Diversifying Clinical Social Practice: The Impact of a Workforce Development Program

Background and purpose: The lack of racial and ethnic diversity among clinical social workers has been persistent in the profession. The Association of Social Work Boards reported that 85% of licensed clinical social workers are white, while 6.8% Black. The pass rates for clinical social work licensing exams sheds light on the source of disparities among racial and ethnic groups, and licensing exam pass rates varies among these groups. Researchers have reported that the pass rates for White candidates for the LCSW exam is 82% , compared to a 60% pass rate for African Americans. Disparities in the labor market among clinical social workers highlight the need for workforce development programs to facilitate further acquisition of skills among clinical social work candidates from marginalized groups and to help advance diversity within the labor market.

Exploratory research on workforce development programs have shown promising results in helping to prepare post MSW candidates with skills and competencies required to work on integrated health care teams. There is also evidence illustrating that workforce development programs have impacted social workers perceptions of preparedness for clinical social work practice. While research on workforce development programs is in its nascent stages, less is known about workforce development programs that are designed to mitigate disparities and facilitate diversity in the labor market. To fill this gap, this study is an outcome evaluation of a workforce development program designed to provide additional training to prepare post MSW clinician of color with skills and knowledge to become LCSW and to diversify labor market.

Methods: This study utilized a phenomenological qualitative approach to collect and analyze data from a purposive sample of post MSW clinicians of color. (N=6). Participants were recruited from three universities within the city. In the sample, 66.6% identified as cisgender females and 33.4 identified as cisgender males. All participants identified as Black. Semi-structured interviews were conducted for one hour with participants while participating in the program. Participants were also interviewed six months after leaving the program. All interviews were transcribed. Open coding was performed utilizing an inductive approach, and raters were able to achieve an inter-rater reliability of 85%. Codes developed were applied to data collected to identify emerging themes.

Results: Three key themes emerged from the analyses of these data: (1) the program provided a clinically rich experience due to training built within the program. (2) participants felt supported through clinical supervision. (3) Participants believed that the program prepared them for the clinical social work exam through tutoring and other supports.

Conclusions and implications: The evaluation of this program shows that proper investment in workforce development programs could help mitigate racial and ethnic disparities among clinical social workers. Participants’ perspective offered insights with reference to necessary inputs required for workforce development programs to facilitate positive outcome for clinical social workers of color and preparing them for the clinical social work exam. These outcomes have implications for diversifying labor market for clinical professionals.