Results: Four categories of practical and relational knowledge were identified: doing for, doing with, standing by for support, and letting go. A narrative matrix of provider and client interactions identified the practical and relational actions (e.g., doing for and doing with) associated with specific life domains (i.e., cognitive, emotional, and behavioral). These findings demonstrated that the activities of case management were not only practical. They were also value driven. For example, when case managers respected client dignity and independence, they acted with values that guided them in making judgments about both the type and use of the relational activities (e.g., doing for and doing with activities) within specific time and spatial dimensions. Conclusions and Implications: Foucault and Bourdieu inspired an enormous and diverse literature on practice and its relationship to theory. In this paper we argue that this scholarship tends to elide how knowledge works in the ethical dimension, that is, in the inevitable and necessary tension between fact and value. Doing for and doing with, for example, emerge from practical knowledge and in the particulars of caring relationships, and their effects cannot be explained or prescribed by technique. And these practitioner reflections on value require our taking seriously ‘values' as knowable and actionable. Indeed, these data show how practical knowledge in provider/client relationships produce particular ‘valued' effects and how relational aspects of treatment are often overlooked because the fact/value separation in social work research consigns these to the subjective (i.e., value) and emotional (i.e., interference), thus unknowable dimensions of practice.