Citation

Nickerson AB, Fernandez BS, Cruz M, Stanford SE. J. Appl. Sch. Psychol. 2023; 39(1): 1-23.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2023, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/15377903.2021.1998279

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Despite advances in the practice of school crisis preparedness and response, evaluation data are very limited. This article highlights the importance of adopting an evaluation mindset for school crisis teams. Evaluation can be formative, which analyzes interventions as they occur, and summative, to assess overall outcomes. An illustrative example is provided from a large suburban district in the Washington DC area that has been evaluating crisis response since 2007, with efforts in the past five years focusing more specifically on goal attainment scaling. From 2015-2020, the district engaged in 70 documented crisis responses, 31 for human-caused or intentional crises (e.g., suicide, homicide, injury) and 39 for natural or accidental deaths or injuries. The most common crisis interventions used were individual crisis intervention with students (n = 585) and student psychoeducational groups (n = 359). Individual crisis intervention, suicide risk assessment, referral for outside counseling, and student follow-up were more frequently used in response to human-caused or intentional crises compared to natural or accidental incidents. Tools and resources used to document the intervention effectiveness, including the goal attainment scaling, are provided along with implications for how school-based crisis teams can use this information in their evaluation efforts.

Language: en

Keywords

crisis response; evaluation; goal attainment scaling; School crisis