Developing and Validating a Design-Based Practice Model for Initial Client Engagement: A Racial and Social Justice Perspective

Background and Purpose:

Social work’s commitment to racial and social justice (RSJ) is well-established, yet there is a lack of empirical evidence on how social workers translate RSJ into direct practice. Grounded in classic pragmatism, this multi-phase Design-Based Research study sought to develop and validate an RSJ-informed model of initial client engagement. Research questions were 1) How do social workers operationalize RSJ into client engagement? 2) How does the preliminary model resonate with social workers who are in direct practice, and 3) How do social workers perceive its applicability and utility in their own RSJ-informed client engagement?

Methods:

In Phase 1, we used simulation to observe and examine how 30 experienced social workers engaged a standardized client (i.e., trained actor) of intersecting marginalities. The simulated sessions were video-recorded, and we conducted post-session interviews with workers about their RSJ-informed client engagement methods. Grounded Theory coding methods were used to analyze both simulation and post-session interview data. Phase 1 resulted in the development of an RSJ-informed practice model to client engagement. In Phase 2, we used an online survey to validate and refine this model. We surveyed 20 additional social workers to seek their perspectives on the transferability of the model. A combined deductive-inductive content analysis approach examined the respondents’ alignment with the model and identified areas for refinement to enhance practice relevance. Through both phases, a community advisory board of diverse RSJ-informed social workers provided guidance to ensure the results reflect practice realities.

Results:

The Phase 1 RSJ-informed practice model captures six interconnected themes: 1) intentionality (how social workers purposefully integrate RSJ values into initial client engagement), 2) clinician-in-relation (the social worker’s relational positioning), 3) holding space (the ability to create an affirming therapeutic environment that recognizes the complex intersecting identities of the client), 4) inviting (the practitioner foregrounds transparency and client agency while critically employing engagement skills to invite the client to share their experiences at their own pace), 5) disentangling (a critical form of assessment and case formulation that includes a broader examination of social and political relations of power across time, place, and RSJ movements), and 6) catalyzing (the clinician and client begin to identify and initiate various interventions and advocacy). Phase 2 affirmed the various components of the clinical practice model and offered more nuanced identification and operationalization of the practice skills embedded within each component. Participants emphasized the model’s potential transferability across diverse practice situations and ability to engage clients from an RSJ approach.

Conclusions and Implications:

This study advanced social work science, policies, and practices by offering an empirically-grounded RSJ-informed practice model. The findings can contribute to scientific approaches of DBR and simulation-based research to develop and validate research-informed social work practice. The resulting practice model can enhance education to assist social workers engaging in RSJ-informed practice. The emerging practice model has potential to shape policy and practices to ensure commitments to justice are meaningfully operationalized with clients, thus bridging the gap between theoretical commitments and real-world application.