Tag Archives: school counselors audience

Five social, emotional and mental health supports that teens need to succeed

By Dakota King-White, Sade Vega and Nicholas Petty September 9, 2019

Many teenagers have been exposed to traumatic events, and most experience regular life stressors. Exposure to violence and other traumatic experiences can have a lifelong effect on learning and may negatively impact academic achievement. Among examples of traumatic events that some teenagers experience are community violence, school shootings, the loss of a loved one due to death, parental incarceration, divorcing parents, a parent or caregiver with mental illness, and substance abuse in the home. Within the school setting, the negative influence of trauma on teens may lead to poor concentration, declining academic performance, school absenteeism, and the decision to drop out. These challenges create barriers for the success of teens in the academic setting.

Schools across the United States have recognized the importance of providing school-based mental health support because these services benefit students academically, socially and emotionally. However, questions regarding the issues facing teens and the types of mental health supports needed to deal with these issues require further examination. Implementing a needs assessment can assist schools in uncovering the answer to these questions. The findings can then help determine what programming should be implemented to improve students’ overall development, such as teaching them social skills to help them become productive members of their communities and school settings.

We wanted to learn more about the social, emotional and mental health needs of teenagers, so we conducted a needs assessment in which we surveyed 198 high school students in a Midwestern city. The teens in our study identified the types of emotionally stressful experiences they have faced since attending high school. They also described what schools could do to make them feel supported and better able to deal with the related challenges.

The following sections present the five top issues identified by the students we surveyed, along with recommendations on ways that schools can support teenagers socially, emotionally and mentally.

 

****

 

1) Social media makes peer pressure a 24/7 problem. Teens today are confronting certain pressures that teens in the past didn’t face. A prime example: Social media has become an indispensable part of teenagers’ lives. According to a 2018 report written for the Pew Research Center by Monica Anderson and Jingjing Jiang, YouTube, Instagram and Snapchat are the most popular online platforms among those ages 13-17, and most teens have access to these apps on their smartphones. Anderson and Jiang note in the report that 95% of teens have access to a smartphone, with 45% of teens acknowledging that they are online “almost constantly.”

This constant mobile connection creates the conditions for teenagers to consistently be exposed to peer pressure even outside of the school environment. Mina Park and colleagues in 2017, in a journal article in Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, noted that hyperconnectivity to social media can also lead to depression, negative body image and eating disorders.

What schools can do to help: Teens must be given an outlet to discuss their frustrations when it comes to dealing with peer pressure. Students should be directed to their school counselors or other trusted adults in the school with whom they can share their feelings and pressures and get supportive, confidential advice in return. It is also helpful to allow for genuine conversations in the classroom about the importance of students being confident in who they are and embracing their differences. Safe spaces in schools allow teens opportunities to feel supported in a neutral environment, to accept who they are, and to embrace differences among their peers.

 

2) Bullying is a significant issue. Peer pressure is not the only problem arising from constant social media access. The other, and even more troubling, issue is bullying. Teens may experience, witness or engage in bullying situations, including cyberbullying, which is more prevalent among teens.

The Bullying Statistics website (bullyingstatistics.org) notes that cyberbullying may consist of teens sending cruel messages, spreading gossip or posting threatening messages on social media platforms, pretending to be someone else on a social media account, or sexting. According to recent statistics from the website, more than 25% of teenagers have been exposed to cyberbullying situations that have had a negative impact on them. Bullying can have a significant effect on teens socially, emotionally and academically. Some of the negative impacts include depression, anxiety, attendance problems, and decrease in academic achievement. However, many teens who experience cyberbullying do not tell their parents or guardians about these painful experiences.

What schools can do to help: October is National Bullying Prevention Month, and many schools across the United States take time to develop effective strategies to raise awareness about bullying and to prevent bullying incidents on their campuses. It is important for schools to create an environment in which victims of bullying/cyberbullying, or teens who witness the bullying of a peer, can talk to trusted adults about bullying situations. Help your students by providing safe places in schools where teens can disclose when they or their peers are being bullied, or even create a hotline for students to report bullying situations.

Additionally, offer professional development to teachers and other staff members on identifying the warning signs of bullying, and provide them with effective strategies to help students who are being bullied. Likewise, many parents are unaware of how to support their teens when they are being bullied, so invite parents to on-campus workshops where they can learn ways to address these issues with their teens. During the parent and family sessions, discuss the various types of bullying that take place, the warning signs of bullying, and school and community resources for victims of bullying and cyberbullying. Workshops for parents and families can add another layer of support for young people who are affected by bullying.

 

3) Students are concerned about their personal safety. In our study, the third top concern that students reported was anxiety about their personal safety. According to the National Institute of Justice, school safety is currently a common concern among educators and administrators across the United States. Teens may not feel safe in their schools because of gun violence on school campuses across the country or even violence in their own communities or neighborhoods. The National Institute of Justice has stated that more schools have increased their security measures to protect students. Many of these schools have instituted locked doors, security cameras, hallway supervision, controlled building access, metal detectors and locker checks.

More than half of the ninth- and 10th-graders and more than 70% of the 11th- and 12th-graders we surveyed reported that they had experienced a traumatic event while attending high school. These various traumatic events can cause students to feel concern about their overall safety in their schools and communities. This type of stressor can in turn affect how teens engage in their educational environments.

What schools can do to help: Trauma-informed methods must be put in place to support students and their overall safety. Trauma-informed approaches focus on ways to ensure that students feel supported, listened to, and safe. Among the trauma-informed approaches that counselors can create in their schools are to build trust and rapport with students and to collaborate with outside community resources to support students who have been exposed to traumatic events. By getting to know your students, you will notice when their behaviors change, and because you have built trust with them, you can approach them in a friendly way to address these changes.

In addition, provide training on trauma-informed methods for teachers, support staff and administrators at your school. This training will help them create resources aimed at the needs of teens. Additionally, educators can seek professional help for their own personal traumas so that they may better interact with students who are dealing with stressors. By ensuring that teachers and staff members have access to community resources and training about personal safety and trauma, schools are developing leaders who can help students socially, emotionally and academically.

 

4) Students need help coping with their emotions. Teens’ emotions run rampant during their high school years. Most experience a range of emotions, including anger, fear, frustration, disappointment and hurt. These emotions may mask some of the broader issues that students face and that ultimately affect their academic performance.

Some of the students in our study participated in a small group that focused on developing social skills. The single-gender support group addressed the students’ academic, social and emotional needs. The sessions offered teens a safe place to identify stressors in their lives and to discuss the emotions attached to those stressors. By talking about their emotions, students were able to identify yet other emotions that were hiding underneath their anger and aggression. Throughout this process, the teens learned how to effectively articulate their emotions and to identify the underlying factors that were fueling them.

What schools can do to help: Encourage a supportive environment and training for students, such as small support groups facilitated by school counselors, clinical counselors, school psychologists or social workers, as well as peer-to-peer support groups. Teach teens the proper social skills related to identifying their emotions, and explain that all emotions are OK to have.

Quite often, teenagers express only the basic emotions when talking to others, especially adults. However, challenging them to look deeper and to identify the true emotion can be effective. Teens need safe places at school where they can learn how to cope with their anger and the other uncomfortable emotions that they often face.

 

5) Dealing with grief is important. A final concern students reported centered on dealing with grief from the loss of a loved one. Those students in our study who had experienced the loss of a loved one or who had witnessed a friend going through such a loss reported needing a supportive outlet to deal with those losses. Students may experience various losses during their teen years, such as the death of a friend or family member, and they are often left to process their emotions about the loss on their own. If schools are unaware that students have experienced a loss, those students may go without the support that is needed to help them process their grief. A lack of support during this time can have a significant impact on teens succeeding within the academic setting.

What schools can do to help: Build rapport early in the year with students so that they will be comfortable sharing should they experience a loss. During times of loss, allow students to grieve. Provide additional assistance by forming support groups for students who have experienced loss. This type of support can be offered through collaboration with local counseling agencies, hospices or other entities that support families experiencing loss. It is also helpful to maintain a list of community resources that address grief and loss. This community resource guide can be shared with teens, parents or caregivers, and other stakeholders.

Transforming school into an emotionally responsive environment

Students who are well-equipped socially, emotionally and mentally at the beginning of their academic careers can better cope when hardships occur. As counselors, we can help our students succeed in school and in life by first learning to identify their social, emotional and mental health needs, and then providing resources such as social skills workshops and support groups for them. Additionally, we can lead by example by improving our own social, emotional and mental health through professional development workshops that emphasize social and emotional learning practices.

Remember, school is not just a place where students gain academic knowledge; it is where they prepare for life. By doing our part to create a safe and emotionally supportive environment, we can increase the odds that students will succeed beyond the walls of the classroom.

 

****

 

Dakota King-White is an assistant professor in counselor education at Cleveland State University. Prior to that, she worked in K-12 education as a school counselor, mental health therapist and administrator. Contact her at d.l.king19@csuohio.edu.

Sade Vega is a student in health science at Cleveland State University. In 2018, she received the university’s undergraduate student research award for her research on assessing the social, emotional and mental health needs of high school students. Contact her at s.m.vega@vikes.csuohio.edu.

Nicholas Petty is the director of undergraduate inclusive excellence at Cleveland State University. Prior to working at the university, he was an administrator in the Cleveland Metropolitan School District, where he earned national attention for his innovative approaches to behavioral intervention and student motivation. Contact him at n.petty@csuohio.edu.

 

Letters to the editor: ct@counseling.org

Counseling Today reviews unsolicited articles written by American Counseling Association members. To access writing guidelines and tips for having an article accepted for publication, go to ct.counseling.org/feedback.

 

****

 

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.

The case for universal mental health screening in schools

By Emily Goodman-Scott, Peg Donohue and Jennifer Betters-Bubon September 5, 2019

When I (Emily) was in elementary school, I vividly remember being screened for scoliosis. One day, all the students in my fifth-grade class marched down to the school library, and one by one, we were each briefly and privately evaluated by the school nurse. This was a form of universal screening: systematically screening every student for given criteria.

Universal screening continues to be commonplace today in our pre-K-12 schools. In education, we screen all students for academics: Are they reading on grade level? We screen all students for key health-related factors: Could their hearing or vision be impeding their academics? We provide universal screening for a variety of factors that can affect students’ school success … but what about screening for mental health?

Mental health concerns are prevalent in society, with approximately 80% of chronic mental health disorders beginning in childhood. The National Academy of Sciences estimates that 14% to 20% of youths each year are diagnosed with mental, emotional or behavioral mental health disorders. In addition, we are seeing substantial stress in childhood and adolescence. According to Dr. Sandra Hassink, a former president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, approximately one-third of children display signs of stress, while more than half of college students report overwhelming anxiety. Hassink categorizes stress as the “top health problem facing kids today.”

In addition to stress and anxiety, we remain concerned about the rates of suicide, self-harm, depression and school violence among pre-K-12 students. Despite the prevalence of mental health concerns, only 45% of youths with a diagnosis receive treatment. And less than 25% of those youths receive any form of treatment in the schools, despite the overwhelming evidence supporting early prevention and intervention.

In schools, it is often easier to identify externalizing behaviors such as aggression and rule breaking rather than internalizing behaviors such as depression, anxiety, isolation, suicidal ideation and so forth. In fact, in a 2008 study, Catherine Bradshaw, Jacquelyn Buckley and Nicholas Ialongo found that students with internalizing behaviors were substantially underserved in pre-K-12 schools compared with their peers with externalizing behaviors. This suggests that students with internalizing behaviors may fly under the radar of school staff, making them less likely to be identified and, thus, less likely to receive services.

Given the prevalence of mental health and behavioral concerns in students and the gaps in adequately identifying and serving students with elevated needs, there has been a call for change in pre-K-12 schools. After the devastating school violence and loss of life at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, the Connecticut Office of the Child Advocate conducted a thorough investigation and made recommendations, the first of which was screening every student in a particular class, grade, school or district for criteria related to mental health or social/emotional indicators. Universal screening, also known as universal mental health screening (UMHS), has been recommended by a plethora of organizations, including the 2002 President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education, the National Association of School Psychologists, the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and A Framework for Safe and Successful Schools, which was authored or co-signed by a wealth of educational and mental health organizations.

Furthermore, burgeoning research supports the implementation of school-based UMHS, suggesting that it can increase the likelihood of identifying students with internalizing behaviors. Many of the schools we have talked to have echoed this sentiment, saying that after implementing UMHS, they identified students struggling with internalizing concerns who previously had not been identified by either the school or the family and thus were not receiving services. UMHS can help pinpoint student needs that are beyond the awareness of school staff and parents or guardians, thus ensuring that fewer students fall through the proverbial cracks.

Schools and school districts nationwide are considering UMHS, with more and more schools beginning implementation. At the same time, successfully facilitating this practice requires significant planning and time initially and having a system of resources readily available to serve the students, once identified. In 2018, the National Center for School Mental Health at the University of Maryland created a guide for operationalizing the steps to UMHS. We’ll describe those steps. 

Operationalizing UMHS

Step one: Create a multidisciplinary team and secure buy-in from key stakeholders. The UMHS team is responsible for designing and coordinating UMHS implementation. Because of the systemic nature of the process and the plethora of responsibilities, implementation should truly be a team effort rather than falling on one or two staff members. Team members could include school-based mental health providers such as school counselors and licensed mental health counselors, as well as school psychologists and school social workers. It is also important to include school-based and district-level administrators on the team, both for their expertise in school leadership and resource availability and to gain their buy-in. Some teams might have other stakeholders such as family members, school nurses, teachers, resource officers, and related community partners join the team to offer their unique perspectives. It might be helpful to develop district-level teams to discuss districtwide protocol and resources.

Once the team is assembled, it should collaborate with key stakeholders to gain momentum, support and resources. This buy-in can be developed by educating key stakeholders on the purpose and research behind UMHS and how UMHS can meet the specific needs of the school or district. The team can analyze the current concerns of the school or district by gathering corresponding data: Are students’ mental health needs being adequately identified and met? What are the most pressing issues in the school or district? For instance, has there been an increase in student suicide attempts or drug-related suspensions and use in the school and community? Is the team interested in prevention efforts to better identify students with internalizing concerns such as anxiety or depression?

Many of the schools and districts with which we have corresponded have reported that UMHS was supported and even driven by influential district-level stakeholders, such as a superintendent. It is important for counselors to understand that gaining buy-in for UMHS can take years and that it requires purposeful advocacy and education. When attempting to gain stakeholder buy-in, team members may find it fruitful to present UMHS as a tool to meet existing district priorities such as improving students’ social/emotional learning, enhancing college and career readiness, and removing barriers to learning.

Also, rather than presenting UMHS as “one more initiative,” team members can ask how this practice might tie into other programs that already exist in the school or district. UMHS is often implemented as part of multitiered systems of support (MTSS) such as response to intervention and positive behavioral interventions and supports. MTSS is widely implemented in all states nationwide, and its tiered focus on prevention for all students and identification and intervention for those with elevated needs is a natural fit with UMHS. Thus, teams could discuss UMHS within their school’s or district’s existing MTSS practices. Furthermore, in an effort to work smarter, not harder, consider whether an existing student support team is in place that could oversee UMHS, rather than creating a new team to do this.

This first step of garnering key stakeholder support may take some time. We’ve seen that using data to highlight school needs and connecting UMHS to district priorities and current programs generally assist with stakeholder buy-in.

Step two: Clarify the goals and purpose. Once the UMHS team is developed and has gained buy-in from instrumental stakeholders, the next step is confirming the goals and purpose of UMHS. During this step, the team can work with key stakeholders to continue reviewing school/district data and confirming the goals for UMHS. What is important to the stakeholders and the district? What are the most pressing needs for the school or district? It may take some time to reach consensus on the greatest need in the school or district.

Step three: Discuss resources and logistics. UMHS takes considerable planning as the team maps out its processes and procedures. Thus, much of the work for UMHS is done on the front end. Each school or district has unique needs and resources, so there is no one-size-fits-all approach for implementing UMHS. One question the team might ask during this step is which students are currently being screened or should be screened moving forward. We’ve seen some schools that screen for suicide and depression in high school health classes across all students, whereas other schools screen more broadly for strengths and difficulties at multiple grade levels, such as third, seventh and 10th grades. Still other schools may have the resources and desire to screen across every grade K-12. The answer to which students to screen may be based on a school’s or district’s resources and its driving purpose behind implementing UMHS.

Another consideration is garnering the support and consent of parents and guardians. First, the team might consider the overall readiness of parents and guardians for UMHS. Some schools recommend holding educational sessions for parents and guardians in which de-identified school-level data on student needs is provided, along with the rationale for using UMHS to meet those student needs. This may be a helpful time for the team to normalize mental health and UMHS by making comparisons to other school-based screenings for reading level, hearing, vision and so forth.

We also recommend demystifying UMHS by describing the procedures and perhaps showing examples of successful UMHS processes in other schools or districts. These information sessions can also describe how parents and guardians will be notified of their child’s results, especially for children identified with elevated needs. We have witnessed that parents and guardians are often supportive of UMHS when provided with ample and appropriate education and awareness, and when consideration is given to the unique culture of each school community.

Once schools have gained buy-in from parents and guardians, UMHS teams should engage in the consent process. Many schools have found success with a passive consent, notifying parents and guardians about UMHS through several means (email, automated phone calls, letters home, social media, etc.) and communicating that students will be included in the UMHS process unless the parent or guardian completes an opt-out form by a specified date.

When it comes to discussing resources and logistics for UMHS, two questions usually take precedence: How much will UMHS cost, and how much time will UMHS require? The UMHS team should work hand-in-hand with stakeholders, especially administrators who oversee the school or district budget and schedule, to address these concerns. School staff with whom we’ve spoken have reported that UMHS does take time and can have associated costs, especially in the beginning. However, these staff members have also expressed that the cost and time were absolutely worth it.

One cost associated with UMHS is the assessment or screener being used (we will discuss this in greater depth later in the article). Regarding time, the UMHS team should discuss how the school staff will be involved and the training required for their involvement. For example, who will administer and score the assessments/screeners? Who will communicate the results? Who will notify parents and guardians of elevated scores?

When considering time and costs, the UMHS team should also evaluate available resources for providing services to students identified with elevated needs. What school-based services will be offered? What referrals will be made for outside services? Teams typically map out the existing resources available within the school or district, as well as current and possible external partnerships. In anticipation of an increase in identified students and, thus, needed services, these partnerships and referral sources should be explored and confirmed prior to screening. In addition, teams need to create a plan for services based on student need and the level of immediacy (e.g., same-day supports for immediate/critical needs versus same-week supports for moderate needs). Relatedly, some schools secure grants and Medicaid funding to finance provision of services in the schools by community-based mental health professionals.

Other questions that come up frequently center on the issue of liability. For example, schools often ask us:

  • “What if we identify students with elevated needs, such as suicidal ideation, and the parents or guardians refuse services?”
  • “What if we have more students eligible than we have available services?”
  • “Legally, how do we document these results?”
  • “Regarding confidentiality: which school staff members should be aware of the results?”
  • “Do the results become part of a student’s permanent file?”

These are important questions to consider and talk through with the UMHS team, especially administrators and the school district’s legal experts. By establishing clear district policies and defining protocols proactively, the UMHS team can get ahead of many of these concerns. Furthermore, small-scale pilot screening can help teams predict schoolwide prevalence of students who will need intervention. Collecting and sharing de-identified screening data can also be an essential step in advocating for additional services and resources. 

Another important logistic to consider is time. As mentioned, teams usually spend considerable time planning for UMHS implementation, including designing a timeline. Within this timeline, teams often consider conducting a pilot screening, testing UMHS with a small sample of the school, such as a class in each participating grade. After this pilot, schools can collect feedback on the screening to guide changes to the process and procedures before rolling out UMHS throughout the school or district.

The team might also consider the time of year, week and day that UMHS will be implemented. It is often recommended to begin UMHS toward the start of the school year but to allow enough time for students to settle into their new routines and for students and teachers to have built rapport. This also provides time for follow-up screening to occur after the initial baseline. In addition, screening could take place early in the day, such as during an advisory or home room period, and early in the week. This allows time for immediate follow-up, particularly for students identified as having high needs. It also allows time to reach out to the student, parents or guardians, and school-based and community-based resources. In fact, some schools align their UMHS schedules with the availability of internal and external referral sources to ensure that mental health providers are on standby to assist immediately if needed.

Step four: Select a screening tool. Selecting an appropriate screening tool is a crucial aspect of UMHS. Because no two schools are alike, each team should consider its school’s specific needs, culture and resources. The National Center for School Mental Health recommends asking the following questions when considering screening tools:

  • Is the tool reliable, valid and evidence-based? In other words, has the tool been empirically tested and backed by research? Similarly, was this tool normed on a population that is similar to the school or district population? We want a tool that is culturally appropriate, valid and reliable, and, thus, as accurate as possible.
  • Is the tool free, or can it be purchased for a reasonable cost? Tools have a range of costs, which is important to consider based on the school’s or district’s budget and the number of students completing the tool.
  • How long will it take to administer and score the tool? Time is a precious commodity in education. Thus, the UMHS team should investigate the possible options for administering and scoring tools. Although paper-and-pencil tools exist, schools often prefer administering screening tools through online means (e.g., Google forms) or Scantrons. Electronic administering and scoring can lead to fewer errors and faster results.
  • Does the tool come with ready access to training and technological support for staff? As mentioned earlier, staff need to be trained on UMHS procedures, including administering and scoring screening tools. Furthermore, most tools have educational requirements, such as a master’s degree in specific fields, associated with administering and scoring them. Hence, some schools and districts have determined that school psychologists or school counselors are responsible for administering and scoring the tools because of their training and expertise.
  • Does the tool screen for what the school or district wants to know (e.g., type of mental health or behavioral concern)? Specifically, do the goals and purpose of the UMHS process align with the aim of the screening tool? If a school’s goal is to screen for internalizing mental health concerns (e.g., depression, anxiety, self-harm, suicidal ideation), does the selected tool actually screen for those concerns?

It is important to note that the developmental age of students should be considered when selecting a screening tool, as should the type of administration. Some tools are self-reports completed by the students, whereas other tools are completed by teachers or parents and guardians (this is especially the case when screening younger students). It is also important to discuss the meaning of specific scores for each tool in advance of data collection and analysis. For instance, what score constitutes a high risk in need of immediate follow-up? What score constitutes a moderate risk, and when should follow-up occur? What score constitutes little or no risk?

The following list includes common UMHS tools:

  • Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders: Screens for internalizing and externalizing concerns (K-9)
  • Student Risk Screening Scale: Screens for seven externalizing behavioral criteria (lies, cheats, sneaks; steals; behavior problems; peer rejection; low academic achievement; negative attitude; and aggressive behavior) three times per year (K-12)
  • Behavior Assessment System for Children, Third Edition: Behavioral and Emotional Screening System: Identifies students with needs in both academic and social domains, including internalizing problems, externalizing problems, school problems and adaptive skills (pre-K-12)
  • Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: Screens broad behavioral domains, including emotional symptoms, conduct problems, hyperactivity/inattention, peer relationship problems and prosocial behavior (K-12)
  • Resiliency Scales for Children and Adolescents: Profiles personal strengths and vulnerability (ages 9-18)

Step five: Collect data, analyze and follow up. After implementation of the screening tool, UMHS teams will engage in data collection, analysis and follow-up according to their individualized plans. Follow-up may include further evaluation and services for students with elevated needs. It may also include monitoring students with elevated needs and providing additional screening at different points during the school year and subsequent school years. As emphasized by the National Center for School Mental Health, it is imperative that students with high risk to themselves or others receive follow-up the same day.

UMHS and counselors

Both school counselors and licensed mental health counselors (LMHCs) can play active roles in UMHS in several ways. First, school counselors run comprehensive school counseling programs that provide a range of student services, including direct counseling services. School counselors also provide consultation and collaborate as members of student support teams and schoolwide leadership teams. Thus, school counselors should be active members of their respective UMHS multidisciplinary teams, helping to design and implement the screening process, and sharing their expertise on mental health, equity, data-driven practices and culturally responsive systemic change. As part of a UMHS team, school counselors may also assist with analyzing the screening data, referring students to mental health services, and engaging in progress monitoring and continued evaluation. School counselors may also provide counseling services, although their counseling should be short term and time bound.

LMHCs can also be involved in UMHS screening in a variety of ways. School-based or community-based LMHCs may be invited to be members of a UMHS team because they can provide expertise on mental health needs and the services available in the school and community. In addition to consulting and collaborating on screening procedures and data analysis, LMHCs can provide further evaluation and long-term and crisis counseling to those students identified with elevated needs.

Again, we emphasize that counselors’ roles, and the corresponding procedures and services, may be different based on each school’s or district’s culture, resources and needs.

Challenges and benefits

There are both challenges and benefits to implementing UMHS. Among the challenges, there is no denying that screening takes time, resources, stakeholder support and substantial planning. The stigma surrounding mental health issues can also test stakeholders’ willingness to implement UMHS in schools. In addition, some educators and legislators have voiced concerns that UMHS could lead to the overdiagnosis and unnecessary stigmatizing of students, giving them labels that could last a lifetime.

School leaders are often hesitant to initiate a UMHS program if they lack the resources to meet identified needs without collaborating with outside agencies. Some school administrators in rural areas indicate that school-based mental health services are the only such services available for most families. Teams working to implement UMHS must be prepared to address resistance to universal screening in their communities as part of the implementation process. Hence the importance of seeking early education and buy-in.

At the same time, UMHS is associated with a wealth of benefits, including:

  • Prevention and early identification and treatment of mental health and behavioral concerns
  • The use of data to guide mental health interventions
  • A comprehensive approach that encourages systemic thinking and breaks down school/community/family silos
  • Collaboration across school-based mental health providers and between school-based and community-based mental health providers
  • Greater normalization and awareness of mental health issues within the schools

Schools and school districts have told us that implementing UMHS is worth the associated challenges. Many school-age youths struggle with mental health and behavioral concerns, yet their struggles are not always identified or treated, leading to larger long-term concerns. Because of the climbing rates of school violence, anxiety, depression, self-harm and suicide among our youths, we need a better system. We need a system in which fewer youths fall through the cracks. We need a system in which more youths are identified earlier and more accurately. We need a system that is comprehensive and that works. 

****

For more information, we suggest the following resources:

  • The School Counselor’s Guide to Multi-tiered Systems of Support edited by Emily Goodman-Scott, Jennifer Betters-Bubon and Peg Donohue (2019, Routledge). This book discusses aligning comprehensive school counseling with MTSS, devoting a chapter to UMHS.
  • The SHAPE System (theshapesystem.com): The School Health Assessment and Performance Evaluation System is a free, private, web-based portal that offers a virtual workspace for school mental health teams to document, track and advance quality and sustainability improvement goals and to assess trauma responsiveness.
  • National Center for School Mental Health (csmh.umaryland.edu): The center is committed to enhancing understanding and supporting implementation of comprehensive school mental health policies and programs that are innovative, effective, and culturally and linguistically competent across the developmental spectrum (preschool to postsecondary) and three tiers of mental health programming (promotion, prevention, intervention).
  • Systematic Screenings of Behavior to Support Instruction: From Preschool to High School by Kathleen Lane, Holly Menzies, Wendy Oakes & Jemma Kalberg (2012): The authors show how systematic screenings of behavior, used in conjunction with academic data, can enhance teachers’ ability to teach and support all students within a response-to-intervention framework.
  • School-Wide Universal Screening for Behavioral and Mental Health Issues: Implementation Guidance (tinyurl.com/OhioPBISGuide): This document provides a general overview of considerations in implementing UMHS for behavioral and mental health issues.

 

****

 

Emily Goodman-Scott is an associate professor, graduate program director and school counseling coordinator in the counseling program at Old Dominion University in Virginia. Prior to that, she was a school counselor and special education teacher. She is passionate about advocating for lower caseloads and greater resources for school counselors and schools. Her research interests include a range of school counseling topics such as multitiered systems of support (MTSS), counselor education, and counseling exceptional students. Contact her at egscott@odu.edu or on Twitter: @e_goodmanscott.

Jennifer Betters-Bubon is an associate professor of counselor education at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. Previously, she was an elementary school counselor for 11 years and a special education teacher. In addition to teaching future counselors, her work focuses on data-driven practice, advocacy and leadership in transforming the role of the school counselor within culturally responsive MTSS. Contact her at bettersj@uww.edu.

Peg Donohue is an assistant professor of counseling at Central Connecticut State University (CCSU) in the Department of Counseling and Family Therapy. Before joining the CCSU faculty, she spent 16 years working as a school counselor in Connecticut and California. Her primary research interests include fostering social and emotional learning, aligning school counselor preparation with MTSS, and universal screening for mental health concerns in schools. Contact her at peg.donohue@ccsu.edu.

 

For more resources and conversations on UMHS, follow the authors on Twitter:
@SchCouns4MTSS and Facebook: School Counselors for MTSS.

Knowledge Share articles are developed from sessions presented at American Counseling Association conferences.

 

****

 

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.

Using reality therapy to help military families

By Nicole M. Arcuri Sanders June 14, 2019

Military children are the “Children of the world, blown to all corners of the world. [They] bloom anywhere.” Just like dandelions, military children never know where they will go and where they will grow.

Diane Townsend Davis is credited with creating the dandelion motto for military children. Understanding this motto is imperative for any counselor who wishes to work with military children, but especially for school counselors. The Department of Defense Dependents Education (DoDDE) estimates that 80% of military children (approximately 1.2 million) attend public schools.

Counselors who work with military children must understand the unique stressors that these children face, but counselors also must be prepared to help meet these children’s needs in a short amount of time because their families move often. To avoid having these children slip through the cracks, school counselors must be knowledgeable about rapport-building strategies with this population and meet their needs in a realistic time frame.

 

Reality therapy

Working with clients from their worldview is not a new concept for counselors. This is particularly important when working with a population connected to the military because these clients’ perspectives differ drastically from those of the civilian population. Being knowledgeable about the unique needs of the military culture is a necessity for effective counseling work. For instance, often as military children begin to find their niche in a school, their families will receive orders for relocation. Military families relocate 2.4 times more often than do civilian families (on average, military families relocate every two to three years).

Reality therapy offers this population an honest evaluation of their current choices and behaviors to determine if change is needed to obtain their desired outcomes. This modality offers something that is very important to consider for this population —an emphasis on what aspects of life the client has control over.

As noted, military children move often and therefore tend to be the new kid in school quite frequently. But these children are not like most other new children in school. These children:

  • Have parents who are willing to sacrifice their lives for the well-being of the nation and to safeguard its people
  • Have parents who often leave for extended periods of time to either train for combat-related situations or as part of combat-related missions
  • Know that a great deal of risk is associated with their parents’ jobs
  • Don’t always know whether their mom or dad made it back safely from work
  • Can go for months without being able to see their parent(s)

In an age of social media, these children may at times be able to connect with their parents, but they also might see or hear reports of attacks on the news. When a member of a military unit is killed in action, all communication is cut off at their deployment station to ensure that the family of the service member is notified prior to receiving any other communication. When military children are unable to connect with their parent, the fear of the death being their father or mother is very real. All of the above noted aspects are the reality for military children, and all of these aspects are out of their realm of control.

Reality therapy offers these clients the opportunity to form a relationship with their counselor based on understanding and nonjudgment. Clients have a voice when working with counselors who use reality therapy. The clients become empowered by being afforded the idea of having control over their behaviors and actions.

A basic tenant of reality therapy is aiding clients in having their basic needs met. Creating a safe place in which clients do not feel judged but do feel empowered is therapeutic in itself.

Reality therapy is founded on the idea that everyone is seeking to fulfill five basic needs:

1) Love and belonging

2) Power or sense of worth

3) Freedom or independence

4) Fun or a sense of pleasure

5) Survival (which is based on knowing that one’s basic needs are being met)

When one of these needs is not being met, mental health issues can arise.

For clients connected to the military, feeling loved and belonging might look different than it does for other clients. Because these clients are frequently separated from loved ones and move often, meeting their need to feel loved and belong can be challenging. Reality therapy provides these clients with the understanding that they cannot change or control others. So, the practical approach will be to solve problems through their ability to control themselves and their own behaviors and thus make choices that support their needs and desired goals.

Within the military, very little power is offered to the family or the service member. Ultimately, the family and service member follow orders from a multitude of levels within the Department of Defense (DOD). Yet each military-connected member can feel a sense of accomplishment through actions they choose to control. For instance, helping clients make a list of goals that they want to accomplish while living somewhere (i.e., making the best out of each duty station) can be empowering to them.

Gaining knowledge of a new area through exploration can also be empowering. Helping clients identify their interests (and what makes them unique) can further support their independence and wellness. Fun can also be part of that experience.

Of course, with each transition that military-connected clients face, their survival needs will be tested. For instance, they may need to realign their thoughts regarding shelter (housing). Yet helping these clients differentiate what is out of their control and what is in their control can aide them in pursuing actions that support the desired outcomes that are within their control. Clients may still be angry, confused or saddened by aspects that are outside of their control. But counselors can help clients see that rather than blaming others or relying on these aspects as an excuse, they can focus on and take ownership of their present time and actions.

Reality therapy sessions are structured around the WDEP system — the client’s wants, doing, evaluation and planning. The counselor meets the client in the here and now and explores what the client wants. This realistic exploration of attainment notes what is in the client’s control and what is not. Clients then share what they are doing to help themselves achieve their wants. Next, the counselor helps clients evaluate whether what they are doing is supportive of or detrimental to their goals. Then, together, the counselor and client plan ways to change detrimental behaviors and fine-tune supportive behaviors to allow for the client to obtain his or her wants.

As the client is faced with new areas of need, the same WDEP system can be applied. Military-connected clients are faced with many hardships fostered by their culture. But reality therapy offers this population a real chance to be resilient by adapting to change and overcoming challenges.

 

Resilience

Military child resiliency largely resembles how well the stay-behind parent is doing. If the parent is unable to cope or transition with the needs of the family when the service member is not available to assist them, then a domino effect will occur. Children will have to fulfill adult responsibilities in the absence of the service member. The parental stressors will then be placed on the children’s shoulders.

For some parents, missing a spouse may be too much for them to handle. Other parents who are left behind may not be married or may not currently be together with the service member, but they may still rely on the service member for support with the children.

When there is a lack of available support, the additional stressors put these families at risk. A 2008 report from the Military Family Research Institute found studies to support that since 9/11, when the number of deployments for service members increased, military families experienced increased rates of marital conflict, domestic violence, child neglect or maltreatment, parenting stress, anxiety and depression.

On the opposite side, when the parent left behind is able to successfully juggle the transition and continue meeting both personal and family needs, children experience less turmoil. These children are better able to continue on as normal with minimal changes to other aspects of life. However, having resources available to these parents to support them in filling roles for which the service member parent was typically responsible is imperative.

Civilian school counselors and community mental health counselors should consider that the resources that military families rely on may not be readily available. For instance, counselors should note whether additional family support is local versus distant and how long the family has called its current community home. Again, reality therapy can provide these clients with a realistic perspective of addressing their needs. Therefore, it is important for counselors to know what additional supports are available to these families.

 

School counselors

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, children across the United States spend an average of 6.64 hours a day and a 180 days per year attending public schools. As noted previously, 80% of military children attend public schools.

Public schools have a duty to be aware of the needs of military children. In its 2012 national model, the American School Counselor Association (ASCA) asserts the necessity for school counselors to understand their students’ culture in order to provide effective support for students’ academic, career and personal/social development. ASCA further proclaims in its 2012 executive summary that school counseling programs can be effective only when a collaborative effort exists between the school counselor, parents and other educators, thus creating an environment that promotes student achievement.

School counselors who use reality therapy can support students’ academic, career and personal/social development. For each of these areas of development, the school counselor can address the student client’s wants and doing while also aiding the student in evaluating such efforts and making plans that support success. Yet without understanding the unique needs of the military lifestyle, school counselors will be unable to support these children in the schools or locate appropriate community resources to provide support outside of school. Therefore, when assessing the student client’s wants, a realistic perspective of the stakeholders involved will aid in developing goals that the student client has control over.

 

Community counselors

The same notion of understanding the unique needs of military children and military families is true for civilian community counselors. According to the ACA Code of Ethics, the primary responsibility of a counselor is to respect the dignity and promote the welfare of clients (Standard A.1.a.). This notion alone requires counselors to take the specific needs of their clients into consideration.

To best do this, counselors should not impose their own values on clients (A.4.b.) but instead should honor the diversity of clients and their uniqueness within their social and cultural contexts. Reality therapy promotes this understanding by developing a therapeutic relationship that embraces the client’s worldview and operates from that perspective in developing realistic goals.

 

Realistic intervention

As military children, family members and service members are blown to all corners of the world, professional counselors should be asking themselves a question: “How can we best serve these clients so that they can bloom?”

All counselors should have the same mission when working with this population — namely, devising goals that are realistic and attainable for these clients. Counselors must make themselves knowledgeable of the specific resources that are available to this population to promote therapeutic growth rather than presenting yet another barrier that these clients must face. There are many resources available exclusively to service members, veterans and their families of which civilian counselors may not be aware. When working with military families, it is imperative that counselors do their homework regarding these resources before leading clients blindly with an analysis of client control in establishing wants or goals.

Toward the end of this article, I will share a number of resources that are available to assist military families living off base. But let’s next consider what civilian counselors can do.

For starters, civilian counselors will want to build rapport with the military-connected client while being mindful of their cultural worldview (just as they would with any other client). This will require the counselor to be knowledgeable about the military population and the client’s role within the military family. As noted earlier, this is a unique culture, and being able to understand this lens of perception will be helpful when clients are processing and trying to navigate scenarios for realistic solutions or coming to terms with aspects that may be troublesome (again, following the tenets of reality therapy).

Second, whether working with the service member, the child or the stay-behind parent, consider infusing into the treatment plan the power of resiliency. Due to their lifestyle, military-connected clients are typically used to a great deal of adjustment in various aspects of their lives on a regular basis. Helping clients build off of their past successes to navigate new challenges can be empowering. Reality therapy supports counselors in evaluating with clients what is working and what is not.

In 2008, the Military Family Research Institute found that the following stressors were considered normative for military children but not for civilian children:

1) Regular, and at times lengthy, separations from parents

2) Lengthy parental work hours

3) Permanent changes of station

4) Deployments for multiple and various purposes

5) Exposure to combat-related activities and equipment, including training

Just because the stressors are considered normal for the population, the events and circumstances experienced are not to be inferred as easy for military children to manage. Just like with any stressor for any client, the more sudden, serious, ambiguous or traumatic the loss, the more difficult the stress will be to manage. Many of these same stressors are applicable both to the parent who is left behind and to the service member.

It is common for military couples to experience marital distress due to a multitude of these stressors. Commonly seen mental health issues in the military population for the service member and veteran include mood disorders, trauma/posttraumatic stress disorder, sexual assault, suicide, addiction, adjustment issues and relationship concerns. Commonly seen mental health issues among military spouses and children include mood disorders, trauma, adjustment issues and relationship concerns.

To explore an issue that may plague any member of a military family, we will focus on working with a military-connected client who is experiencing relationship issues. Guiding these clients in exploring how to communicate with their families despite the physical distance between them and how to involve family members in their life even from afar can help with feelings of detachment. Reality therapy offers clients the ability to come to terms with aspects of their lives that are in their control as well as outside of their control.

Finding ways to help clients embrace the family dynamic even when changes occur can help sustain the idea of their family system. Highlighting previous resiliency efforts to help clients explore this new change, come to accept it, and adapt how they now fit into their family system can reinforce the idea of maintaining relationships. WDEP analysis for each consideration posed by clients offers not only a realistic evaluation of their current circumstance, but also celebrates their small victories and offers opportunities to modify aspects that are not supporting their desired wants.

Navigating the change within the family while assessing client strengths and processing their feelings regarding the change (as well as the realistic desires of the client, while still being mindful of the military lifestyle) can aid the client in managing more healthy relationships. This can be extended to other relationships outside of the family as well.

The idea of resiliency and understanding military culture is at the core of helping these clients. Reality therapy offers counselors the ability to seamlessly integrate into each session regardless of how much time they ultimately have with these clients.

 

Resources for all

To provide additional effective supports when working with children and families connected to the military, it is necessary to know where to turn. These additional supports are very important because these clients move frequently and are often far from family and friends who might normally offer assistance. And counselors cannot do it all by themselves.

The resources mentioned below are only a few of the many available to military families. However, they are a great place to start, whether you counsel military-connected children and their families in the school setting or in the community.

American Red Cross: Offers support with emergency communications with service member while deployed, financial assistance, information and referral services, deployment services, and Reunification Workshops.

Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP): Program is intended to support service member dependents who have ongoing medical, mental health or special education needs (on both spectrums — gifted as well as challenges). To enroll, service members should complete and submit 1) DD Form 2792, the Family Member Medical Summary or 2) DD Form 2792-1, the Family Member Special Education/Early Intervention Summary to their installation EFMP office.

MIC3 (mic3.net/): This is the official website of the Military Interstate Children’s Compact Commission. The goal of the interstate compact is to replace the widely varying policies affecting transitioning military students with a consistent policy in every school district and in every state that chooses to join.

Military Child Education Coalition: The coalitions three goals are the following:

1) Military-connected children’s academic, social and emotional needs are recognized, supported and appropriate responses provided.

2) Parents, and other supporting adults, are empowered with the knowledge to ensure military-connected children are college, workforce and life ready.

3) A strong community of partners is committed to support an environment where military-connected children thrive.

Military family life counselors: Intention is to support service members, their families and survivors with nonmedical counseling worldwide. Counselors provide face-to-face counseling services, briefings and presentations to the military community both on and off the installation.

Military and Government Counseling Association (MGCA): MGCA is a division of the American Counseling Association with the mission of servicing those who serve. Its website says, “The purpose of MGCA is to encourage and deliver meaningful guidance, counseling, and educational programs to all members of the Armed Services, their family members, and civilian employees of Local, State and Federal Governmental Agencies. … Develop and promote the highest standards of professional conduct among counselors and educators working with Armed Services personnel and veterans. Establish, promote, and maintain improved communication with the nonmilitary community; and conduct and foster programs to enhance individual human development and increase recognition of humanistic values and goals within State and Federal Agencies.” MGCA publishes the peer-reviewed Journal of Military and Government Counseling. The journal publishes articles on all aspects of practice, theory, research and professionalism related to counseling and education in military and government settings.

Military Kids Connect: Military Kids Connect is an online community for military children (ages 6-17) that provides access to age-appropriate resources to support children dealing with the unique psychological challenges of military life.

Military OneSource: Military OneSource offers a range of individualized consultations, coaching and counseling services for many aspects of military life. Services include confidential nonmedical counseling, spouse education and career opportunities, document translation, financial and tax consultation, special needs, spouse relocation and transition, and education.

U.S. Department of Defense Education Activity school liaison officers: The purpose of this position is to serve as the primary point of contact for school-related matters; represent, inform and assist commands; assist military families with school issues (to include providing parents with the tools they need to overcome obstacles to education that stem from the military lifestyle); coordinate with local school systems; and forge partnerships between the military and schools.

Many of the resources available to military service members and their dependents (spouse and children) are free of charge. Noting this may be the difference in whether military families seek these resources out.

 

Summary

I hope this article has provided some insights regarding the needs of military children and their families. In order to provide effective school and community resources for this population, it is important to be aware that these children are not located only on military installations; they are also on public school campuses and in civilian communities. To safeguard the well-being of these children and their families, it is also imperative to understand the uniqueness of military culture.

Currently, there is a gap in services for military families living in the civilian realm. The purpose of this article is to build confidence among civilian school counselors and community counselors by suggesting realistic resources that will help them to better support this population. You never know if a dandelion will blow into your community and need assistance to bloom.

 

****

Nicole M. Arcuri Sanders is a licensed professional counselor and core faculty at Capella University within the School of Counseling and Human Services. Clinically, she engages in practice with the military-connected population. Within this specific area of focus, she has also completed research, published, and presented at local, regional and national conferences to advocate for effective clinical services to meet this population’s needs. She has previously worked as a DoDEA district military liaison counselor, substance awareness counselor, school counselor, psychiatric assessment counselor, anti-bullying specialist and teacher. Contact her at Nicole.ArcuriSanders@capella.edu.

 

*****

 

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.

 

One school counselor per 455 students: Nationwide average improves

By Bethany Bray May 10, 2019

Although America’s average student-to-school counselor ratio is improving, it is still higher than what is recommended by the American School Counselor Association (ASCA) and some states lag far behind the national mean.

Across the U.S., there is an average of one school counselor for every 455 public K-12 students. This is an improvement over last year’s average of 464-to-1 and the narrowest margin the ratio has been in three decades, according to ASCA.

However, the nationwide average remains far above ASCA’s recommended ratio of 250 students per school counselor. Individual state ratios also vary widely, ranging from 202-to-1 in Vermont to 905-to-1 in Arizona.

“Given the prevalence of school shootings, increasingly intensified natural disasters and rising suicide rates among youth, there has never been a more critical time to ensure that students have access to school counselors,” says American Counseling Association President Simone Lambert. “Our children deserve the opportunity to reach their academic potential to prepare for future careers, while attending to mental health concerns. School counselors play a vital role in supporting students who have mental health concerns, which challenge students’ daily life functioning and school success.”

ASCA compiles a report each year on student-to-school counselor ratios based on data from the federal government. The Virginia-based nonprofit’s latest report, released this week, included data from the 2016-2017 school year, which is the most recent information available.

 

According to the report:

  • States and territories with the lowest student-to-school counselor ratios include Vermont (202-to-1), U.S. Virgin Islands (213-to-1), New Hampshire (220-to-1), Hawaii (286-to-1), North Dakota (304-to-1), Montana (308-to-1), Maine (321-to-1) and Tennessee (335-to-1).

 

  • States and territories with the highest student-to-school counselor ratios include Arizona (905-to-1), Michigan (741-to-1), Illinois (686-to-1), California (663-to-1), Minnesota (659-to-1), Utah (648-to-1), Puerto Rico (571-to-1), Idaho (538-to-1), the District of Columbia (511-to-1), Washington (499-to-1), Oregon (498-to-1) and Indiana (497-to-1).

 

  • Alabama was the most improved state, adding 269 new school counselors and decreasing the student-to-school-counselor ratio 15% (to 417-to-1).

 

  • Wyoming lost more than 100 school counselors (76 secondary-level counselors and nearly 70 at the elementary level). As a result, the state’s student-to-school counselor ratio increased 52% from ASCA’s last report, from 225-to-1 to 343-to-1.

 

****

 

Access the full report with a state-by-state breakdown on the ASCA website: schoolcounselor.org

 

 

The American Counseling Association’s School Counselor Connection page: counseling.org/knowledge-center/school-counselor-connection

 

From the Counseling Today archives in 2017: “U.S. student-to-school counselor ratio shows slight improvement

 

Statistics on mental health and American youth:

 

 

Bethany Bray is a senior writer for Counseling Today. Contact her at bbray@counseling.org

 

Follow Counseling Today on Twitter @ACA_CTonline and on Facebook at facebook.com/CounselingToday.

 

****

 

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.

Workforce projections show a coming surplus of school counselors, shortage of addictions counselors

By Bethany Bray January 28, 2019

According to the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), there will be a shortage of addiction and mental health counselors and a surplus of school counselors and marriage and family therapists in the decade to come.

These predictions come from HRSA’s workforce projections, released recently for a variety of behavioral health professions, including professional counselors, through the year 2030.

Across the country, demand for addiction counselors is expected to increase by 21 percent through 2030, while the supply of these practitioners is expected to rise just six percent. For mental health counselors (defined as a practitioner “who work[s] with individuals and groups to deal with anxiety, depression, grief, stress, suicidal impulses and other mental and emotional health issues”), HRSA predicts that demand will grow by 18 percent while the supply of practitioners will grow by 13 percent.

In both cases, this would leave a deficit of many thousands of counselors across the United States.

“As indicated by the latest HRSA data, professional counselors who specialize in mental health and addictions are in high demand due to an ongoing, pervasive mental health workforce shortage and increased need, such as with the opioid epidemic,” says American Counseling Association President Simone Lambert. “As a profession, we must continue to advocate for access to mental health care in our schools and communities for clients of all ages and diverse backgrounds. In addition, we need to focus on creative solutions, such as telehealth, to service those in rural areas with limited mental health and addiction counselors. ACA continues to seek solutions toward licensure portability in the hopes that in the not-so-distant future professional counselors will be able to provide services across state lines or seamlessly relocate to assist struggling communities.”

On the flip side of the coin, HRSA reports that America is “producing a relatively large number of school counselors,” with a supply expected to increase by 101 percent through the next 11 years, far exceeding a demand growth of just three percent. Even if public schools across the country were to conform to the American School Counselor Association’s recommendation of one school counselor per 250 students, there would still be a surplus of school counselors in 2030, HRSA reports.

HRSA’s projected surplus of marriage and family therapists is not quite as extreme, with demand growing by 14 percent and workforce supply increasing by 41 percent through 2030.

HRSA released these behavioral health workforce predictions in December 2018.

This fall, the agency also released a state-by-state breakdown of supply and demand estimates for behavioral health jobs, including professional counselors, psychiatrists, social workers and other occupations through 2030.

Lambert, a licensed professional counselor and core counseling faculty member at Capella University, notes that the projected need for substance abuse and mental health counselors is reflected in the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Outlook Handbook. The agency projects that employment of substance abuse, behavioral disorder and mental health counselors will grow 23 percent from 2016 to 2026, “much faster than the average for all occupations.”

 

 

****

 

Find out more:

 

HRSA Behavioral Health Workforce Projections landing page

 

HRSA report: State-level Projections of Supply and Demand Behavioral Health Occupations: 2016-2030

 

U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Outlook Handbook for substance abuse, behavioral disorder and mental health counselors

 

 

 

****

 

 

Follow Counseling Today on Twitter @ACA_CTonline and on Facebook at facebook.com/CounselingToday.

 

****

 

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.