Clinical Analysis

Two measurement tools, how you would measure the outcomes, the strengths and limitations, and supporting criteria for clinical significance.
Empowerment in social work practice is a crucial component, running congruently with outcomes of functioning levels and quality of life for clients. Collaborating with individuals and giving them confidence in their life choice and being capable of meeting their own needs are considered some objectives within empowerment. For populations who face social stigmas and gender stereotypes, understanding empowerment can be even more crucial—ultimately measuring the program’s efforts to stabilize the client’s safety and independence.
The initial measurement tool utilized to gauge the therapeutic intervention for clients would be the Empowerment Scale. Participatory action research measures the consumer’s mental health and trauma-related through self-help programs (Noordink et al., 2022). The scale is free of charge to the program other than minor administrative details. The empowerment scale consists of four factors with a four-point response rating scale, ranging from strongly agree” or “1” to “strongly disagree” or “4” (Noordink et al., 2022).
The benefits of this tool can allow social workers to evaluate a client’s advocacy, community, relationship, and personal self-efficacy (Morris et al., 2014). However, it is reasonable to expect gender or unorthodox discrepancies in empowerment given the enormous social context discrimination. In the discussion post from weeks prior, the proposed program participants may face societal challenges that can impact reporting or seeking services and influence them into adulthood.
The Spouse Physical Assault (SPA) survey would allow the program to assess the potential for future maltreatment of the victim within relationships (Stith et al., 2016). The risk assessment tool has been tested on multiple working and focus groups and promises to be reliable, valid, clinically relevant, user-friendly, state-of-the-art, and legally defensible (Stith et al., 2016). The SPA will be administered within three phases, upon initial entrance, mid-treatment, and once more near the termination, to determine the likelihood of the participants returning to DV relationships or a life of violence (Stith et al., 2016). The self-survey tool consists of 76 items questioning social supports, victim fear, dissatisfaction within their current environment, relationship history, financial barriers, personal history, and additional factors involving their DV incidents (Stith et al., 2016). Combining this assessment tool results with the clinical Behavioral Assessment, the professional will better understand the initial means for treatment or the possibility of the client returning to the cycle of abuse (Stith et al., 2016).
The benefits of the SAP can effectively outline the likelihood of the client returning to a DV relationship. It can provide insight into the effectiveness of the program’s treatment and how well the intervention is administered. The SAP is a free tool to access and utilize. The self-survey can be conducted solely on the patient or collected by the professional during the session. However, the downfall of this tool is its repetitive nature to test over a more extended period to collect the most accurate data. Additionally, the SAP tool can only be administered via a clinician due to its intense therapeutic nature.
Describe how you would collect the data and what you would expect to learn from it.
Researchers commonly use questionnaires to gather data from their target population (Boynton & Greenhalgh, 2004). Including a mix of self-surveys, closed-ended and open-ended, and rating scaled questions shows promise in collecting more authentic information to support clinical significance. The added structure that questionnaires offer will be advantageous for any research that incorporates them. Self-optimize the program’s performance while highlighting potential improvements need to enhance the services and support for the community (Dudley, 2020). Given that they are easy to use and inexpensive, administered questionnaires are becoming more and more common, but questions given by researchers lead to more profound perceptions.

References
Boynton, P. M., & Greenhalgh, T. (2004). Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7451.1312
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press
Morris, S. B., Huang, J., Zhao, L., Sergent, J. D., & Neuhengen, J. (2014). Measurement equivalence of the Empowerment Scale for White and Black persons with severe mental illness. https://doi.org/10.1037/prj0000069
Noordink, T., Verharen, L., Shalk, R., van Eck, M., & van Regenmortel, T. (2021). Measuring instruments for empowerment in social work: A scoping review. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcab054
Stith, S. M., Milner, J. S., Fleming, M., Robichaux, R. J., & Travis, W. J. (2016). Intimate partner physical injury risk assessment in a military sample. Psychology of Violence, 6(4), 529.