Cultural Competence in Social Work Providers: A Systematic Review

Background and Purpose: Social workers are mandated to practice in a culturally competent manner. The topic of cultural competence is of even greater importance given the frequent racial and ethnic differences between social workers and clients. In spite of the abundance of conceptual literature on the topic, little is known about social work providers’ levels of cultural competence and their experiences in multicultural practice. The purpose of this systematic review was to find and review U.S.-based studies that assessed providers’ level of cultural competence and their experiences in multicultural social work practice. Although multicultural practice encompasses many diverse group, the aim of this review was solely on racial and ethnic diversity in social work practice given that majority of licensed social workers in the United States are non-Hispanic Whites, and most report providing services to clients who are racially or ethnically different from them.

Methods:  Research citations from 2006–2016 in Social Service Abstracts, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science and Academic Search Complete were searched with the combination of search terms such as “social worker*” “social work provider*”, cultur*, multicultur*, divers*, empirical, qualitative and quantitative. The review of databases yielded a total of 1,270 studies, from which 74 qualified for further review. A total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria. The qualifying studies used qualitative (13), quantitative (12) and mixed (2) methods, and 10 of them were dissertations. Studies were assessed for theoretical framework, sample, design, and outcomes.

Results: The samples ranged from 6 to 58 in qualitative studies, 81 to 1,124 in quantitative studies, and 29 to 256 in mixed methods studies, and they were predominantly White. The most frequently used conceptual framework was the cultural competence model, and the most common methods were interviews, focus groups, and surveys. Measured through self-reports, the providers’ levels of cultural competence varied (from good to moderate to poor), and non-White social workers usually scored higher than White providers. Providers in general experienced some tensions and biases in multicultural practice often related to privilege and power dynamics, and applying their own cultural beliefs and values to guide client assessments and interventions. Personal, educational, professional, and structural factors, such as employers’ lack of recognition of multicultural skills, affected providers’ experiences of working with culturally diverse clients.

Conclusions and Implications: The design of reviewed studies limits the ability to make recommendations for practice. Specifically, all quantitative studies were cross-sectional and relied on self-reports, which can be particularly prone to social desirability bias on the topic of cultural diversity. Lack of clarity about the data analysis process and incomplete analysis of findings were common issues in qualitative studies. Many of the studies also lacked methodological rigor and theoretical foundation. The study outcomes offered a wide range of cultural competence levels and experiences in multicultural practice, further limiting the overall applicability of the studies. The paper makes recommendations for future research based on the review.