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.

摘要

尽管学校危机准备和应对实践取得了进展，但评估数据非常有限。本文强调了对学校危机团队采用评估心态的重要性。评估可以是形成性的，在干预发生时进行分析，也可以是总结性的，以评估总体结果。华盛顿特区的一个大型郊区提供了一个说明性的例子，该地区自 2007 年以来一直在评估危机应对措施，过去五年的努力更具体地侧重于目标实现规模。从 2015 年到 2020 年，该学区参与了 70 次有记录的危机应对，其中 31 次是针对人为或故意的危机（例如，自杀、他杀、伤害），39 次是针对自然或意外死亡或受伤。最常用的危机干预措施是对学生进行个体危机干预（n  = 585) 和学生心理教育团体 ( n  = 359)。与自然或意外事件相比，个人危机干预、自杀风险评估、外部咨询转介和学生跟进更常用于应对人为或故意的危机。提供了用于记录干预有效性的工具和资源，包括目标实现量表，以及对基于学校的危机处理团队如何在其评估工作中使用此信息的影响。