood meetings, public hearings), and is often then translated into statistics.
 * 5) Placation – This level of participation is useful for powerholders, as it performs the two-fold task of consultation of the citizens and disallows them from turning their participation into change. This level allows the legitimacy and validity of citizen input and opinion to be gauged by the powerholders, who maintain the final say.  Those opinions that are unpleasant or particularly challenging of the powerholders is then placated.
 * 6) Partnership – Powerholders renegotiate their power, opting to disavow enough to provide citizens the opportunity to reach an equal level of power. Through this, powerholders maintain influence while also including citizens the same opportunity for influence in the programs that affect them.  Planning and decision-making are shared responsibilities between the citizens and the powerholders in this step.
 * 7) Delegated Power – Citizens possess a greater amount of power than the powerholders once did. Though the citizen’s now hold the majority of the power, the powerholders still maintain involvement and influence.  However, the program’s accountability is ensured by the citizen’s ability to voice their opinions, direct the operations, and influence the program’s trajectory.
 * 8) Citizen Control – Participants govern the program. In this step, participants are in full control of policy, operations, trajectory, and are able to wholly control the terms and conditions for change, including renegotiations of power.

With Arnstein’s Ladder in mind, it is pivotal to social work program design that recipients of services are involved and engaged in program services and organizational operation. It is highly encouraged for all practitioners to be conscious of meaningful participation. For those programs seeking to improve upon client participation, it is important to offer an “apprenticeship” track for those who wish to engage in the program. It is also crucial to keep in mind when greater levels of client and community participation in programming might be disempowering. Social workers are advised to determine where the client is at through open dialogue, and colleague consultation.

IV. Program Termination
Though little has been published regarding social work program termination, it is reasonable to assume that many nonprofit agencies struggle to retain all of its programs. There are many possible reasons for program termination, and may include overall efficiency (failure to meet program goals and objectives) or having too few voluntary participants. However, one likely explanation for program termination is lack of funding. “Financial or  budgetary  constraints  have  been  increasingly  posed as stimulating program terminations” in agencies, particularly those experiencing budget deficits. There are a number of approaches to program termination, including a “draconian” cost-cutting method and partial program termination. Although not explicitly indicated in the literature, it can be assumed that (given the profession’s focus on community-building) social work program termination should be mindful of the population being served. Program termination appears to be a complex process. For example, in the case of certain higher education program terminations, five main criteria have been found to determine the termination process:
 * a. the program’s quality
 * b. its centrality to the institution's mission,
 * c. demand for the program from students and from the state, region, or nation
 * d. its cost-effectiveness, and
 * e. its unique nature.