Assessment of the inclusivity of the national CLAS standards enhancement initiative of bisexual identities

Q2 Social Sciences
C. Pavão, K. McLeroy, Y. Lincoln, J. Burdine, E. Wright
{"title":"Assessment of the inclusivity of the national CLAS standards enhancement initiative of bisexual identities","authors":"C. Pavão, K. McLeroy, Y. Lincoln, J. Burdine, E. Wright","doi":"10.1002/ev.20515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter reports on the evaluation of state and local level National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health Care (aka CLAS Standards), specifically those standards addressing the health needs of sexual minority individuals, with an emphasis on the inclusion of bisexual+ communities and the implications of bisexual+ (non)inclusion in CLAS standards. At the state and local levels, bisexual identity is rarely recognized as distinct from other sexual identities. This lack of representation raises an essential issue of how local communities, states, and the federal government struggle with sexual minority data classification and prioritizing health benchmarks for sexual minority populations and subpopulations. We also found that the CLAS cultural competency policy definition at the federal level lacks an appropriate degree of bi‐inclusivity. The findings from this study reveal that the five states in our sample implemented CLAS Standards in ways that demonstrated bi‐erasure. Specifically, states defined gender and sexual minorities through exclusionary categories that place emphasis on the “Other”. LGBTQ+ evaluators can rely on the Principles of LGBTQ+ Evaluation to create strategies that demonstrate how to effectively address the intersecting ramifications of bi‐erasure at the policy level.","PeriodicalId":35250,"journal":{"name":"New Directions for Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Directions for Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20515","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter reports on the evaluation of state and local level National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health Care (aka CLAS Standards), specifically those standards addressing the health needs of sexual minority individuals, with an emphasis on the inclusion of bisexual+ communities and the implications of bisexual+ (non)inclusion in CLAS standards. At the state and local levels, bisexual identity is rarely recognized as distinct from other sexual identities. This lack of representation raises an essential issue of how local communities, states, and the federal government struggle with sexual minority data classification and prioritizing health benchmarks for sexual minority populations and subpopulations. We also found that the CLAS cultural competency policy definition at the federal level lacks an appropriate degree of bi‐inclusivity. The findings from this study reveal that the five states in our sample implemented CLAS Standards in ways that demonstrated bi‐erasure. Specifically, states defined gender and sexual minorities through exclusionary categories that place emphasis on the “Other”. LGBTQ+ evaluators can rely on the Principles of LGBTQ+ Evaluation to create strategies that demonstrate how to effectively address the intersecting ramifications of bi‐erasure at the policy level.
评估双性恋身份的国家CLAS标准增强计划的包容性
本章报告了对州和地方一级国家卫生保健文化和语言适当服务标准(即CLAS标准)的评估,特别是那些解决性少数群体个人健康需求的标准,重点是纳入双性恋+社区以及双性恋+(不)纳入CLAS标准的影响。在州和地方层面,双性恋身份很少被认为与其他性别身份不同。这种代表性的缺乏提出了一个重要问题,即地方社区、州和联邦政府如何努力对性少数群体的数据进行分类,并优先考虑性少数群体和亚群体的健康基准。我们还发现,联邦层面的CLAS文化能力政策定义缺乏适当程度的双包容性。本研究的结果表明,我们样本中的五个州以双擦除的方式实施了CLAS标准。具体来说,各州通过强调“他者”的排他性分类来定义性别和性少数群体。LGBTQ+评估者可以依靠《LGBTQ+评估原则》来制定策略,展示如何在政策层面有效地解决双性恋消除的交叉后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
New Directions for Evaluation
New Directions for Evaluation Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信