Peer involvement in service provision: how US human service nonprofit organisations include sex workers as organisational staff

Abstract

Human service non-profit organisations (HSNPs) looking to improve the representation of clients in the work of their organisation may decide to hire people with lived experience as peer providers. This paper looks at how HSNPs that provide services to sex workers make decisions about hiring those with lived experience of sex work as staff. To address the issue, the following questions were asked: 1) how do HSNPs make the decision to hire sex workers as staff members; and 2) if hired, how are individuals actually involved in the organisation? The study aimed to answer these questions using open-ended interviews with 64 staff in HSNPs in the US Midwest that indirectly or directly provide services to sex workers. Findings indicate that while many organisations hire individuals with lived experience in sex work, the expectations placed on these individuals vary considerably depending on the perceptions other HSNP staff have about sex work. When HSNPs hire individuals with lived experience to further their organisational agendas with respect to sex work, they should include sex workers in a substantive and inclusive way to minimise organisational bias and ensure sex worker views are accurately represented.

Keywords:

• Sex work
• nonprofit organisations
• peer providers
• inclusion
• participation

Acknowledgements

I thank the five reviewers who reviewed this manuscript, as their comments greatly improved the paper from the initial submitted draft. I also thank Sara Terrana, Sunggeun (Ethan) Park, Rachel Wells, Chris Dingwall and Jennifer Mosley for comments on an earlier draft. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA) Conference, and the Society for Social Work and Research Conference (SSWR). I thank participants on panels for their valuable comments. Finally, I thank the study’s anonymous respondents for their time and contribution to the project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Harm reduction involves the use of strategies that reduce negative consequences of behaviours that entail risk, such as drug use or sex. It also constitutes a social movement that aims to respect the rights of individuals that engage in drug use and sex work (Harm Reduction Coalition 2015).

2 In 2003, The George W Bush administration enacted the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), requiring national and international beneficiaries to denounce prostitution. This resulted in legal challenges on First Amendment grounds as it required US organisations to adopt a political policy in exchange for the receipt of grant money. In 2013, the anti-prostitution pledge for US organisations was overturned in the Supreme Court case of Agency for International Development V. Alliance for Open Society International (Barnes 2013), although many sex worker organisations still have difficulty getting government funding. The Open Society Institute continues to fight the constitutionality of the pledge as it applies to foreign affiliates of US-based organisations (Open Society Institute 2020)

3 For examples of other similar programmes, see www.nswp.org.

Additional information

Funding

This project received financial support from the Fahs-Beck Fund for Research and Experimentation and the Oakland University Research Council.