THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
CONNECTICUT CHAPTER
Report of BiLingual/BiCultural Survey Findings
On Workplace Standards
July 2005
Prepared by the NASW/CT Latino/Latina Social Workers Network
With the assistance of Marcia Bok, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
University of Connecticut School of Social Work
Dear Colleagues,
The following report is a product of the Latino/Latina Social Workers Network of the National Association of Social Workers, Connecticut chapter. The Network provides a vehicle for Latino/a social workers, and others, interested in addressing issues or concerns relevant to the Latino community. This study came out of concerns raised by Network members around their workplace experiences.
In early 2004 the Network began to discuss workplace issues that are specific to bi-lingual/bi-cultural social workers. From initial discussions we found that certain workplace issues and concerns were common amongst bi-lingual/bi-cultural social workers that cut across workplace settings. Based on these discussions the Network sought to identify information and workplace standards related to bi-lingual/bi-cultural social workers, only to find that very little data existed. This in turn led to the development of a research project that culminated with the issuance of this report.
Though this report is a product of the Latino/a Social Workers Network it’s purpose and usage is not intended solely for Latino/a social workers. We believe the issues raised in this report are relevant to all social workers. The Network identified bi-lingual/bi-cultural social workers, many but not all of whom were Spanish speaking. By use of a survey we found that the issues of concern were the same and the experiences common amongst bi-lingual/bi-cultural social workers, regardless of ethnicity.
As the bi-lingual/bi-cultural population continues to grow so will the need for bi-lingual/bi-cultural social workers. Workplace issues will only become more prominent if not addressed. It is our hope that employers seeking to recruit and retain bi-lingual/bi-cultural social workers will use this report, especially the recommendations. In addition, this report should be used by the social work profession as a vehicle for improving services to clients, advocating for its bi-lingual/bi-cultural members, and by bi-lingual/bi-cultural social workers for self- advocacy as well as a validation of their own experiences.
We welcome hearing from other organizations that may choose to replicate our study and build on the information presented here.
Annette Santiago, MSW
Latino/a Network Chairperson
Bilingual Social Workers Speak Out
“I will be required to take on other duties that my co-workers are
not required because I am bilingual/bicultural”
“As a bilingual social worker I have the same caseload as everyone else (non-bilingual). Most of my clients are Spanish-speaking. Most of the forms and documents are in English. It is very time consuming to translate the forms to my clients and to translate accurately my client’s responses. I know for a fact that I spend much more time working with my clients than those whose clients are only English speaking. Add to that fact that I need to translate letters and other documents. These are not listed as part of my job description”.
****************
“Some people feel comfortable translating for their own cases, but not for
other people. Being bilingual is not a measure of cultural competence”.
“Not all bilingual people are competent to translate. There are many levels of language dominance at academic and social levels and the educational experience/level of the translator. Employers need to be very careful”.
****************
“Social workers who are bilingual/bicultural could benefit from a
stipend to compensate the extra work they perform”.
******************
“Clients and staff will seek me out”.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PAGE 5
SURVEY PAGE 7
Purpose of Survey PAGE 7
Demographics PAGE 7
Employment Data PAGE 8
Professional Training PAGE 9
In The Workplace PAGE 9
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS PAGE 12
RECOMMENDATIONS PAGE 14
LATINO/A NETWORK CHARGE PAGE 17
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PAGE 18
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose
This survey was conducted in the Fall, 2004. Approximately 130 questionnaires were mailed to NASW-CT membership with Latino and Asian surnames. A total of 55 social workers responded, two-thirds of whom were NASW members. The questionnaire was self-administered, anonymous, and mailed back to NASW/CT. when completed.
The purpose of the survey was to determine the experiences of Latino and Asian social workers in Connecticut with respect to the expectations and responsibilities assigned to bilingual/bicultural social workers where they work; and to improve these experiences for workers, clients, agencies, and the community with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) by developing workplace standards that address the current work experiences of bilingual and bicultural social workers.
Findings
About three-fourths of respondents were female and had MSW degrees. They had an average of 12 years of social work experience and about one-third were Licensed Clinical Social Workers. Respondents worked in a wide variety of agency settings and about a fifth were supervisors or administrators. Spanish was the dominant second language.
The survey covered two major areas related to bilingual/bicultural agency services: the quality of these services for clients and the quality of the work environment for bilingual/bicultural social workers. It was generally felt that in both areas there was need to develop better workplace practices.
In relation to the quality of work with clients, respondents felt that there were often not qualified individuals available to provide accurate and nuanced translation services; written agency materials were often not available in the clients’ primary language; and often non-social workers were used to provide translation. It was felt that issues of privacy and confidentiality, as well as the social, psychological, and cultural meaning of client needs was not always understood nor properly communicated.
Regarding the quality of the work environment for social workers, respondents were often asked to translate forms and other written material, asked to act as a translator for clients, and found their workload increased and affected in other ways because of their bilingual/bicultural abilities. In addition, these responsibilities were generally not part of workers’ job descriptions or included in performance evaluations; and workers were generally not compensated for these extra responsibilities. Respondents generally felt strongly that these extra responsibilities contributed to larger caseloads and “burn out”.
Conclusions and Recommendations
It is important to understand that many of the individuals and families social workers serve come from traditionally oppressed, very poor population groups. Their problems are likely to be multifaceted and complex. Even for individuals and families who may be in the U.S. for many years and speak English and appear acculturated, cultural backgrounds and experiences need to be understood. Often, bilingual/bicultural social workers serve as a bridge between the client, the agency, and the community. Bilingual skills, without bicultural understanding, may not be sufficient.
1. If social workers are expected to perform translation and interpretation functions, this should be included in their job description, they should receive financial compensation for performing these functions, and this should be included in their performance evaluation;
2. Social workers are often unaware that they can become trained/certified translators. Social workers who are certified should be compensated for this additional training. They are also often unaware of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of l964 government regulations around language use, as well as NASW Standards for Cultural Competence in Social Work Practice (2001), particularly Standard 9, on Language Diversity. This information needs to be more widely disseminated.
3. Bilingual/bicultural social workers should be assigned a diverse caseload. If a worker is assigned a caseload of all traditionally oppressed and/or non-English speaking clients, then caseload size should be reduced. This would equalize caseload responsibilities and reduce “burn out”.
4. Because clients often have multiple problems, clinicians often also function as case managers. A team approach would be helpful where a clinician and case manager work together, both knowledgeable about a client’s situation.
5. Agencies should adhere to Title VI government regulations, which require organizations receiving federal funds to provide meaningful oral and written language assistance to individuals with Limited English Proficiency (LEP). The use of non- social workers for clinical interpretation and translation should not be permitted.
6. Social service agencies personnel policies and practices should reflect the linguistic and cultural characteristics and needs of the clients they serve. Additionally, training, hiring and compensation of workers with special language and cultural competency skills should be clearly articulated in these personnel policies and practices. All social service agencies should provide cultural competency training.
7. And finally, NASW/CT and other social work CEC providers should promote advanced-level training on culturally competent practices with particular client populations.
The need to increase the pool of trained and skilled bilingual/bicultural social workers continues. It is contended here that if workplace practices and standards are improved, and educational incentives are provided, this will contribute to the growth in the number and quality of social workers available to provide these services. Because of the growing number of individuals and families in the community whom are non-English speaking and who need help, the issues addressed in this report should be considered of immediate concern to the social work community.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS/ CT CHAPTER
Report of Bilingual/Bicultural Survey Findings
On Workplace Standards
July 2005
Purpose of Survey
The NASW/CT Latino/Latina Social Workers Network is working to develop standards for the workplace in relation to employment issues for bilingual/bicultural social workers. These standards will focus on the expectations and responsibilities assigned to bilingual/bicultural social workers where they work. Once adopted by NASW/CT., employers will be encouraged to utilize these standards to assure that clients receive the most culturally competent services possible and that bilingual/bi-cultural social workers providing these services are given recognition within the workplace for their skills. These skills include the importance of language as well as cultural understanding of the client populations. One of the steps in developing these standards is the collection of workplace data from bilingual/bicultural social workers. The data collected from this survey will assure that the workplace standards address the current work experiences of bilingual/bicultural social workers. The survey is for bilingual/bicultural social workers regardless of ethnicity.
Survey Findings
Approximately 130 questionnaires were mailed to NASW-CT membership with Latino and Asian surnames. The findings are based on completed questionnaires from 55 social workers listed in the NASW-CT membership database. The questionnaire was self-administered, anonymous, and mailed back to NASW/CT when completed.
Demographics
1. Gender
Female 40 (73%) Male 15 (27%)
2. Highest SW Degree
BSW 7 (13%) MSW 39 (71%)
DSW 3 ( 5%) Other 6 (11%)
3. Yrs. of Experience in SW
Range 1-30 yrs. Mean 12.2 yrs.
4. LCSW
Yes 21 (38%) No 29 (53%)
NR 5 ( 9%)
5. Nasw Member
Yes 37 (67%) No 13 (23%)
Employment Data
1. Type of Agency
Child Protection 12 (22%)
Family Services 10 (18%)
MH/Substance Abuse 4 ( 7%)
School Social Work 7 (13%)
Medical Social Work 5 ( 9%)
Higher Education 2 ( 4%)
Private Practice 2 ( 4%)
Community Health 4 ( 7%)
Residential program 4 ( 7%)
Nursing Home 1 ( 2%)
Other 4 ( 7%)
The Other category includes child guidance, state social agency, community agency
2. Job Title
Social Worker 13 (24%)
Clinical Social Worker 8 (14%)
Supervisor/Administrator 11 (20%)
School Social Worker 6 (11%)
Therapist 3 ( 5%)
Professor 2 ( 4%)
Psychiatric SW 1 ( 2%)
Trainee/Intern 2 ( 4%)
Residential worker 2 ( 4%)
Other 7 (12%)
The Other category includes case manager, case aide, program assistant.
3. Does Your Job Description Include Translation as a Responsibility
Yes 21 (38%) No 34 (62%)
If yes, are you additionally compensated for this job responsibility
Yes 4 ( 7%) No 17 (31%)
NA 34 (62%)
4. Languages Other Than English
Spanish 49 (89%) French 1 ( 2%)
Lao/Thai 1 ( 2%) Other 2 ( 4%)
NR 2 ( 4%)
5. Percent of Bilingual Staff in Agency
< 10% 13 (24%) 10- 19% 14 (26%)
20-29% 7 (12%) 30-39% 8 (15%)
40-49% 5 ( 9%) 50% + 7 (12%)
NR 1 ( 2%)
Professional Training
1. Are you Aware of Being Able to Become a Trained/Certified Translator
Yes 22 (40%) No 28 (51%)
NR 5 ( 9%)
2. Are you a trained/certified translator
Yes 2 (4%) No 48 (87%)
NR 5 ( 9%)
3. Are you trained to translate English forms or written materials into another language
Yes 4 ( 7%) No 46 (84%)
NR 5 ( 9%)
In The Workplace
1. What is the percentage of non-English speaking individuals served by your agency
< 50% 22 (40%) bet. 50-75% 21 (38%)
> 75% 12 (22%)
2. Does your workplace have bilingual individuals hired to provide translation services
Yes 12 (22%) No 31 (56%)
DK 11 (20%) NR 1 (2%)
“But they use the staff like secretaries or whoever is available”.
“They have a contract with an agency to translate”.
“Outsource fee for service”
“(A state agency) has contract to hire translators as needed for any language”.
2a. If yes, are they certified translators
Yes 5 ( 9%) No 6 (11%)
DK 9 (16 %) NA/NR 35 (64%)
3. Is all of the written agency information available in the primary languages of the clients the
agency serves
All 1 ( 2%) Most 10 (18%)
Some 38 (69%) None 6 (11%)
4. Is someone available, who speaks their native language, when non-English speaking clients
inquire about or request services
Always 7 (13%) Most of the time 15 (27%)
Sometimes 31 (56%) Never 2 ( 4%)
5. Are you aware of Title VI government regulations on language use
Yes 16 (29%) No 34 (62%)
NR 5 ( 9%)
6. Are you asked to translate English forms or materials into another language apart from your
professional responsibility
Frequently 6 (11%) Sometimes 31 (56%)
Never 18 (33%)
6a. If asked frequently or sometimes, are you compensated
Yes 5 ( 9%) No 31 (56%)
NA/NR 19 (35%)
7. Are you asked to act as a translator apart from your professional responsibility
Frequently 9 (16%) Sometimes 32 (58%) Never 14 (26%)
7a. If asked frequently or sometimes, are you compensated
Yes 3 (6%) No 38 (69%)
NA/NR 14 (25%)
7b. If asked frequently or sometimes, how often are you asked to translate in the course of a week
Once a day 4 ( 7%) Several times a day 4 ( 7%)
Several times a week 23 (42%) NA/NR 24 (44%)
8. Is your workload increased or affected by your bilingual/bicultural ability
Most of the time 26 (47 %) Sometimes 14 (26%)
Never 13 (24%) NR 2 ( 3%)
“Spanish-speaking workers have higher caseloads”
“Involved in someway or another with parents-children who are limited English speaking”.
“As an LCSW in the O.P. Clinic I’m primarily assigned to serve English speaking patients…
but I also provide services to Spanish-speaking patients who choose to come to our program,
instead of the Hispanic Center that is part of our hospital”
“At times I have to make myself available to translate for a caseworker or
speak on the telephone to translate”
“Paper work falls behind as a result”
“Cases have often waited longer on the waiting list; cases require much more case
management due to the lack of English abilities; many more direct requests from the community”.
“I am the only Spanish speaking licensed clinical social worker. Therefore, my caseload is to
full capacity and I have to stretch myself to take new clients that do not speak English”
“I am responsible for mentoring Latino students and Latino student
organization and being involved in Latino community”.
“You have to work on your cases as well as other people if they have Spanish-speaking clients”.
“Because I am the only school social worker in my district who speaks
French and Creole therefore I am assigned to various schools”.
“Average, my caseload is seven cases. If a non-English patient is admitted, or two or
three, they will be part of my caseload in addition to the existing seven until discharge
of these seven can even or balance the existing caseload”.
“The need of individual therapy for Spanish-speaking clients is high. There are not
enough agencies who can provide these services”.
“I am a social worker in a detox which deals with many Latino, dual diagnosis clients,
some who are monolingual and others who are bilingual and prefer a Latino worker”.
“I will be required to take on other duties that my co-workers are
not required because I am bilingual/bicultural”
“…. Very time consuming with multiple demands”.
“As a bilingual social worker I have the same caseload as everyone else (non-bilingual). Most
of my clients are Spanish-speaking. Most of the forms and documents are in English. It is very time consuming to translate the forms to my clients and to translate accurately my client’s responses.
I know for a fact that I spend much more time working with my clients than those whose clients
are only English speaking. Add to that fact that I need to translate letters and other documents.
These are not listed as part of my job description”.
“When material is not available in the native language of the client I have to
explain to client and translate the material”.
“Have a higher caseload due to having monolingual cases as well as English speaking cases”.
“I will get the English speaking and Spanish speaking clients while
others are waiting for English-only cases”.
“I will be pulled out of my duties to translate; no one to cover my work”.
“Translate, carry transferred cases that require bilingual services,
assist parents in translating needs to other service providers”.
“Increased – more work for same salary”.
“Definitely increases my workload”.
9. In your performance evaluation, are you evaluated for your bilingual/bicultural ability
Most of the time 3 (6%) Sometimes 14 (26%)
Never 36 (66%) NR 2 ( 3%)
“I’m not a translator but as a bilingual/bicultural LCSW my employer recognizes
in my evaluation the capacity to serve both populations (E/S). They are aware that
bilingual LCSW’s are hard to find….”
10. Are you receiving supervisory support for your bilingual/bicultural work
Most of the time 7 (13%) Sometimes 8 (14%)
Never 37 (67%) NR 3 ( 6%)
“I’m not hired to serve as a translator. My supervisor provides support,
encouragement, recognition to clinical bilingual workers”
11. Are you compensated differently because you are a bilingual/bicultural social worker
Yes 4 ( 7%) No 50 (91%)
NR 1 ( 2%)
12. Are you aware that NASW has published Standards for Cultural Competence in Social Work
Practice
Yes 14 (25%) No 41 (75%)
Summary and Conclusions
Language and culture are basic components of providing a bilingual/bicultural experience for individuals and families who social workers serve, and historical, political, and economic conditions are part of this cultural experience. Thus, for example, it is important to understand that many of the individuals and families we serve come from traditionally oppressed groups and that this colors their perceptions and expectations of the world. Poverty may often play a pervasive role in how the individual perceives the world. It is important to understand how the individual interprets his or her past and present experiences. This is why the kind of interpretation and translation services that are often provided to clients may not adequately address their needs nor be fully understood by them. Even if individuals and families may be in the U.S. for many years and speak English and appear acculturated, different family members may experience their need for service and the service delivery system in many different ways. Often bilingual/bicultural workers serve as a bridge between the client and the agency and community. This is why bilingual skills, without bicultural understanding, may not be sufficient. Inexperienced or inadequately trained workers may inadvertently provide a disservice to their clients if the complex nature of bicultural practice and acculturation are not fully understood. The only way to prevent this from happening is to establish workplace standards that all human services agencies can use as a guide to workplace practices with non-English speaking clients and communities. That is the purpose of this research report – i.e. to help develop these workplace standards, based on the experiences of social workers in the field.
“It is imperative that we as Latino social workers have the support and guidance to
be able to cognitively reframe the marginalized experiences the Latino populations are
subjected to by the lack of standardized practices”.
1. The job description of sixty-two percent of respondents does not include translation as a responsibility even though more often than not these individuals are called upon to provide these services, usually without additional compensation. (Ninety-one percent were not compensated differently as bilingual/bicultural social workers). Sixty-seven percent never received any supervisory support for their bilingual/bicultural work; and 27 percent received this support most of the time or sometimes.
“I feel that there should be a push to compensate bilingual workers who are used for translation/interpreters even if one does not have certification. That is how my agency
gets around not paying for our service/skill”.
“Social workers who are bilingual/bicultural could benefit from
a stipend to compensate the extra work they perform”.
“I know that it caused problems at one job because I was hired at a higher pay than a female non-Spanish speaker and she caused problems with the employer…. (A state agency) in years past wanted me to work for them and refused to acknowledge years of experience and Spanish speaking ability. …”
2. Fifty percent of respondents indicated that less than 20 percent of the employees in their agency were bilingual.
“I am considered the Spanish-speaking therapist at the agency”.
“Clients and staff will seek me out”.
3. Sixty percent of respondents worked at agencies where non-English speaking individuals constituted 50 percent or more of their clientele.
4. Eighty percent of respondents indicated that only some or none of the written agency information was available in the primary language of the clients the agency serves. Sixty percent said that sometimes or never is someone available who speaks their native language when non-English speaking clients inquire about or request services.
“It can be frustrating not to have all agency forms available in Spanish for
Spanish-speaking clients”
5. Sixty-six percent indicated they were asked to translate forms or materials into another language apart from their professional responsibilities, most often without compensation. Fifty-six percent indicated this occurred several times a week or more.
6. Eighty-four percent of respondents are not trained to translate English forms or other materials into another language.
7. Fifty-six percent of respondents said that their workplace did not have bilingual individuals hired to provide translation services. Bilingual/bicultural social workers are often called upon to provide translations and interpretations without advance notice and as an “add-on” to their regularly scheduled workload and without additional compensation. This can lead to, and often does lead to, “burn-out” among these workers. This has a personal toll on the worker as well as a toll on the already limited number of bilingual/bicultural workers in the field
“In this job they respect my duties. But past experiences in other agencies were awful.
Their expectations were not only to provide services but anytime they needed a bilingual
person they called me and it was hard to do my job”
8. Totally untrained workers, such as maintenance staff and secretaries, may be called upon to provide translation and interpretation services. Not only is it unlikely that these individuals will understand the nature and scope of psychological or social problems presented by the client, there are also issues of confidentiality that may be violated.
“I think there should be strong opposition to allowing social workers or other therapists/clinicians to conduct treatment sessions with a translator. To conduct one interview with a translator…. is one thing, but to expect that ongoing treatment can be effective and not consider this a major violation of the privacy of the client is inappropriate and highly disrespectful”.
“LCSW who are bilingual/bicultural should receive special incentives; agencies should hire support staff (i.e. bi-lingual clerical staff) to assist patients when they call; agencies should pay professional translation services and if staff is asked to translate, time should be compensated ($); caseload expectations for staff who serve special populations (more time consuming) should be adjusted (less); hire case managers as part of staff to assist clients with multiple needs, that affect their emotional status, but are not clinical issues; only trained/professional individuals should be used as translators (ideally staff only assigned to translation as translators) and never use “any” person available who can “speak” the language, but is not qualified to translate or will not adhere to confidentiality standards – i.e. a housekeeping person asked to inform a person “You are HIV+”.
9. Fifty-one percent were unaware that they could become trained/certified translators;
and 87 percent did not have this certification or training.
10. Sixty-two percent were unaware of Title VI government regulations on language use
in the workplace. Seventy-five percent were unaware of the NASW published
Standards for Cultural Competence in Social Work Practice.
Recommendations
Bilingual/bicultural social workers are often asked to perform translation and interpretation functions in addition to their regular workload, even though these responsibilities are not explicitly stated in job descriptions, and are often not compensated. In addition, social workers are generally not trained in interpretation – i.e. the ability to translate general nuanced ideas – and translation – where literal word for word translation occurs. There are a growing number of individuals and families in the community who are non-English speaking and who need help. The extra demands of the job related to client language and culture, as well as complex client needs, and the general lack of experienced clinical bilingual/ bicultural social workers to perform these tasks, may cause workers performing these functions to become “burned out” and we may lose the few truly effective workers who are available. Thus, the following recommendations take on a sense of urgency.
.
RECOMMENDATION # 1: If social workers are expected to perform translation and interpretation functions, this should be clearly stated in job descriptions and financial compensation for these special responsibilities should be adhered to. If workers perform translation and interpretation functions, this should be part of their performance evaluation.
RECOMMENDATION # 2: Social workers are often unaware that they can become trained/certified translators. There is an organization called The New England Translators Association and the American Translators Association who can provide advice and help in obtaining this training. This should be widely publicized. There should also be salary compensation for this training/certification.
RECOMMENDATION # 3: Because many non-English speaking clients present a multitude of problems, workers should not be assigned a total caseload of these multiple problem cases. A mixed caseload of more traditional clients and non-English speaking clients should be assigned to bilingual/bicultural workers. If a worker is assigned a caseload of all non-English speaking clients, then caseload size should be reduced. This would reduce “burn-out”. With the shortage of bilingual/bicultural social workers this would help the retention of skilled social workers in the field.
“Not only is there a shortage of Latino social workers, but there is also a lack of cultural competence and sensitivity to Latino norms and values, resulting in discrimination for social workers such as myself who work inpatient and outside of the Hispanic Unit at agency name”
RECOMMENDATION #4: Because clients often have multiple needs, clinicians often end up doing case management. A team approach would be helpful, particularly in clinical settings. Teaming a bilingual/bicultural case manager and clinician would divide responsibilities so that each would capitalize on their strengths. In addition, each would be fully knowledgeable about the client.
RECOMMENDATION # 5: Direct service staff and agency administrators may not be sufficiently aware of the NASW Standards for Cultural Competence in Social Work Practice (2001), particularly Standard 9, Language Diversity:
“Social workers shall seek to provide and advocate for the
provision of information, referrals, and services in the language
appropriate to the client, which may include the use of interpretators”.
This standard requires social service agencies to provide the assistance of “qualified language interpreters” (as distinguished from translators), and requires that the interpreters have “proficiency in both English and the other language” (p.28). Beyond cultural competence, interpreters need orientation and training related to the social services provided.
Recommendations thus include:
- That agencies should provide qualified interpreters
- Who are culturally-competent (as defined in the Standards), and
- Who are oriented and trained in social services.
RECOMMENDATION # 6:There is a difference between a translator and an interpreter. The translator translates word for word, while the interpreter provides a more nuanced understanding of the situation and client needs. These differences need to be understood.
“Some people feel comfortable translating for their own cases, but not for
other people. Being bilingual is not a measure of cultural competence”.
“Not all bilingual people are competent to translate. There are many levels of language dominance at academic and social levels and the educational experience/level of the translator. Employers need to be very careful”.
“ Even levels of meaning can be difficult to discern if you merely focus on the words alone”
RECOMMENDATION # 7: Agencies should adhere to Title VI government regulations, which require that any organization receiving federal funds must provide meaningful oral and written language assistance to persons who have Limited English Proficiency (LEP).
RECOMMENDATION # 8: All social agencies should provide cultural competency training. A training the trainer’s model would be useful here.
“Also, in the area of competency training, it appears that it is typically Latinos who are looked at
in my agency to give input and direction. Although I welcome the opportunity to shed some light on
my culture, I believe this approach to identifying training needs breeds resentment among the non-Latino staff (the majority) because they feel they are being singled out as insensitive and not culturally competent. It is very awkward and quite a dilemma when they are indeed unprepared to tackle the complexities of a culture they know little about. I believe cultural competency training should be
made mandatory for all agencies working with high percentages of minority populations, particularly those that English is not their primary language”.
RECOMMENDATION # 9: As the number of immigrants/migrants from different ethnic and racial groups that come to the U.S. continues to increase, the training, hiring, and compensation of workers with special language and culturally competent skills should become part of the personnel policies and practices of all social agencies.
RECOMMENDATION # 10: NASW/CT and other social work CEC providers in Connecticut should promote advanced-level training on culturally competent practice with particular client populations.
This project represents an attempt to recognize and address some of the workplace issues confronting bilingual/bicultural social workers. If changes in agency policies and practices can result from some of the data and recommendations from this report we will have accomplished the goals of this endeavor. There are many questions still unanswered, of course, such as how to increase social work licensure for bilingual/bicultural social workers, and how to increase the pool of competent bilingual/bicultural social workers by possibly assisting with tuition reimbursements, loan forgiveness, and other financial aid. Additional research is needed to begin to answer some of these, and other, additional questions in order to improve client service and enhance the work experience of bilingual/bicultural social workers.
Latino/a Social Workers Network
Committee Charge
Authorization and Accountability
The Latino/a Social Workers Network is a Board of Directors approved Network of the Connecticut Chapter of NASW. The Network reports to the Board of Directors at least twice a year on the activities of the Network.
Purpose
To provide a professional network for Latino/a social workers and others interested in issues relevant to Latino/a social workers and the Latino/a community, to meet for sharing of mutual interests and to address issues of concern to the Network members within the framework of the social work profession.
Time Frame
The Network is an ongoing unit of the Connecticut Chapter.
Members, Terms, and Criteria
The Network is open to all NASW members. Latino/a social workers that are non-members of NASW may participate in the Network for a period up to six months, after which membership in NASW is expected.
The Network will have a Steering Committee consisting of those members who choose to be active and able to attend steering committee meetings. The chairperson of the Network shall be appointed by the chapter President with the advice of the Network’s steering committee, for a term of one year and may be reappointed for additional terms.
Specific Responsibilities
- Providing support to Network members in their professional career and to other Latino/a social workers.
- Advocating for Latino/a social workers in the workplace, in the profession, and in the community.
- Developing mentoring opportunities for Latino/a students in social work schools.
- Encouraging Latino/a students to pursue higher education through mentoring.
- Advocating with the state’s colleges and universities toward greater recruitment and retention of Latino/a students, faculty and staff.
- Working with the State’s administrative departments for health, education, child welfare and social services to advance service delivery that meets the needs of the Latino/a community, including adequate and culturally competent services.
- Encouraging participation by Latino/a social workers in issues facing the Latino/a community and providing a mechanism for such participation.
- Educating the social work community on relevant issues facing the Latino/a community.
- Conduct Network events throughout the State so that Latino/a social workers can network with colleagues and have a role in the Network.
- Working toward quality human services to Connecticut’s Latino/a community.
- Identifying and promoting Latino/a social workers interested in appointed positions and elective office.
History
The Latino/Latina Social Workers Network of NASW/CT was formed in 1997 to address the needs of Latino/a social workers. The Network involved itself in advocacy efforts to encourage the Connecticut State University System’s four state universities to recruit and retain more Latino/a students, faculty and staff, collaborated on a statewide conference and other efforts to improve foster care services for Latino/a children and offered opportunities for Latino/a social workers to network through social events. The Network was disbanded in 2000 largely due to a transition of staffing in the NASW/CT office. The Network was restarted in 2002 with a kick off reception at the chapter’s annual conference.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The following members of the Latino/Latina Social Workers Network of the National Association of Social Workers were involved in the development, implementation and/or completion of this report:
Annette Santiago, MSW, Chairperson
Marcia Bok, Ph.D., MSW
Anna Bracamante, MSW Student
Yadira Duran, MSW
Barbara Candales, Ph.D., LCSW, MPH
Antonia Cordero, DSW, MSW
Marie A. C. Cortez, MSW
Margarita Gonzalez, MSW
Yvonne Muniz, MSW
Gustavo Nava, LCSW
Denise Perez, MSW Student
Nelly Rojas Schwan, DSW, LCSW
Elizabeth Serrano-Fontanez, MSW
Stephen Karp, MSW, staff
A special thank you to Dr. Marcia Bok for analyzing the survey data and drafting the report. Also thank you to Ms. Caitlin Zinser for her many hours of data entry and Ms. Kajuana Hamilton for the formatting of this report.
Add text from .doc here.
