Initial Recommendations and Tools for
Reframing Human Services
Values
Fairness Between Places
Used in communications on human services, Fairness Between Places is likely to shift public
thinking away from the Mentalism – aka Bootstraps –cultural model by providing a more
productive way of thinking about what human services are about and why they matter. The
values works to provide a way of thinking about the issue of why some people do well and
others don’t and why it is a public responsibility to address these inequities.
Communications Example:
It is important that do things to make sure that all Americans, no matter where they
live, have the opportunity to live in healthy communities. To do this we need to be fair
to all communities by building an infrastructure that will give everyone the opportunity
to experience positive wellbeing and meet their potential. This means we need to
devote more resources to places that are facing greater challenges. Put simply, it is only
fair that every American has the opportunity to live in a healthy and successful
community.
Pragmatism
The value of Pragmatism has been shown in past research to provide an antidote to
deterministic or fatalist thinking—that problems are too big or too deeply embedded to do
anything about. On human services, this value has the potential to move the public beyond the
fatalism of the Lost Community – aka Good Old Days - and the Government is Inept and
Corrupt mental models.
Communications Example:
As we set out to address social problems, our most important goal should be to use a
common-sense approach. To do this, we must make sure that the program we put in
place is designed to meet our needs. This means identifying things that are working and
replacing them with services that function well and provide what people need. If we fail
to act with this goal in mind, our country will continue to impractical approaches instead
of using proven techniques.
Using these previously tested reframing tools will allow the Assembly to accelerate the reframing
process while future tools are being developed and tested.
Interdependence
The value of Interdependence works by “collectivizing” goals—it takes default perspectives that
focus on individual costs and benefits and widens the lens in a way that allows people to see
collective benefits derived from addressing social problems. On the issue of human services,
this value can help people to see that the fates of all Americans are intertwined and that we will
all benefit from a society in which human needs are addressed.
Communications Example:
What affects one part of the nation affects us all. We need to give greater support to
programs that get people to work together to solve social problems, which helps bond
our communities together and allows us to deal effectively with the problems
communities confront.
Prevention
The value of Prevention has worked in the past to highlight the need to take a proactive
approach to using public policy to address social issues—a “pay now or pay more later”
perspective. On human services, this value is promising for making the upstream arguments
about advocacy work and to illuminate the root-causes that human services address.
Communications Example:
We can do more in our country to prevent problems in our country before they occur.
Instead of postponing our response to problems, we should use our resources today to
prevent them from becoming worse. When we postpone dealing with things, they get
bigger and cost more to fix later on. We would all be better off in the long run if we took
steps today to prevent the challenges that we know will affect the well-being of our
children and nation down the road.
Using these previously tested reframing tools will allow the Assembly to accelerate the reframing
process while future tools are being developed and tested.
Explanatory Metaphors
The Outcomes Scale
It is has been shown to get the public over notions of Mentalism– that all children (and people)
in difficult circumstances need to do is pull themselves up through willpower and disciplined
determination. The metaphor allows people to see that there are societal and contextual factors
that weigh some children down, but at the same time that such risk factors can be
counterbalanced by protective factors in communities—protective factors that human services
can be described as providing. This metaphor sets up a productive way for people to think about
the role of human services in improving outcomes. Below is an example of this metaphor.
Communications Example:
Think of a child’s well-being as a sort of scale, one end of which can get loaded with
positive things, the other end of which can get loaded with negative things. We’re
talking about things like supportive relationships with adults on the positive side and
extended exposure to stress (abuse, violence) on the other. We want the scale to tip to
the positive side, so we need to make sure that its positive side is loaded up, and unload
some of the negative factors from the negative side. We might also think about where
the fulcrum of the scale is positioned — is it making the scale harder to tip towards
positive outcomes, or easier? It turns out that we can slide that fulcrum in either
direction, say, by teaching children coping skills or making sure that they stay physically
healthy. The earlier we start trying to move that fulcrum, the easier it will be. These are
some of the things we have to do to make the scale tip to the positive side even when a
child may experience negative weight from risk factors.
Using these previously tested reframing tools will allow the Assembly to accelerate the reframing
process while future tools are being developed and tested.
Brain Architecture and Toxic Stress
These metaphors, used together, have been shown to help people understand the
consequences of prolonged exposure to stressors on a child’s development and of the need for
high quality environments and experiences to create positive long-term outcomes. As such,
these metaphors seem particularly useful in communicating about human services related to
vulnerable children and families.
Communications Examples:
The basic architecture of a human brain is constructed through a process that begins
before birth, and continues into adulthood. Like the construction of a home, the building
process begins with laying the foundation, framing the rooms and wiring the electrical
system, and these processes have to happen in the right order. Early experiences literally
shape how the brain gets built. A strong foundation in the very early years increases the
probability of positive health and learning outcomes later on, while a weak foundation
increases the odds of later difficulties.
While there are many different kinds of stress, some stress is so severe and frequent
that it becomes toxic to a child, especially when the child doesn’t have supports around
them to buffer against those experiences. Toxic stress in early childhood can result from
extreme poverty, frequent neglect, abuse or severe maternal depression, all of which can
disrupt the developing brain. In this way, toxic stress can lead to lifelong problems in
learning, behavior, and both physical and mental health. Being surrounded by
environments and communities that have supports and resources is necessary to protect
children against these toxic stressors and promote their health and well-being.
Using these previously tested reframing tools will allow the Assembly to accelerate the reframing
process while future tools are being developed and tested.
Levelness
Previous FrameWorks research has shown that using the metaphor Levelness can help people
collapse the false compartmentalization of health and illness, and move to an understanding of
mental health as something that is built over time and requires community support. This
metaphor seems particularly important for advocates who want to communicate about human
services that focus on mental health issues.
Communications Example:
Children’s mental health is like the levelness of a piece of furniture, say, a table. The
levelness of a table is what makes it usable and able to function, just like the mental
health of a child is what enables him or her to function and do many things. Some
children’s brains develop on floors that are level because they have healthy supportive
relationships and access to things like good nutrition and health care. For other children,
their brains develop on more sloped or slanted floors because they’re exposed to abuse
or violence, have unreliable or unsupportive relationships, and don’t have access to key
programs and resources. Just like a table that’s not level cannot level itself, children
need support and help for their mental health.
Prosperity Grid
The Prosperity Grid metaphor works similarly to the Fairness Between Places value encouraging consideration of differences in access to resources based on place, but through a
concrete metaphor of a “grid.” This notion of communities being on or off the grid allows people
to acknowledge, consider and discuss structural differences that cause social problems and
structural solutions for addressing these issues. As such, this metaphor holds promise in
communicating about the systemic and preventative advocacy work of human service
organizations.
Communications Example:
We need to examine the prosperity grid that plugs communities and individuals into the
programs and advantages that help develop their talent. In some communities, the grid
has broken down and people can’t access opportunity. We need to unclog the grid so
that families and individuals can get access to the resources they need to bring their
talents online for our communities.
Using these previously tested reframing tools will allow the Assembly to accelerate the reframing
process while future tools are being developed and tested.