Globe and Mail article: ‘The awful truth about social programs’
This Globe and Mail article comments on the lack of efficacy of human service programs in Toronto, particularly those aimed at serving poor people. These comments should sound familiar to those who have studied Social Role Valorization (SRV) and the related assessment tool PASSING, and by no means is limited to Toronto, Ontario, Canada, or poverty programs. Whether you agree or not with the writer’s assessment, it at least underscores the potential utility of regular, external assessment of human service programs, based on measurable, objective criteria. The PASSING tool specifically does this based on the criteria of Social Role Valorization.
A couple quotes from the article:
• “The evidence to date – such as it is – suggests that many, perhaps most, social programs do not make a difference, except to the legions of administrators and social workers who are directly and indirectly employed in delivering them.” Wolf Wolfensberger taught about this idea often, relating it to the post-primary production form of most modern economic systems in developed countries. The ‘need’ for jobs drives the creation of new societally devalued groups as well as keeping currently devalued groups in deviant status. This also raises the question of the pervasiveness of unconsciousness surrounding these economic factors as well as the failure of human services.
• “Some small, inexpensive interventions appear to work reasonably well.” Students and practitioners of SRV might think about the power of crafting valued social roles on the personal level (see page 78 in the 3rd edition of the SRV monograph).
The article also points out how many of these poverty programs are driven by non-programmatic considerations, including historical political decisions.
In: Uncategorized · Tagged with: non-programmatic, PASSING, poverty, programmatic/non-programmatic, Social Role Valorization, SRV, unconsciousness, Wolf Wolfensberger