Cobb and Love,

Tennessee Schools PREPARE P roviding Support R eaching E ducators P arents/Students A nd R estoring community with E ffective interventions Cobb and Love, 20112

 Twelve school shootings since Sept  March 2005 – Cumberland City, Tennessee- 14 year old shot and killed school bus driver as she was carrying a bus of approximately 24 students  August Maury Middle School in Jefferson County- student is accidentally shot and wounded by a gun brought to school  November Campbell County Comprehensive High School in Jacksboro, Tennessee- a freshman student shot the school principal and two assistant principals- one of the assistant principal’s died as a result 3Cobb and Love, 2011

Support for this project provided in part with funding from the USDOE, Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Program Collaboration for this project occurs between the Vanderbilt Community Mental Health Center and the Tennessee Department of Education Cobb and Love, 20114

 Develop and disseminate information to school districts that will assist all schools in advancing and maturing the response and recovery portion of their emergency management plan  TSP is an ongoing dialogue with all stakeholders, an ecological process enabling Tennessee schools to respond to crises with effective, best practice interventions. Cobb and Love, 20115

 Tennessee schools will be prepared to offer students, staff, educators and parents immediate and effective assistance in the aftermath of a school crisis, with the goal of mitigating long term emotional suffering of survivors  Crisis response plans will be realistic, useful, and accessible at the time of the emergency  Tennessee school personnel will be empowered to train and develop crisis response team. (In house expertise ) Cobb and Love, 20116

An exhaustive review of literature concerning ◦ Consequences of traumatic incidents on children/adolescents and adults ◦ Perception of school personnel’s ability to address incidents effectively ◦ Research and/or best practices utilized in postvention responses in schools A needs assessment evaluated through three focus groups ◦ Tennessee schools that have experienced school shootings ◦ Urban schools in Tennessee ◦ Potential stakeholders in program Cobb and Love, 20117

 Identify and Reach Target Audience  School counselors/School social workers/School psychologists/SRO and administrators  Coordinate with Tennessee Association of Mental Health  Development of Logo  Development of Program Overview  Development of Training that outlines research and best practices  Development and Publication of Manuals  Development of Training DVD Cobb and Love, 20118

 Four hour training  District Consultation  All day training/consultation  Abbreviated training to target audience  Telephone Consultation  Facilitate development of postvention plan  Develop scope of postvention response after a traumatic incident  Emergency Assistance  In person  By telephone Cobb and Love, 20119

 Role of executive leadership  State Leadership  Superintendents  Assistant superintendents  School District Personnel  Principals  Crisis Response Team  Principal  School Counselors  Psychologists  Social workers  Other Identified School Faculty and Staff ( School nurse, teachers, security guard, secretary, bus drivers, cafeteria staff, janitorial staff)  Collaboration with Community Resources Cobb and Love,

 Leadership before a crisis  What is in a Postvention crisis plan?  Best Practice ideas in the Postvention plan  Restoring Community – first day back to school  Skills for Postvention Team Members ◦ Group skills ◦ Cultural competence ◦ Identifying children in need of referral  Building Resilience ◦ Individual counseling skills for traumatized children 11Cobb and Love, 2011

These are all “professionals” volunteering to help your students. Who do you trust? 12Cobb and Love, 2011

 Identify licensed professionals in the community that you may allow into the school post emergency  Have the postvention team establish a relationship with these community professionals  If the professionals are trained in mental health postvention, and willing to work with your team, try to meet annually together. 13Cobb and Love, 2011

 A “live” contact list must be kept bedside and in their car at all times! ◦ Complete after hours telephone chain including numbers of district personnel and community support agencies. 14Cobb and Love, 2011

 Approximately 4 years into project  Trained approximately 3000 educators  A mental health representative attended each original regional trainings  Identified train the trainers across the state  Aligned to requirements of SAVE-ACT Cobb and Love,

 Primary Aim – Determine impact of training on postvention plan and team development  Secondary Aim - Evaluate association between leadership and plan development 16Cobb and Love, 2011

 September 2009, TN Director of School Counseling solicited participants through list serve  January 2010, additional school counselors were solicited at Tennessee School Counselor Institute 17Cobb and Love, 2011

 Received 405 survey responses  Estimates of potential respondents range from 626 to 999  Thus, estimated response rate is 41-65%  Majority of respondents (53%) identified themselves as being from rural area 18Cobb and Love, 2011

 Training Attendance ◦ Did not attend training – 62.2%  School Crisis ◦ Student Deaths – 46.2% ◦ Medical Emergencies – 33.6% ◦ Teacher Deaths – 19.6% ◦ Suicides – 12.2% 19Cobb and Love, 2011

Respondent Location * Variable #(%)UrbanRuralSuburbanp (n = 73)(n = 216)(n = 114) School shooting8 (80)2 (20)0 (0)<.005 Violent crime6 (75)2 (25)0 (0)<.005 * Proportions were calculated on the number of respondents to each question and therefore frequencies for individual questions may not add up to the total number of respondents 20Cobb and Love, 2011

Postvention Teams * TeamIn processNo teamp (n = 150)(n = 74)(n = 151) School, # (%) <.001 Attended training74 (48.7)48 (31.6)30 (19.7) No training76 (34.1)103 (46.2)44 (19.7) District, #(%)<.10 Attended training70 (50)41 (29.3)29 (20.7) No training81 (37.2)84 (38.5)53 (24.3) * Proportions were calculated on the number of respondents to each question and therefore frequencies for individual questions may not add up to the total number of respondents 21Cobb and Love, 2011

Respondent Location * VariableUrbanRuralSuburbanp Reasons for not attending training, # (%) Did not receive information 21(56.8)82(71.3)30(50.8)<.025 Too busy to attend 8(25.8)36(37.9)32(57.1)<.001 Not Released by principal1(3.4)7(7.8)5(10)n. s. * Proportions were calculated on the number of respondents to each question and therefore frequencies for individual questions may not add up to the total number of respondents 22Cobb and Love, 2011

VariablePlan developed In processNot developedp ( n = 266)( n = 72)( n = 20) Leadership support, # (%) <.005 Low69 (60)13 (11.3)33 (28.7) Middle97 (80.8)5 (4.2)18 (15.0) High100 (81.3)2 (1.6)21 (17.1) 23Cobb and Love, 2011

 High quality of training (Over 93%)  Crisis plans completed or in process ◦ Rural Locations- 94% ◦ Suburban Locations – 93% ◦ Urban locations- 89%  Postvention plans not developed in rural schools due to lack of knowledge were found to be significantly related (highest number of non attendees to training ) 24Cobb and Love, 2011

 Website Development ◦  Train in districts where teams attend along with administration  Target Rural areas  Target Administrators 25Cobb and Love, 2011

26

Cobb and Love,

 Individual district training is available if district leadership assembles a full, appropriate team including district leadership, school leadership, counselors, teachers, etc.  Three regional trainings in 2012 Cobb and Love,

Contact Information: Nicole Cobb, Ed.D. Rene Love DNP, APRN-BC Cobb and Love,