Seeking Social Media Recommendations: The Ethical Quandary for Case Management

Case managers and other healthcare professional commonly ping “friends” or tag “connections” for resource info from treatment and provider recommendations to specific home health agencies and skilled nursing homes. Complex patient circumstances become group chats. After all, there’s no harm in seeking consultation or recommendations, right? Read how unintentional posts become ethical and legal missteps, and how to best manage them.

The discharge planning process always moved quickly, but these days it’s on steroids! Case managers face intense pressure to quickly transition patients to that next level of care, or home. Whether you case manage for a hospital, an MCO, or a community-based agency, you need information when you need it! You seek answers to questions “in the moment” and that is usually not the workplace! Social media has become fastest way for case managers to quickly get resource information on how to access what you need, and when you need it!

More and more new case managers are entering the workforce than ever before. Their onboarding happens at warp speed, though learning discharge planning resources can take time; they also change rapidly. Case managers and other healthcare professionals commonly ping “friends” or tag “connections for needed resources, from treatment and provider recommendations to specific home health agencies and skilled nursing homes. Complex patient circumstances become group discussions where colleagues to weigh in on management of everything from addiction and family dynamics to “tough to place” patients, or those with chronic readmissions and ED visits. Access to costly prescription drug access, transportation, and other health-related social need are also popular topics. After all, there’s no harm in seeking consultation or recommendations, right? I get countless emails and queries about this topic, so decided to write a brief blog post to guide the masses.

HIPAA Breaches, Penalties, and Professional Sanctions

Actually, there are ethical, and often legal pitfalls of posting these recommendations. Despite a case manager’s best intent to seek guidance, these types of posts can easily and unintentionally become HIPAA breaches. This may translate to financial penalties for the case manager and their employer, or potential sanctions or reprimands against one’s professional licensure and case management credential.

It can be common to see these posts within professional groups or communities. You know how it plays out. Limited information is posted about the patient, but then questions are posed by connections or group members. For each question and with each answer, more ePHI is inadvertently released. Ultimately there is just enough data for the patient or their family to be identified. It may not be one piece of information that leads to a HIPAA breach, but the collective discussion. This might include:

  • Posting the names and locations of potential facilities for transfer
  • Posting the age, psychosocial information about family demographics, or unique characteristics. 
  • Posting the name of the health plan for the patient
  • When a case manager’s social media profile includes information about their current employer
  • Providing psychosocial information on a patient who resides in a community of under 20,000 persons.

What’s the best way to handle obtaining these recommendations?

There are a series of ways that case managers can consult with colleagues and heed HIPAA and other ethical and legal requirements for patient privacy and confidentiality:

  • Use the least information possible about the person (or their family members) to obtain needed guidance and be mindful of the amount of detail provided (e.g., use obesity vs. a specific weight).
  • Make sure all necessary permissions for release of information documentation are clearly signed.
  • Move recommendation dialogues offline (e.g., emails, telephone calls) 
  • Heed those HIPAA and ePHI guidelines
  • Remember, all disciplines have unique privacy and confidentiality guidelines listed in their standards of practice and codes of ethics; many have additional social media policies with detailed parameters.
  • DO NOT FORGET that there are also distinct case management standards, guidelines, and ethical codes for most credentials addressing the legal parameters for use of health information technology, electronic communication, seeking consultations, informed consent, and associated privacy and confidentiality requirements (e.g., ACM, CCM, CDMS, CMC, CRC, RN-CMGT). All board-certified and credentialed case managers are beholden to those requirements. 

NOTE: Detailed information on this topic can be found in Chapter 7: Ethics is What You Do While Everyone Watches: Health Information Technology, in The Ethical Case Manager: Tools and Tactics by Dr. Ellen Fink-Samnick published through Blue Bayou Press and available on Amazon.

DISCLAIMER: This blog post is meant to provide professional recommendation and does not supersede formal legal guidance. All case managers are strongly urged to review the the regulations and requirements for their individual licensure scope of practice, requisite case management and other formal credentials, plus relevant risk management and compliance policies and procedures for their employer.

Patient Compliance vs. Adherence: Advancing the Health Equity Mandate

Use of the term “compliance” instead of “adherence” by healthcare regulatory entities and organizations, plus practitioners, health systems and their and employees condones the blaming of patients for poor outcomes. It’s time to change this practice!

First, big thanks to all who read my last blog post Health Equity and the SDoH are Not Synonyms. That article has quickly become my top blog post with thousands of views across social media platforms and other news outlets. Ellen’s Interprofessional Insights is free access to all who value its messaging, so please share the link. Now, onto my latest fierce focus. 

I was reminded last week of a long-standing pet peeve: (mis)use of the terms compliance and adherence. I participated in RISE’s Annual Population Health Summit with vibrant conversations int he space about patient engagement. Through a number of sessions there was THAT framing that makes me vibrate with frustration. My brain went into overdrive! 

When will the industry stop blaming patients for treatment inactions? Has there not been enough focus on DEI strategies to enhance practitioner and provider cultural awareness and humility? How much emphasis has there been to advance assessment of health-related social needs (HRSNs) or social drivers of health, patient health literacy, and decreasing biases? (Psssst: Remember, the CMS penalties and Joint Commission standards (TJC) are real!). Despite a resounding YES to the above questions, we’ve got miles to go before we sleep. Use of the term “compliance” instead of “adherence” by healthcare regulatory entities and organizations, plus practitioners, health systems and their and employees only condones the blaming of patients for poor outcomes. It’s time to change this practice!

Compliance Conveys Power Not Partnership

I’m notorious for level-setting and wanted to start with a review of definitions. Compliance refers to regulatory enforcement of applicable requirements whereby organizations and their providers are expected to meet or exceed the defined legal, ethical, and professional standards.Their explicit goal is to reduce fraud, abuse, and waste, with the implicit intent to ensure patient and occupational safety. Yet, there is a concerning power dynamic imposed by this definition as regulatory entities (e.g., NCQA, NQF, TJC) possess legitimate power by virtue of their role in the industry.

Compliance also implies power verses partnership. The term speaks to an assumption that patients must be subservient to a practitioner’s authority, a troublesome concept for this clinical professional. What happens when a patient’s voice is not heard or dismissed by practitioners? What about when a patient doesn’t feel seen?  These situations emerge with increasing incidence across every population, with who are marginalized and minoritized experiencing this reality in unacceptable numbers.

Compliance suggests passive behavior, as when a patient is expected to follow treatment instructions. It may be the patient who is comfortable doing what the physician tells them to, whether take a prescribed medication in a defined dose or follow-up for counseling with a behavioral health provider. Some patients may heed this guidance as the norm, not daring to question their provider, while others will seek to clarify the rationale. This approach should not be surprising in an era where patients are consumers of their care. However, questioning, challenging, or ignoring provider recommendations is too often viewed as a negative. 

Power and misused power yield trauma, whether historical, experiential or event in scope. Acute, chronic, and complex trauma share misused power and/or oppression at their source.  Blaming patients is laden with stigma and accusatory messaging. It gets me wondering how much attention is paid to a patient’s health literacy, language proficiency, or any of their concordant preferences. 


By contrast, adherence is the active choice of patients to follow through with prescribed treatments, while taking responsibility for their well-being. This term signifies that patients and practitioners collaborate to improve their health behaviors toward overall a higher state of wellness. Successful outcomes are achieved through a blend of clinician expertise with patient choice incorporating lifestyle, values, and care preferences. Shared decision-making and personal integrity leverage meaningful therapeutic relationships.

Sync for Social Needs, Z-Codes, Yet Being Out of Sync

I was excited when NCQA, NQF, and the TJC joined the Sync for Social Needs Coalition. Yet, these entities present as out of sync with their views on how to best assess and address exactly what drives patient motivation and engagement in treatment. NCQA still uses the term adherence on their resource pages and metrics. TJC echoed emphasis on patient activation and adherence in recent issue briefs.

My beloved Z-Codes are not so in sync either. ICD-10-CM Z codes for Patient Noncompliance were expanded in 2023 to my disappointment. To be fair, I’m a member of the Gravity Project and tout their work at every opportunity. However, I took a brief break from my involvement to finish my Doctoral Culminating Project. The mantra, you snooze, you lose applies!

Z-Code Z91.1 of patient noncompliance with medical treatment and regimen made me shiver. How is this concept objectively evaluated in the current care climate? Hearing colleagues refer to “non-compliant patients” always felt subjective. The terminology stirred thoughts of misbehaving children or those unable to follow traditional societal norms. 

My clinical training aligns with psychodynamic theory, thus there are always reasons for all behaviors, whether conscious or unconscious. This approach explains why a person may present as unable or unwilling to follow medical treatment. If we don’t ask why, we can’t properly assess the reasons for these behavioral manifestations. Expanding these codes gave the industry license to label patient actions as “noncompliance” with their dietary regimen and medical treatment. Caregivers of patients are also subject to these same biasesfor their “noncompliance “with an expansive list of codes under Z.91. These codes can be viewed here.

This terminology use is shocking given how the workforce is readily cued to manage their biases, stay informed of microaggressions, and participate in continuous learning to decrease missteps. Training on cultural awareness to promote patient engagement and satisfaction with care is emphasized at every turn. Yet, I am disappointed that practitioners are empowered to code, and thus blame, patients and caregivers for treatment disparities and misunderstandings.

Activating Change

Industry prioritization of health equity mandates a cultural shift in treatment language and perspectives. Here are tangible recommendations:

1Shift the narrative and power dynamic: Practitioners and providers must shift from viewing compliant and “obedient” patients to persons provided the respect and space to partner in their treatment decisions. Autonomy and self-determination remain enduring ethical principles and amplify attention to cultural perspectives.

2. Coping with the human condition is universal: Most patients and their caregivers experience fear and anxiety about their health conditions and those of their loved ones. A majority worry about diagnosis, prognosis, and quality of life. Everyone uses some defense mechanism to cope or not (e.g., denial, isolation, projection, displacement). The reality of the health experience often occurs without warning, and usually when least expected. We must give people the grace and space to cope with it.

3. Engage to understand patient and care giver rationale: To embrace cultural awareness and humility we must seek to understand patient and caregiver behaviors. We must eliminate implicit biases rather than empower them through quality metrics and measures; “these biases reinforce blame on the patients rather than look to the system and/or the competencies of the clinicians”; big nod to my friend Michael Garrett for this quote!

4. Assess for Psychosocial Needs: This arena is a top priority for organizations and most I know are on the case to integrate reflective screening tools into their efforts. I appreciate that far more resources are needed for all of those who need them. However, let’s make sure the right team members are employed for assessment and referral of patients, including community health workers, case management assistants, and health service coordinators. The outcomes are clear about their merits to assess across the touchpoints of care for:

  • Health and digital health literacy
  • Cultural preferences for treatment (e.g., medication, provider gender)
  • HRSNs, financial, and other impediments to care (e.g., co-pays, medical debt, lack of family support, isolation, transportation, incarceration, techquity) 

5. Use Non-Judgmental Communication: It is critical we set an inclusive tone to care, including but not limited to:

  • Maintain an affirming presence to establish trust 
  • Ask the patient to verify their gender and pronouns 
  • Ask the patient to verify their race and ethnicity
  • Ask the patient to identify their family or support system, regardless of blood relation
  • Demonstrate empathic and reflective listening 
  • Respect client autonomy by allowing the person to speak 
  • Empower patient through use of open-ended questions, such as, ‘What matters most to you?” or “What can I do for you today?”
  • Respond, clarify, and confirm, instead of reacting
  • Honor the patients religious and cultural beliefs, values, and choices

(Fink-Samnick & Garrett, 2023

Unconditional respect between patients and providers is difficult, but not impossible. Little will change toward engaging patients in their needed care until we stop blaming them for the industry’s shortcomings.

Health Equity and the Social Determinants of Health Are NOT Synonyms

Successful health equity strategies must be inclusive, and focus on all marginalized and minoritized persons and their communities. Any lesser view will continue to yield a faulty health equity equation. 

I delayed writing this blog to not compete with a recently published article in CMSA Today on The Social Determinants of Health: Case Management’s Next Mandate. It’s a quick 5-minute read if you haven’t gotten to it yet. However, that additional week gave me time to review another important and slightly longer read, the National of Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine report, Federal Policy to Advance Racial, Ethnic, and Tribal Health Equity 

Report Overview and Missteps

This well-intended report from the National Academies highlights the mandate for macro-level oversight of three disparity domains, as reflected in the title. There was affirmation how the social determinants of health and mental health (SDoH and MH) and the policies that shape them contribute to hindering and advancing health equity. Valuable recommendations included:

  • Creating a permanent federal body responsible for improving racial, ethnic, and tribal equity across the federal government
  • Development by Congress of a score card to assess the impact on health equity of all proposed federal legislation in the future, and
  • Having Federal agencies conduct an equity audit of their current policies. 
  • Collecting more accurate and complete population data for minoritized communities; those social (racial) groups that are marginalized or persecuted due to systemic oppression. 
  • Improving coordination among federal agencies
  • Supporting better inclusion of community input, and 
  • Increasing federal support and access for state and local programs.

These recommendations were sound, as the communities highlighted all face considerable obstacles in accessing optimal physical and behavioral health. Yet, the report suffers from two common flaws that I often identify when reviewing published works on this topic:

  1. Aligning health equity attainment only with the SDoH and MH, and 
  2. Viewing only racial and ethnic populations in the context of the discussion.

Health Equity and the SDoH Are Not Synonyms

Few things annoy me more than short-sighted views of the healthcare horizon in the context of our health equity challenge. I get especially irritated when health disparities are attributed to the SDoH alone. For example, I often hear presenters discuss high mortality rates for minoritized populations and attribute these poor outcomes to poverty and low socioeconomic status, unemployment, and lesser education. Maternal mortality for Black Women is >2.6 X that of White Women, though this particular data point was independent of income, education, or other elements commonly associated with health disparities. 

These faulty views impede accurate comprehension of the full scope of factors obstructing health equity, including systemic and structural racism, implicit and explicit biases, and the political determinants of health (PDoH). This erroneous perspective perpetuates generations of historical, experiential, and other event traumas endured by these populations. Patients continue to be blamed for their poor health outcomes rather than the system (and its providers) that created the chasms in care to begin with. 

Inadequate data to reflect minoritized populations has led to a risk-management ripple-effect. Faulty algorithms have been identified across clinical decision-making and interviewing models leading to inaccurate risk assessment, treatment recommendations, and medication dosages. Poor operational and fiscal outcomes intersect with quality and safety concerns, especially when the data used does not accurately reflect the clinical needs of the population. 

Health Equity Includes More than Race and Ethnicity

Achieving health equity involves taking dedicated action to improve the access, quality, and experience of healthcare for all individuals, populations, and communities. There is no doubt that race and ethnicity are key constructs for research attention and action, with abysmal morbidity and mortality rates. The National Academies report notes:  

  • Life expectancy for non-Hispanic Whites at 78.9 years of age compared to 75.3 for Blacks, and 73.1 for the American Indian and Alaska Native populations.

However, other marginalized populations face equally worrisome barriers to equitable care access and treatment. Of equal importance are gender orientation, age, and individuals with physical, cognitive, developmental, and mental health disabilities, to name a few areas. These populations are too often left out of health equity discussions:

  • Sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations have a higher incidence than non-SGM of developing chronic diseases (e.g., asthma, arthritis, diabetes, kidney disease, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, heart attack, stroke, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)), and more frequently deal with barriers to care from discrimination, let alone cost.
  • People living with disabilities (PLWD) have poorer health than the general population and are at a greater risk of injury and of developing non-communicable chronic diseases and age-related health conditions at earlier ages. 
  • Rampant gender disparities present in pain management, especially for those who identify as women. They experience “gendered treatment” across healthcare settings and with symptoms devalued or dismissed by their healthcare providers. This study’s results were also independent of socioeconomic status, education, or other health-related social needs.

The President of the National Academy of Medicine, Dr. Victor J. Dzau is correct that “Addressing the nation’s racial and ethnic health disparities is an imperative for the medical community.”; I would also add the priority for behavioral health given the current societal demand; after all, there is no health without mental health and visa-versa. However, efforts that limit health equity strategies to racial and ethnic disparities are short-sighted. Successful diversity, equity, and inclusion imperatives require the voice of every societal stakeholder across the entire cultural schema. 

Health Equity Actions Advance

Attaining health equity involves dedicated action to improve the access, quality, and experience of healthcare overall. This translates to intentional work by everyone, from those in data analysis, and learning and development, to persons specializing in process improvement and data measurement. This means:

  1. Developing quality metrics for health plans, health systems, and other entities that focus on more than reactive, short-term return on investment metrics, such as readmissions, patient engagement, and patient satisfaction. These antiquated data points only blame patients for poor outcomes through use of language such as “non-compliant”, rather than put accountability for change in the hands of providers. 
  2. Ensuring quality improvement efforts reduce unnecessary care utilization (e.g., ED visits, hospitalization), while simultaneously increasing access to preventative and primary care, behavioral health, and specialty care; this means adding concordant providers and approaches to care, which has been addressed in prior blog posts.
  3. Shift case management back to a proactive vs. reactive model; discharge planning is not the sole priority. Instead, case management competencies must highlight swift assessment of patients and their support systems, care coordination, interprofessional collaboration, effective communication, and outcomes management, while heeding professional ethical and compliance standards.
  4. Educate policy makers on inclusive health equity frameworks such as by Peterson et al. (2020). This robust framework accounts for equity and justice at the core of health outcomes, multiple and interacting spheres of influence, and a historical and life-course perspective (e.g., historical, experiential, developmental traumas). 
  5. Reinforce a sense of belongingness by everyone, especially persons from underserved communities. All patients and their families should feel seen, heard, and safe in the healthcare sector. This outcome can be measured by patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs), employee satisfaction and engagement surveys, and methods that involve analysis of these measures through demographics of race, ethnicity, and gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, physical and developmental disabilities, and socioeconomic status.

The Call to Action

“Our industry achieves the highest level of health for all persons, only when all voices are includedCommunities that commit to health equity make all persons feel valued, and do so via concerted and ongoing attention. It is only through this all-encompassing effort that avoidable inequities are identified and addressed, historical and contemporary injustices are eliminated, and healthcare disparities are mitigated.” (Fink-Samnick & Garrett, 2023). 

Successful health equity strategies must be inclusive, and focus on all marginalized and minoritized persons and their communities. Any lesser view will continue to yield a faulty health equity equation. All populations deserve better.

The Case for Diversity in Health and Behavioral Health Professions is More Than Powerful: It’s an Interprofessional Mandate

The face of the current health and behavioral health workforce fails to mirror the workforce it cares for. The recent SCOTUS decision will only further negate cross-sector efforts to attract, admit, train and, sustain the inclusive workforce patients need. What must happen to mitigate this massive gap in care?

I am a fan of the Commonwealth Fund’s issue briefs, and the recent one on The Case for Diversity in Health Professions Remains Powerful was especially significant. The messaging was in direct response to the latest SCOTUS decision on Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. For those who missed it, this decision removed “race-conscious affirmative action” in undergraduate admissions. This decision is poised to drop Black and Hispanic admissions by at least 10%, and strike a blow to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in education. The ripple-effect of this decision across all historically vulnerable populations was made clear in GLAAD’s post-decision statement

 “This decision inaccurately and unfairly limits access to the American dream, and drags our entire country backward, upending decades of precedent and progress. Equity for Black Americans and all people of color, including LGBTQ people, is essential to our democracy, economy, and future. This decision could also open the door for challenges to DEI practices in business settings and it is critical that companies and educational institutions respond with loud commitments to continue best practices for inclusion.”

Gaping wholistic health disparities already limit access to necessary physical, behavioral, and psychosocial health. The face of the current health and behavioral health workforce fails to mirror the workforce it cares for. The recent SCOTUS decision will only further negate cross-sector efforts to attract, admit, train and, sustain the inclusive workforce patients need. This action has great potential to inflict greater harm to a population already dealing with historical, experiential, developmental and other traumas. What must happen to mitigate this massive gap in care?

The Current Discordant Reality

I was educated and trained at a time when practitioners were often taught that anyone could work with anyone; I fought the opposing views for years. However, the research to support concordant care is equally compelling. I feel strongly that we must teach and emphasize the importance of cultural humility and work to eliminate implicit and explicit biases in practice. But, we also have an ethical obligation to be sensitive to the cultural nuances that come with caring for others. Every patient deserves to feel safe and a sense of belonging in the context of their care and treatment.

Academic programs across every discipline are working overtime to fill the massive void of practitioners available to treat underserved communities and their populations. Conclusive data validates how patient-provider concordance makes a difference in the quality of patient engagement, trust, and satisfaction. Patients do better in treatment when they feel that their providers and practitioners understand them and look like, and this reality transcends the cultural schema. However, current workforce demographics fails to ensure any level of concordant care.

A recent report  of medical residents yielded: 

  • Black men make up less than 3 %of all physicians
  • <1 percent identify as American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or other, Pacific Islander

For active physicians:

  • Persons who identify as men comprise a majority of the physician workforce: 63% vs. 37% (women) 
  • Persons who identify as women comprise >50% of the medical specialties focused on children, women, and families (e.g., reproductive health, pediatrics, neonatal and perinatal medicine, and child and adolescent psychiatry). 
  • 64 %: White
  • 20.6 %: Asian 
  • 6.9%: Hispanic, and 5.7 %: Black or African American. 
  • Barely 1 %: multiple races and non-Hispanic
  • < .3%: American Indian or Alaska Native or
  • .1% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

Data for mental health practitioners yield equally concerning results, particularly in light of the high demand for care. A survey >37,000 mental health professionals yielded abysmal numbers that fail to reflect the diversity of populations requiring intervention and treatment:

  • 74.2%: White  
  • 7.9%: Black or African American 
  • 7.9%: Hispanic or Latino.
  • 3.1 %: Asian
  • .7%: American Indian or Alaska Native

There are insufficient health and behavioral health professionals trained to work with the LGBTQIA++ community, and ensure patient safety, trust, and satisfaction with their care. 

Persons with Disabilities have limited representation in the healthcare workforce. A report from 2022 revealed:

  • 7.9% employed within healthcare with 4% as practitioners and 4% in healthcare support roles

The industry has miles to go toward ensuring a concordant health and behavioral health system and workforce that matches the face of the population it is entrusted to care for. How else can patients feel seen, heard, and assured of the care they deserve?

Advancing Action

I rarely post dramatic data without offering ways to mitigate the gaps in care presented. Considerable action across industry sectors is being dedicated to attaining a more diverse health and behavioral health workforce. The efforts in play comprise an exhaustive list, but a few novel ones are listed below. Add others that you may be aware of in the comments section at the end of this post.

The Smallest Advocacy Actions Can Yield the Greatest Reward

My recent travels reminded me how much satisfaction can be gained by advocacy on behalf of a larger group of individuals.

The universe provides us interesting lessons, and usually when we least expect them. That mantra about the journey being as meaningful as the destination applies to this blog, but in a different way than you might expect. While the theme of this post alludes to the importance of equity and response to trauma, it is not my traditional fierce messaging. Instead, this post offers my reflections on the rewards that can come from contributing to the greater good.

Where it Started

This last month has been full of conference travel, with my usual array of presentations and panel discussions. I was honored with the publication of my fifth book (The Ethical Case Manager: Tools and Tactics) and also inducted as a Case Management Fellow (FCM™) by the Case Management Society of America (CMSA), and the first social worker to do so. These accolades are important career milestones for which I’m grateful. Yet, these milestones paled in comparison to one experience that occurred around the same time. That event reminded me how much satisfaction can be gained when one small action is taken on behalf of a larger group of individuals.

These past weeks saw travel challenges for much of the population. The experiential trauma for all traveling during this timeframe was palpable, and due to events that were usually beyond each person’s control. This loss of power left travelers reeling. There were flight delays courtesy of extreme weather conditions, workforce shortages, and flight cancellations. There was even a substation fire that prompted a lengthy hold on flight departures and arrivals at one large international airport.

Who sat at airports for endless hours or days, in hopes of getting to their anticipated destination? How many slept on airport furniture or even floors? Who missed conferences, business meetings, family, or other long-awaited celebrations? Who missed flight connections by a matter of minutes? How frustrating to see your connecting flight at the neighboring gate upon landing, but unable to sprint off the plane quickly enough to get on board!

Where it Went

I was among the lucky ones. While several of my flights were delayed, I always got to my destination. Yet, the experiences for one flight impacted me greatly. I was heading home from a conference in Miami. That event fell during the initial, and often chaotic, June vacation week. The flight was loaded with travelers embarking on international trips, and catching connections at my destination, Dulles Airport in Herndon, Virginia. 

A large band of thunderstorms delayed our departure from Miami by 90 minutes and threw passengers into a panicked state. Some individuals had planned their trips for months, while others had sudden family and business emergencies to manage abroad. Even once we were in the air, flight attendants worked continuously to calm upset passengers throughout the aircraft and contact various airlines to hold connecting flights, as possible. Some of these flights were also delayed, which somewhat eased the worry of already tired and, in some cases, traumatized passengers.

Upon landing at Dulles, an announcement was made by the flight attendant to allow travelers with connecting flights to disembark first. I had a sneaking suspicion that this action would be hard to implement and wasn’t wrong. Everyone stood up to grab their bags and deplane. Here was my opportunity to help! I was close to the front of plane and in a pivotal position to be an enforcer of this one simple and logical request. Little did I know that I had a collaborator seated nearby who was equally committed to doing the right thing, and for all passengers.

My collaborator sat directly across the aisle from me, and spent most of the trip consoling the passenger next to her. This person was visibly upset about the disruption to her travel. The flight attendants were able to confirm that this passenger’s connection flight was three gates away and being held for her arrival. Yet, her worry remained at a fever pitch.

My collaborator and I stepped up simultaneously and into action. We realized that some people might not feel empowered to get off the plane, especially those persons sitting toward the back. We directed passengers who did not need to run for a flight to stay in their seats. There were some interesting expressions and explicatives shared, though everyone ultimately got our drift and pitched in to support the efforts. Within minutes, close to 180 passengers successfully (and gratefully) deplaned. My aisle-mate and I were among the last passengers to leave, and with appreciation of the flight crew.

How it Mattered

I slowly walked to the airport shuttle, then turned around to see my collaborator behind me. We smiled at each other and chatted about our actions. We treated others as we would want to be treated if in the same situation. We advocated for the human condition, which was what I was trained to do as a board-certified case manager and clinical social worker. She and I were also in agreement about one key takeaway from this experience, which more than equaled, if not exceeded any of my recent accolades. Our advocacy takes all forms. Yet, even the smallest advocacy actions can make the biggest difference to others, and in turn, can provide us the greatest reward.

Part 2: Wholistic Health Equity Determinants and the LGBTQIA++ Community

This Part 2 post continues exploring the pervasive impact of Wholistic Health Equity Determinants (WHED) on the LGBTQIA++ community. Focus is on the rising incidence of trauma and mental health conditions across the community and the expanding advocacy, funding, as well as resources to mitigate the WHED.

I appreciate the buzz about my last blog; it’s a quick read if you missed it. To catch you up, the LGBTQIA++ community face pervasive Wholistic Health Equity Determinants (WHED): SDoH, SDoMH, PDoH, and the systemic racism that perpetuates them. Discrimination, dismissal, and rejection trigger trauma across every demographic, and intensify integrated health incidence across this population. This Part 2 post explores the unprecedented exacerbation of behavioral health conditions and escalation in mental illness for the the LGBTQIA++ community. Additional focus is placed on novel resources to mitigate the physical, behavioral, and psychosocial health disparities faced by this population.

The Behavioral Health Landscape

     Let’s be clear, the LGBTQIA++ community is a marginalized population with morbidity and mortality rates that are worse than other groups. Increasing attacks on the community’s legal rights have amplified the impact of historical, experiential, and event traumas for the population. 

The following data sources span The Trevor Project’s 2023 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGBTQ Young People, the 2020 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, and other research.

Suicide

There has been a dramatic uptick in suicidal ideation and gestures among LGBTQIA++ individuals, especially for the community’s youngest members:

  • 41% considered attempting suicide:
    • 46%: Ages 13-17 and 34%: Ages 18-24
    • Of those who attempted suicide: 
      • 17%: Ages 13-17
      •   9%: Ages 18-24
      • 22%: Native/Indigenous 
      • 18%: Middle Eastern/N. African
      • 17%: Multiracial
      • 16% Black
      • 15%: Latinx
      • 11%: White
      • 10%: Asian American/Pacific Islander

Mental Health and Access to Care

The incidence of mental health faced by the community is alarming with higher rates for depression and anxietycompared with non-community members. The prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder impact upwards of 47% of the community.

Yet, the rates for mental health realities faced by LGBTQIA++ youth concern me greatly:

  • 67%: symptoms of anxiety
  • 25%: symptoms of depression
  • 56% who wanted mental health care were unable to get it:
    • 47%: afraid to talk about their mental health with someone else
    • 41%: didn’t want to get their parent’s/caregiver’s permission
    • 40%: afraid that they wouldn’t be taken seriously
    • 38%: couldn’t afford it
    • 27%: were not out about their authentic self and were afraid of being outed
    • 23%: didn’t feel they would understand their sexual orientation or gender identity
    • 20%: parent/caregiver didn’t allow them to go
  • <50% of transgender and nonbinary youth found their school to be gender-affirming
  • 30% said their mental health was poor most of the time or always from anti-LGBTQ policies and legislation.
  • Nearly 66% affirmed how hearing about potential state or local laws banning people from discussing LGBTQ people at school made their mental health worse.

Persons with Disabilities

Members of the LGBTQIA++ community have a higher likelihood of disabilities, whether physical, cognitive, or intellectual. Incidence is upwards of 40% of persons, though fewer of these disabilities are often expressed by individuals or formally identified.

As an already marginalized group, individuals with disabilities may feel “unseen” and experience more profound stigma and discrimination. Cumulative effects of this marginalisation can occur over the life course, with older members of the community experiencing higher rates of disability, depression, anxiety and isolation than the general community, and decreased social support. They are less likely to advance academically, with fewer persons attending college or attaining beyond a 2 or 4-year degree.

Transgender, non-binary, or gender non-conforming people with disabilities can often feel silenced. Abundant literature affirms they are more likely to experience chronic illnesses, including cardiac disease, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, stroke, arthritis, and asthma compared to persons living without disabilities.

Substance Use

The community experiences substance abuse at higher rates than their heterosexual counterparts:

  • LGB Adults: 2X as likely
  • Trans Adults: 4X as likely

21.8%: Diagnosed with an alcohol use disorder vs. 11% of the general population

Advocacy and Action

Advocacy and action have ramped up for dedicated funding, legislation, and program development. Educating industry stakeholders is vital, as is ensuring mentoring and support for LGBTQIA++ youth, adults, and their families. Registries of providers, practitioners, and treatment specialists who offer concordant care are essential. Here is a list of novel community-focused efforts:

  • The Department of Housing and Human Development has launched a new LGBTQIA++ Youth Housing initiative. HUD will partner with local communities, service providers, and young people directly impacted by residential insufficiency to address barriers to housing and shelter access. The recent press release lists further details
  • GLADD provides a clearinghouse of population-specific resources for advocacy, legal, and other general information across the life span. Military members and veterans can access specific linkages to various entities such as OutServe and the Service Members Legal Defense Network.
  • The Human Rights Campaign strives to advocate and promote equity for all persons within the movement. Their massive resource database encompasses topics to empower allies and other community stakeholders from coming out to maneuvering college, elections, hate crimes, health and aging, parenting, religion and faith, and workplace support. 

HRC’s Foundation supports the National LGBTQIA++ Health Education Center, which provides educational programs, resources, and consultation to healthcare organizations to optimize quality, cost-effective care for the population. Accessible webinars span topics as behavioral health, population-based health, trauma-informed care for Trans and Gender Diverse Patients, reproductive health.

  • NAMI offers general guidance on mental health issues faced by the community, and considerations for seeking LGBTQIA++-competent care.
  • Rainbow Labs in Los Angeles, addresses the bullying, isolation, and lack of support often faced by Queer and Gender non-conforming youth (QGNC). The organization provides mentorship, support groups, and linkage with safe individuals, advocates, and programs. One Bold Summer is a free 8-week summer mentoring initiative for QGNC youth (ages 12-18) that pairs QGNC youth with mentors. 
  • SAGE is the largest and oldest U.S. organization dedicated to improving the lives of LGBTQIA++ older adults. The group has been on the forefront of advocacy for elders, quality of long-term care, housing, and other resources. Their National Resource Center on LGBTQ+ Aging hones in on the unique needs of community older adults such as caregiving, elder abuse and neglect, benefit programs, financial, and other health-related social needs.  
  • SMYAL is among a growing number of locale-based housing programs that ensure safe, LGBTQ-affirming support, through tiered residential options: transitional housing, extended transitional housing, and rapid re-housing. Residents can access a range of courses and community engagement opportunities including nutrition and cooking classes, financial literacy, healthy relationships and communication, and resume workshops.
  • The Trevor Project provides 24/7 information, support, and resource connection for LGBTQIA++ Youth around the world. Mechanisms allow for immediate access to trained counselors via call, text, or chat, and linkage to an international community for LGBTQ young people

What’s Next?

I have been a fierce ally of the LGBTQIA++ community for well over 45 years, with countless family, friends, and colleagues in this space. Despite efforts to address the massive WHED faced by the community, innumerable challenges remain. The list of resources in this post is a broad swipe of efforts on the move.

Blog readers are encouraged to contribute resources as they know of them. The work to mitigate WHED for this population will take the collective and concerted action of us all!

Wholistic Health Equity Determinants and the LGBTQIA++ Community

Too little emphasis has historically been placed on this population’s challenges in addressing these determinants, as in accessing quality concordant health and behavioral health care, managing their psychosocial health and reflective resource needs, and activating action to mitigate their abysmal health outcomes. Systemic racism further perpetuates each of these disparities, triggers trauma that activates physical illness, while also compromising individual safety. It is time to shift this trend.

A number of this blog’s followers expected me to review the recent (May 2023) Federal Reserve Report, The Economic Well-being of US Households in 2022 this week. The report poses interesting implications about the Wholistic Health Equity Determinants discussed in my last post. While this topic is of interest to my health equity lens, a more critical focus beckons.

With PRIDE in full stride, the dire needs of the LGBTQIA++ community will receive prime attention today, and for my next several blog posts. Too little emphasis has historically been placed on this population’s challenges in addressing these determinants and continues to be the norm. The community still struggles in accessing quality concordant health and behavioral health care, managing their psychosocial health and reflective resource needs, and activating action to mitigate their abysmal health outcomes. Systemic racism further perpetuates each of these disparities. It triggers trauma that further exacerbates physical and behavioral health, while also compromising individual safety. Time to shift this trend.

Recent Realities

The recent article in Health Affairs by Auerbach & Fox nailed it: “significant evidence suggests that virtually all LGBTQ++ populations are at elevated risk of preventable illness, injury, and death.” This article and previous works by the Kaiser Family FoundationUniversity of Wisconsin’s Institute for Research and Poverty, and HRC arm us with considerable data to advance action!

Poverty and Food Insecurity

An increasing incidence of the LGBTQIA+ community live close to the federal poverty level:

  • 34% have incomes below 200% (of the FPL) vs. 25% of non-LGBTQIA++ people.
  • 39% earn $30,000 a year or less annually. 
    • 28% of lesbian and bisexual women compared to 21% of heterosexual women. 
    • 23% of gay and bisexual men compared to 15% of heterosexual men.
  • 32% of transgender persons earned an annual income of under $10,000 compared to 23% of heterosexual persons.
  • Lesbian couples have the highest poverty rates followed by heterosexual couples and male same sex couples.

In general, across the community:

  • 30% are unable to pay their bills.
  • 67% used all or most of their savings for healthcare expenses.
  • 52% had trouble paying medical bills in the past 12 months or had difficulty paying for necessities (e.g., food, heat, or housing) 
  • 41% borrowed money from family or friends.
  • 2x as likely to experience food insecurity than other populations at rates upwards of 30% of the population. One recent study reported female sexual minorities as: 
    • 52% more likely to experience nutrition obstacles, and
    44% more likely to report household SNAP assistance than their heterosexual counterparts. 

Unemployment

Unemployment rates loom large for the community:

  • 22% of adults vs. 16% of straight and cisgender counterparts
  • 29% of transgender adults, 30% of bisexual women

Amid the pandemic these numbers soared with surveys revealing as high as:

  • 28% of LGBTQIA+ report that they, or another member of their household experienced a job loss vs. 23% of the rest of the population, and
  • Close to 50% report their work hours reduced.
  • 45% of the population reported challenges paying their rent or mortgage vs. 32% of the remaining population.

Quality of and Access to Necessary and Concordant Care

The Kaiser Family Foundation yielded concerning results in the context of chronic illness management:

  • 47% have an ongoing health condition that requires regular monitoring, medical care, or medication.
  • 21% have a disability or chronic disease that keeps them from participating fully in work, school or housework.
  • 34% of those on Medicaid with a disability or limiting chronic disease report the following experiences with providers:
  • Not believe they were telling the truth (16% )
  • Suggest they were personally to blame for a health problem (13%)
  • Assume something about them without asking (21%)
  • Dismiss their concerns (29%)

Trauma and Chronic Illness Exacerbation

The community’s higher rates of exposure to psychosocial stressors contribute to higher rates of chronic and autoimmune illnesses. The higher incidence of individuals to poverty, unemployment, homelessness, interpersonal violence, as well as family and peer abandonment, contribute take their toll across LGBTQIA++ populations.

Research notes high incidence and prevalence reported for the onset and exacerbation of migraines, respiratory issues, HIV/STIs, diabetes, heart attacks, hypertension, arthritis, visual/hearing impairment, and stomach/gall bladder trouble, along with substance use and addiction. Neurological symptoms can be especially fierce in response to the expansive psychosocial stressors faced by individuals.

But Wait, There’s More

The pervasive WHED struggles of the community contribute to higher rates of discrimination, trauma, and, ultimately, more intense behavioral health conditions and mental illness. The incidence of suicidal ideation, gestures, and completed actions are at record levels, and for the youngest members of the LGBTQIA++ community. This topic deserves its own blog post and where I’ll go next time.

In addition, there must be defined recommendations for industry action. Reports have noted a variety of recommendations that ensure protective factors are in place for members of the community; these may include having healthcare providers and practitioners promote inclusion and belongingness, as well as expanding access to concordant treatment specialists. Emphasis has also been placed on individuals reducing isolation, leaving rural areas and residing in more urban areas, seeking higher levels of education, being employed, being married, not growing up in poverty or becoming a parent at a young age. 

These  factors make for a nice wish list but may not directly eliminate the immense disparities that have plagued the community for centuries. More can and must be done. Stay tuned for my next bi-weekly post. 

Time to Advance Wholistic Health Equity Quality

In response to this growing price tag the industry has evolved a fresh generation of quality frameworks, metrics, and models to forge a more comprehensive health equity vista. However, all of these efforts fall short of that goal. Every organization and entity still uses different metrics to measure and benchmark their actions. The actions of NCQA, the National Quality Forum, and CMS (through their Health Equity Pillar) are not for naught. Yet, there remains no viable, formal roadmap adopted to align cross-sector efforts and steer a successful course toward wholistic health equity; at least not until now. 

Whole person care is the ideal model to attain health equity across populations, though current quality metrics are not aligned to the wholistic health compass. Despite decades of research and successful outcomes, Integrated care’s domains of physical and behavioral health continue to remain remain siloed. While the social determinants of health and mental health (SDoH and MH) dramatically impact health and behavioral health outcomes across every practice setting, they are inconsistently factored into national quality models. 

What Comprise the WHEDs

Systemic racism, historical, developmental, and event traumas are also well recognized in the literature as correlates of health disparities. The Political Determinants of Health (PDoH) add their fury to the fire by fueling worsening clinical outcomes as a person’s social position decreases. Yet despite these facts, the US health system lacks a unified health equity vision that consistently includes assessment of these fundamental constructs. Add systemic racism, and the PDoH to the SDoH and SDoMH, and we gain a comprehensive lens for addressing health disparities: wholistic health equity determinants (WHED).

The WHED contribute to poor clinical outcomes and fiscal losses across each touchpoint of care though increased chronic illness severity, morbidity, mortality for every life stage. Vast differences appear across rural and urban regions. Safety-net hospitals have profoundly higher hospitalization utilization rates for length of stay, intensity of treatments, and costs, including readmission rates and associated penalties.

ACEs, historical, developmental, and other event traumas increase onset and exacerbation of chronic respiratory illnesses, diabetes, obesity, and mortality. Members of the LGBTQIA++ population are at higher risk than other groups of developing severe mental illness, and for experiencing an exacerbation or new onset of mental illness. Reasons for these disparities include the community’s chronic exposure to implicit bias, discrimination, and racism, as well as increased social isolation and exposure to interpersonal violence.

Given the realities addressed above, anything less than a vantage focused on the WHEDs is short-sighted. This limited gaze will not enhance quality of care for the rising number of vulnerable and disenfranchised populations across the globe.

Mandate for Action

National health expenditures now exceed $4.3 Trillion annually and will further rise. I can hear some of you muttering how this number is related to the pandemic only. Here’s food for thought: pre-pandemic these numbers had already topped over $3.8 Trillion related to chronic illness exacerbation and the SDoH. The incidence of these factors has only intensified and escalated from the pandemic.

In response to this growing price tag the industry has evolved a fresh generation of quality frameworks, metrics, and models to forge a more comprehensive health equity vista. However, all of these efforts fall short of that goal. Every organization and entity still uses different metrics to measure and benchmark their actions. The actions of NCQA, the National Quality Forum, and CMS (through their Health Equity Pillar) are not for naught. Yet, there remains no viable, formal roadmap adopted to align cross-sector efforts and steer a successful course toward wholistic health equity; at least not until now. 

Advancing the Wholistic Health Equity Quality Roadmap©

Imagine an 8-step color-coded roadmap that aligns with a dedicated total quality management process. This novel framework holds organizations across sectors accountable for improving care access and provision, and can be tailored to any organization. Quality data on the front-end is culled from evidence-based screening and assessment of health-related social needs, and uses diagnostic data (e.g., ICD-10CM-Z Codes). Revenue cycle management is as vital as interprofessional intervention, inter- and intra- agency collaboration, DEI priorities, then eclipsed by use of whole-person and inclusive- population health outcomes data. 

You’ve all been patiently waiting for me to unveil my Doctoral Culminating Project, and your wait is over! My Wholistic Health Equity Quality Roadmap© will be formally unveiled in distinct versions at the upcoming industry events, including:

A 2-part article series will also be published in Wolter Kluwer’s Professional Case Management Journal this Fall. 

The industry and its stakeholders are out of options! Implementation of the Wholistic Health Equity Quality Roadmap©  at a national level is a moral, ethical, and financial imperative that will ensure inclusive, quality-driven, patient-centered, and concordant interventions for all populations.

New Book Frames a Vivid Ethics Spectrum for the Interprofessional Case Management Workforce

Case managers strive to be ethical, and can recite the industry’s ethical tenets of autonomy, beneficence, fidelity, justice, and nonmaleficence by heart. Yet, too often case managers get caught in the crosshairs. Enter, Dr. Ellen Fink-Samnick with a timely resource and Amazon’s #1 best seller (Medical Ethics, Nursing Administration & Mgmt.) for all professional stakeholders: student, novice and more seasoned case managers, consultants, and those in leadership roles.

Ethics has long been viewed as not black and white, but rather varied shades of gray. However, these interesting times mandate a novel stance. Ethics now comprise a spectrum of vivid colors that reflect its fierce disruptions to practice, and for every member of the health and behavioral health workforce. Managing this intense reality is a constant struggle for all practitioners, especially those in case management. My latest book and Amazon’s #1 Best Seller in Medical Ethics offers clear guidance; enter The Ethical Case Manager: Tools and Tactics

Case management’s workforce faces many accountability challenges not experienced by other professions. First, case management is an umbrella profession comprised of varied disciplines (e.g., counseling, nursing, occupational therapy, and social work). Each discipline has a distinct code of ethics or professional conduct, as well as dedicated standards of practice. Let’s add another layer of complexity that includes the over 25 case management-related credentials for individuals (e.g., ACM, CCM, CDMS, CMGT-BCTM, CRC), those for organizations (e.g., NCQA, URAC)and their unique requirements. Of course, there are also a lion’s share of professional associations across the industry. The landscape gets even more precarious when including the hierarchy of case management roles that span community health workers, case management assistants, and community based case managers, to board-certified case managers, and those in leadership positions. 

The question beckons: Where should your ethical compass point? The range of established resources of guidance defined by each of the above entities makes the answer to this question challenging to answer. It also yields two confusing conundrums for the workforce:

  1. Defining the ethical and legal parameters for case management practice, and 
  2. Reconciling these parameters with employer policies and procedures across the industry.

Here’s where, The Ethical Case Manager: Tools and Tactics comes to the rescue. The book’s content is written for an interprofessional audience that spans the educational spectrum of degrees held by those in the field. This approach provides a context for accountability, while addressing the most complex ethical dilemmas to date. Attention is paid to workplace bullying, digital healthcare innovation, management of implicit biases, microaggressions, health equity and inclusion, plus interstate practice, and other population health situations. The pandemic’s wrath is woven within chapters where relevant. Didactic knowledge is blended with Federal and state regulations, innovative models, practice templates, and dedicated resources.

Each of the book’s 10 chapters includes real-life case scenarios and contemplation questions that allow learners to dig in and apply the content. 20 Ethical Tactics provide tangible touchpoints for learning. Every reader will reap their own reward, from students, to new or more seasoned case managers, consultants, as well as those in leadership roles.

The Ethical Case Manager’s 318 pages encompass the most vital areas for case managers:

  • Section 1: Essentials of Ethics
    • Chapter 1: Terms and Definitions
    • Chapter 2: Established Resources of Guidance
  • Chapter 3: The Value Proposition for Ethical Case Management
  • Section 2: Realities of practice
  • Chapter 4: Population-based Practice
  • Chapter 5: Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice (co-authored with Michael Garrett)
  • Chapter 6: Workplace Bullying
  • Chapter 7: Health Information Technology
  • Chapter 8: Interstate Practice
  • Section 3: Activation of Ethical Decision-making
  • Chapter 9: Enduring Models
  • Chapter 10: Case Scenarios and Direct Application
  • Epilogue

The Ethical Case Manager: Tools & Tactics will be your primary resource, whether you seek to:

  • Educate students
  • Onboard new staff
  • Benchmark ethical practice
  • Resolve ethical dilemmas
  • Guide compliance practices 
  • Ensure successful fiscal, clinical, and operational outcomes 
  • Employ ethical decision-making models
  • Leverage interprofessional teams
  • Inform individual practices

***********************************************************

The Ethical Case Manager: Tools and Tactics is only available on Amazon and for a special introductory price of $43.18. Pricing increase to $69.99 on 5/31/23.

Attending the upcoming Case Management Society of America Conference in Las Vegas? You will have access to 2 exciting book signing events: 

  • 6/27/23-Pre-Con, Telehealth 2024: Advancing Case Management’s Practice Proficiency, 2:15-3:15 PM
  • 6/29/23-Exhibit Hall book signing at the Case Management Institute table, 11 AM to 2:30 PM. Discounted rates, bulk orders, and bundled specials will be available

#ethicsmatter

#ethicalCM

15 Job Search Lessons for Health, Behavioral, and Public Health Students

Today’s job search has become complex, especially for the next generation of health, behavioral health, and public health professionals. Here are 15 lessons to activate and succeed in your actions.

It’s been way too long since I wrote a blog and now is the PERFECT time to restart this action. My Baccalaureate, Masters’ and now, Doctoral students are graduating, and ready to make their mark on the industry.

Yet it is my MSW students that I worry the most about. They face lots of considerations, especially in light of an ongoing Great Resignation and the newest dynamic of “Quiet Quitting”. How can you engage in a successful job search? What can you negotiate? Who’s interviewing who on the interview? Here are 15 lessons to activate and succeed in your job search!

Lesson 1: Organize 

Set up an electronic folder on your computer, with subfolders:

·       References

·       Cover letters

·       Interview questions

·       Submitted applications

·       Recruiter contacts

·       Key info about jobs applied for  

Track positions on a spreadsheet with information including application dates, if you heard back and when, job details (e.g., salary, key benefits, virtual or in-person, multiple sites), contact information. I’m a fan of Excel, but how to organize is up to you!

Lesson 2: Keep your resume focused, comprehensive, and competency-based.

A resume is your professional face. In your zest to post and send it to potential employers, it becomes easy to include too much info, be too wordy, or use unprofessional language. Think:

· Formatting: Use a resume template, plus career planning offices at your college or university, and:

o Indeed.com

o  The New Social Worker 

o  ResumeGenius  

· Use competency-based language: Professions have competencies that are viewed as the pillars of practice. Use that language to describe roles for practicums, internships, or professional jobs; for example, ‘intervened with adolescent population’ instead of ‘worked with adolescents’. Another example is, ‘engaged in counseling’ instead of ‘provided, or did counseling’. Competency-based language also lives in course syllabi and licensure regulations for your state.

· Attention to detail matters: A resume is your first impression to perspective employers. If there are errors, they will wonder, ‘if you can’t take the time to proof your own resume, why should they believe you’ll do better on the job?’. Do spelling AND grammar checks!

Lesson 3: Have references ready!

Reach out early to references and keep their current contact information accessible! Maintain professional letters of recommendation in your online files. Keep references in the loop so they know to expect any calls or emails for information about you. With so many phishing emails, everyone is cautious about providing information. Your reference can easily miss a vital request to provide the recommendation that leads to a job offer!

Lesson 4: Know what matters to the organization

This lesson is two-fold: first, keep up on public health facts and their impact for populations served by the agency. Brush up on Crisis theory, Trauma-informed care, and short-term counseling techniques. This info will help you develop ideas on how to best serve the organization. Knowledge is power; this is a great way to tout your expertise in the interview.

Second, ask what DEIJ (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice) initiatives the organization has in place; this information goes beyond what may be on the employer’s website. You want to know exactly what initiatives have been put in place to ensure all employees, patients and clients, and other stakeholders feel included, safe, and experience a sense of belonging in their interactions with the entity.

Lesson 5: Know brief assessment tools and resources

With the uptick in mental health across populations and the workforce, have working knowledge of assessment tools to manage anxiety, stress, and depression. Quality resources live at Therapist Aid and AHRQ

Lesson 6: Interviews are reciprocal opportunities

Interviews are not a guarantee of employment. Candidates can spend so much time during an interview discussing their expertise, they forget to ask key questions about the workplace.

Research employers before the interview. View the employer’s website to learn their mission, vision, and goals. Learn how the organization conducts business. Ask questions about short and long term goals, and how they see you fitting into these plans. This tactic conveys your interest in the position. Interviews are for potential employers to interview you, but also you to interview them. This mindset puts you in control of the process, and decreases anxiety. Ask questions to learn if this job and setting are for you, such as those at Big Interview

Remember, decision-making timeframes vary, so ask about next steps. Organizations can take 2 days to make final decisions or months! Know what you are facing to help prioritize other offers!

Lesson 7: Ask about job stability

Amid these unpredictable times, it’s appropriate to ask about potential layoffs and furloughs. Some positions are funded by grants, so ask how long the position is funded and what happens next; this is especially true of the termination of Covid-19 emergency declarations. Hiring freezes are still common and won’t necessarily be information shared. If you don’t ask, you won’t know.

Lesson 8: Be ready to name your unique strengths, and demonstrate them 

Job candidates will be asked how to handle specific situations. Identify your strengths and how they would make a difference. Consider:

·       How do your strengths set you apart from other candidates?

·       Why should the organization hire you?

·       What examples can you provide so the employer understands your worth?

·       How can you demonstrate your ability to work with a team?

·       You will be asked about your weaknesses. Be prepared to respond in a professional manner, and have your answer ready. 

Lesson 9: The only constant in our industry is change 

You might be happy to NOT be in school for a bit, but be open to new learning: the industry will change as will you; be open to what it means for you to change with it.

Lesson 10: Be open to short-term or part-time roles

An exciting short-term or part-time role may turn into the best career option never anticipated. In these interesting times, more MSWs are accepting multiple part-time positions. This option can promote greater flexibility, while minimizing burn-out. Also, don’t dismiss positions that are different from your expectations!

Lesson 11: Set up your professional social media profile. 

Set up a professional profile using established websites and job bank platforms. Facebook (or Meta) can help with networking, but use other websites that highlight recruitment:

Keep a profile professional! Use a polished photo versus a selfie with your BFF, pet, or family! Solid guidance is at What Recruiters Want to See on Your LinkedIn Profile

Lesson 12: Negotiation is expected

Negotiation is expected for any job. Negotiate for everything:

  • A higher hourly rate or salary
  • Remote options or flexible work hours
  • Coverage/reimbursement for professional fees (e.g. licensure exam application, exam prep courses, professional association dues)
  • Coverage/reimbursement for clinical supervision and if it is offered onsite. Organizations may pay a portion of the rate to the whole amount. They may only provide supervision internally or have waiting lists. If supervision is provided, you may need to promise to stay at the organization for set number of years post-completion, or pay pack a set amount.

You don’t know what you don’t know, so ask questions! The answers may surprise you! 

Lesson 13: Don’t be thrown by a title or position qualifications 

People apply for jobs based on titles; titles are deceptiveLearn about the scope of each role before dismissing a solid opportunity. 

Don’t dismiss a role based on qualifications alone. Application processes may ‘kick you out’ for not having hard competency qualifications (e.g., degree, licensure). Other knowledge or experiences can sway the decision; volunteer roles and practicums with a population speak volumes. Don’t assume you’re not qualified!

Lesson 14: Take the right job, not just any job

You want an income when you graduate, but strive for the right job. Listen to your clinical gut during the job search. Don’t jump on the first offer or settle if something feels off. Process the opportunity with peers, former professors, and mentors. We may be amid the Great Resignation, but, the grass isn’t always greener; there are brown spots everywhere. 

Lesson 15: Enjoy the job search

There is pressure to be employed, but explore opportunities. Get out there and enjoy the search!

I invite colleagues and followers to post other practical lessons below to empower our next generation of professionals!

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com