Common Oversights During Crisis Intervention - school emergency administration - Brief Article

School Administrator, Jan, 2001 by Charles M. Jaksec Iii

After a popular student or faculty member is killed in a car accident or some other tragedy strikes a school population, educators may intervene with the best of intentions, but sometimes their poorly executed schoolwide crisis intervention results in behavioral maladjustment with long-lasting ramifications for students.

Poor crisis intervention actually may prevent or delay the school's return to a normal level of functioning.

Many school districts have adopted uniform crisis intervention procedures that are meant to apply to every situation, while other districts grant flexibility to their school building staff to formulate emergency procedures when dealing with incidents resulting in a loss of life due to accident, homicide or suicide.

Typical Mistakes

Unfortunately, administrative oversights sometimes interfere with the proper provision of crisis intervention services. By addressing the following common mistakes (though several may be seen as minor in nature), school leaders can improve the way they and their staff members manage emotionally laden situations.

* Absence of an in-school crisis intervention team.

Many schools have crisis intervention procedures that are "cookbook" in nature and contain nebulous and overly complicated flow charts and instructions. During a crisis, the need for action is immediate so that excessively wordy or bureaucratic procedures are either abandoned in midstream or ignored.

The moment of crisis is not the ideal time to inquire about crisis response procedures. A preassembled school-based crisis team can and should assume the immediate responsibility of primary service provider when the school encounters a crisis.

The team must be readily available to assist students and school personnel when summoned. Preparedness is a key component of any crisis response and the establishment of a ready school-based crisis team is vital to an effective crisis response.

* Lack of logistical planning.

When a crisis occurs, students may seek emotional or psychological support if the events affect a large number of students or faculty. Students at secondary schools may subsequently converge in common areas, including guidance suites, administrative offices or outside patios. Under these chaotic conditions, crisis intervention efforts remain difficult at best.

A practical solution is the pre-establishment of specific counseling areas. Classrooms, libraries, conference rooms and offices can accommodate students or school personnel who have been affected. The pre-established room assignments also should consider space needs for varying size groups--private offices for 1-5 students and conference rooms for 6-12 students. The absence of such logistical planning can interfere greatly with successful crisis intervention efforts.

* Failure to inform the school population in an appropriate or timely manner.

When a school encounters a crisis situation, the administration must communicate the unfortunate and sometimes tragic news to the school population. A critical problem emerges from the failure to communicate this information in an empathetic manner. The school population may perceive the administrators as indifferent and uncaring. Students may become angry and, inevitably, these issues must be addressed in crisis counseling sessions. Consequently, valuable time is spent addressing the anger instead of the grief or other ramifications of the crisis.

Another common communication mistake concerns the timing of the announcement to the school population. The administrator should not feel compelled to withhold public announcements until all details of the crisis are secured. At the same time, whatever limited information is released as quickly as possible must be factual. This is especially important in cases involving a large portion of the school population and with situations that already have gained the attention of the news media. Unnecessary delay in sharing information with the school population can lead to wild speculation and harmful rumors regarding the crisis.

* Permitting students to leave school grounds.

After a crisis has occurred, students at secondary schools will attempt to exit the campus to deal with the event on their own terms. Two common problems often result. First, the students' primary source of support following a crisis is found on campus in the form of trained crisis intervention personnel. Consequently, those who leave are depriving themselves of the necessary psychological support that is not often available outside the scholastic setting.

Second, early exits from the campus could place the emotionally distraught student in an environment where harm can occur. Students place themselves and others at risk when, for example, they consume alcohol or drugs to deal with the crisis or operate a motor vehicle under emotional duress.

* Neglecting preparations and debriefing meetings.

A meeting of crisis intervention providers within a school or district at the outset of a crisis has its advantages when it comes time to deliver services. During the preplanning meeting, roles can be reviewed or defined, the magnitude of the crisis estimated, contingency plans formulated and pertinent crisis-related issues discussed.