Authors evaluated the training series to identify areas of improvement and assess the training's efficacy in promoting anti-racist, transformational leadership practices among those participating in the training. They found that trainees were highly satisfied and reported increases in leadership practices that foster diversity, inclusion, and psychological safety. However, the staff who trainees supervised did not notice these changes.

Evaluation of Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health's Anti-Racism, Diversity, and Inclusion Training

Graham DiGuiseppi, Samantha Matthews, Rebecca L. Collins, Nicole K. Eberhart

ResearchPublished Dec 23, 2024

As part of the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health's (LACDMH's) Anti-Racism, Diversity, and Inclusion (ARDI) initiative, established in 2020, an ARDI training series was developed and launched for a cohort of staff who held leadership or management roles at LACDMH.

The authors evaluated the ARDI training series to identify areas of improvement and assess the training's efficacy in promoting anti-racist, transformational leadership practices among those participating in the training, including understanding changes in how trainees are perceived by those they supervise. The authors also provide several recommendations that might help improve the ARDI training curriculum and future evaluations of the initiative.

Findings of the evaluation indicate that trainees were highly satisfied with the training and reported increases in leadership practices that foster diversity, inclusion, and psychological safety among their staff. In contrast, staff reports of their supervisors' leadership practices did not change significantly after the training. The authors recommend that LACDMH continue to expand the ARDI training, and the authors identified specific areas for improvement. Further evaluation is recommended to identify potential effects of the training on the broader LACDMH workforce and climate.

Key Findings

  • Trainees were highly satisfied with the ARDI training and reported that it increased their knowledge of the training's main learning objectives: historical foundations that affect current institutions; racism, intersectionality, and systemic equity; best practices in anti-racist and trauma-informed leadership; and anti-racist service provision.
  • In considering behaviors that foster a diverse working climate, inclusive leadership practices, and psychological safety among the staff they supervise, the proportion of trainees reporting that they engaged in these behaviors was higher after the training than the proportion that reported doing so prior to training.
  • In contrast, staff who reported directly to trainees noted few significant changes in their supervisors' diversity, equity, and inclusion management behaviors or their own psychological safety five to seven weeks after the training.
  • Staff were significantly more likely to agree that their supervisor acknowledges social injustice when it occurs at LACDMH after the training than they were prior to the training (66 percent versus 57 percent, respectively). However, agreement that their supervisor directly addressed racism and other forms of oppression and discrimination was relatively low (50–60 percent of staff) and did not change after the training.

Recommendations

  • LACDMH should expand the training to include a broader group of employees. Attendance was high for the first cohort of the ARDI training, and trainees were very satisfied with the training. Future evaluations might further investigate how diversity, equity, and inclusion experiences might differ depending on staff roles and settings (e.g., clinical versus administrative settings).
  • Researchers should evaluate the cohorts from this year and subsequent years over longer periods of time. More time is likely needed for the ARDI training initiative to have effects on supervisors' behavior that are noticeable to their staff and/or a significant effect on the broader LACDMH workforce and climate.
  • ARDI training developers should revise and enhance the training curriculum. Specifically, ARDI training should include more opportunities to have trainees practice implementing the skills needed to address racial bias, discrimination, and related topics; changes should be made to increase authentic engagement in the virtual growth checkpoint sessions; and LACDMH should ensure that employees have enough time to attend the ARDI sessions or consider streamlining the training to focus on areas of highest priority.

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: California Mental Health Services Authority
  • Publisher: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Web-Only
  • Year: 2024
  • Pages: 24
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RRA3569-4
  • Document Number: RR-A3569-4

Citation

RAND Style Manual

DiGuiseppi, Graham, Samantha Matthews, Rebecca L. Collins, and Nicole K. Eberhart, Evaluation of Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health's Anti-Racism, Diversity, and Inclusion Training, RAND Corporation, RR-A3569-4, 2024. As of April 30, 2025: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3569-4.html

Chicago Manual of Style

DiGuiseppi, Graham, Samantha Matthews, Rebecca L. Collins, and Nicole K. Eberhart, Evaluation of Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health's Anti-Racism, Diversity, and Inclusion Training. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2024. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3569-4.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

This research was funded by the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health (LACDMH), via the California Mental Health Services Authority (CalMHSA) and carried out within the Access and Delivery Program in RAND Health Care.

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.