From Moral Injury to Resilience: Transforming Professional Learning & Development for Care Workers

46% of healthcare workers report moral injury. Discover how trauma-informed blended learning transforms professional development and prevents burnout.

Introduction

Nearly half of healthcare workers experienced moral injury during the pandemic. But the crisis didn't start—or end—with COVID-19. Picture a client falling through the cracks, and you’re powerless to change the system that allows it to happen. This might be a young person in foster care who’s stuck with changing placements because of overfilled capacities, or a patient discharged early because their insurance won’t cover another night. A “client” could be anyone who’s relying on you to help them navigate these complex systems, whether in child welfare or in healthcare. Their well-being depends on not only your skills, but on systemic structures out of your control. This reality doesn’t just cause the feeling of job stress–it's a moral injury. Moral injury is a silent epidemic ravaging healthcare and social services. In MindOpen Learning Strategies’ work, we have learned that the traditional workplace training–often rigid one-off sessions like PowerPoint presentations, or generic and overused online modules–can worsen these wounds by ignoring them completely. Whether it’s a nurse forced to ration their care due to understaffed facilities, or a social worker being unable to assist with a client’s needs because of systemic barriers, these daily realities leave scars.

The COVID 19 pandemic didn’t create this crisis, but it exposed and worsened it. Now, we ask an important question: What is the role of professional development in healing? 46%–nearly half–of healthcare workers report moral injury during the pandemic, leading to long-term impacts on mental health and professional performance (Jafari et al., 2025). We launched our ongoing  “Learning at Work” survey to uncover what helps and what blocks work-based learning among professionals whose job is to care for others. The results are showing  how trauma-informed learning can be the catalyst to transform workplaces from sites of discomfort to spaces of revival. 

An exhausted healthcare worker rests on a chair.

Why Moral Injury Demands Trauma-Informed Blended Learning

The spread of moral injury is a key reason a blended, trauma-informed learning style is beneficial. Moral injury is described as distress an individual experiences when witnessing events that violate their deeply held moral beliefs and values–this is often common in workspaces where in order to follow 'company polices', they have to make difficult decisions. Imagine being told you need to prioritize speed over care, or having to stay silent while witnessing racial/gender-based harm.  Research has already shown this common trend, the effects of over 46% of healthcare workers are far-reaching, enveloping links to higher rates of PTSD, depression, and turnover (Jafari et al., 2025).

The main problem? Most professional development programs fail to address this. Their training often focuses on protocols or productivity, leaving no space to process the overwhelming emotions that come with the work. This is where trauma-informed learning can make an impact. Traditional training ignores the emotional baggage workers carry. Trauma-informed learning does the opposite—it says 'Let's talk about why this work is breaking your heart, and let's give you tools to fight back without burning out.

Being able to acknowledge the both/and, the way I go home and can barely talk because I’m so destroyed by what my clients are facing now, but sometimes also get to be a part of the most amazing examples of advocacy and resilience which I wouldn’t see if I didn’t work here– both are true. Just saying it out loud in the workshop and writing about it helps me feel less isolated and overwhelmed. - Participant in MindOpen professional development

A blended, trauma-informed approach doesn't just improve performance, it protects people. This approach can break the cycle of burnout by naming what is often left unspoken, and give people the tools to carry the weight together.

Is Virtual Delivery Effective for Trauma-Informed Learning?

Healthcare workers collaborating during blended learning professional development session

Blended learning is a strategy that combines in-person and remote activities. This learning tactic is prominent throughout the world, occurring in schools and professional workspaces. Companies and organizations tend to lean towards being completely in-person or virtual during training. With these ‘one end or the other’ approaches, advantages and limitations emerge. On one hand, eLearning (remote learning) offers enticing benefits in areas of education for older learners: approximately 77% of organizations now use it for professional development with advantages like more efficient skill-building and financial savings (Bawa, 2016). The increased efficiency and time saved through these methods support the widespread popularity of eLearning. These statistics about other organizational settings set a potential theme that’s worth exploring in healthcare and human services as well, further research is recommended for a clearer understanding of the effects of different learning strategies.

Despite all the positives, trade-offs exist. Attrition rates increase to 40-80% in fully virtual programs, and studies have found that critical skills like empathy and conflict resolution are less effectively taught without in-person human interaction (Hansen, 2024). Additionally, there’s an equity gap: not everyone has reliable internet, private spaces to learn, or access to digital resources in general.

That is why a blended model, one that takes into account where and how content is best delivered, matters. It doesn’t just split the screen time, it pieces together a more complete learning experience. Blended learning isn’t only about allotting time to screens and classrooms, but about creating spaces where people can:

• Talk through difficult topics in real conversations

• Build soft-skills, like communication and empathy,  in real time

• Access digital content that supports human connection

• Be efficient with their time by acquiring basic knowledge virtually, and reserving in-person time for those learning experiences that benefit most from direct off-screen interaction

“By sharing our unique and often shocking stories of our tutoring and personal learning experiences, we tutors have been able to prepare ourselves for any strange scenarios that might occur in the classroom. When pairing this with the online course on work efficacy that tutors at my organization have been required to take, I've felt well prepared to take on the struggles of being a tutor.” - Tutor in Healthcare Training Program

We’ve observed that the blended-approach with trauma-informed learning has great benefits for all organizational workers, benefitting both new and experienced professionals  to flourish in a professional environment.

The Connection Between Moral Injury and Blended, Trauma-Informed Learning

This blended approach with trauma-informed learning isn't 'nice to have'-- it's essential. When training spaces ignore the emotional strain care work can have on an individual, they reinforce the harm. However, when learning environments model safety and reflection, they offer the first step towards effective healing. The trauma-informed approach strives to meet workers where they are by acknowledging burnout and building skills without disregarding pain. Blended formats make room for flexibility and deeper engagement, but it's the trauma-informed foundations that creates a truly transformative method.

What Workers are Telling Us: Listening to Learners

Every day, workers face emotional and systemic challenges that take both an emotional and physical toll, limiting the return on investment in professional development. We ask workshop participants what stops them from using their new skills back at work. The answers reveal a hard truth: it's not about the training—it's about toxic workplace conditions.

From the pressure of oppressive systems to the silent stress of office politics, our workshop participants name a variety of barriers. Some cite limited time and competing priorities. One direct service professional described how "false urgency forced reliance on old outmoded ways," while another pointed to "a resistance to change, micromanagement, or unstable leaders" within their workplace. Even supervisors and managers noted that the continually changing landscape of the nonprofit world left them "action paralyzed," unable to commit to long-term planning.

But feedback from our workshop participants revealed something deeper than frustration. Workers aren’t just angry—they are grieving. "Fighting against the system is difficult because there's no ability to compromise when the system is only oppressive," one respondent wrote. Someone described fighting against the system to be difficult because “there’s no ability to compromise when the system is only oppressive.” It isn’t that they don’t want to utilize what they’ve learned, it’s the instability that comes with it that drives them away. 

But despite barriers, many responses also highlight sources of hope. When asked about what existing supports could help them apply these skills, no one named expensive software or protocols, they named people. Supervisors, mentors, onboarding buddies, and peer groups all stood out as meaningful integration tools in their experiences. Where there is a space to reflect, there will be traction. Where strong leadership exists, people will respond. One response perfectly captured this "Supportive leaders who prioritize relationship-building and create safe spaces for trying new approaches make all the difference.” This is what a blended, trauma-informed learning model enables. 

The research literature and our own experiences are clear: Utilizing trauma-informed blended learning means it doesn’t end when the ‘session’ does. For these practices to leave a lasting impact, we should build the scaffolding for reflection, relationship-centered culture, and leadership by example. This type of learning has the chance to be transformative in our work culture–going beyond the important positive feedback about professional development, to having the receipts for why some sessions are indeed  “one of the most impactful I [have] attended.”

The Path Forward

You don’t have to wait for policy change to start healing. You just need the right tools and the commitment to use them. MindOpen has already proven this works with over 1,000 participants across 40+ organizations. The question isn't whether hybrid trauma-informed learning works—it's whether you're ready to try it. In both the literature and real lived experiences, we have learned that healing-centered professional development isn’t a luxury, but a necessity for a flourishing workspace. When training doesn’t acknowledge trauma or offer space to process harmful situations, it reinforces the very burnout and moral injury it claims to fix. When workers like me and you are given autonomy that blends flexibility with care, structure with reflection, and knowledge with community, real transformation is possible. 

This doesn’t mean this model is a cure; we’ve experienced firsthand how this model helps build capacity, restore moral clarity, and keep work sustainable and human–the survey responses further prove this idea. We don’t just believe in this model, we live it; now, we want others to name, claim, and carry it forward.

References

Bawa, P. (2016). Retention in online courses: Exploring issues and solutions—a literature review. SAGE Open, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015621777

Cloke, H. (2023, February 3). 100+ Mind-Blowing eLearning Statistics [2024]. Growth Engineering. https://www.growthengineering.co.uk/elearning-statistics/

Hansen, D. (2024). Building a Culture of Continuous Learning: The Key to Employee Retention. ATD. https://www.td.org/content/atd-blog/building-a-culture-of-continuous-learning-the-key-to-employee-retention

Jafari, M., Asra Nassehi, Jafari, J., & Mehdi Jafari-Oori. (2025). Severity and associated factors of moral injury in healthcare workers during the coronavirus pandemic: a comprehensive meta-analysis. Archives of Public Health, 83(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-025-01518-2