A crisis intervention model for adolescent outreach : analysis & evaluation

Abstract

This study attempts to evaluate in practice a model for crisis intervention which is focused on the means of intervention and not on the crisis itself. The model focuses on solving the problems that the client sees as problematic in his life. The model is divided in two phases, the listening stages and the acting stages. These are further divided into six steps, three steps for each phase. James (2008, p. xx) states that since people do not often like to seek help about their problems or leave it to a point where the presenting problem has grown out of control, crisis intervention applies to 'practically all counselling and psychotherapy.' Considering that the nature of the study was to evaluate a model of practice, a single case analysis as an Action Research was implemented. In addition an Action Research was chosen so that at the end of the research there would be a social change in the agenda of the client's life. One particular adolescent service user from the Adolescent Outreach Service was chosen so that the social worker would implement the model. A qualitative approach was used in this research. Semi-structured interviews were held with the social worker before, during and after the model was implemented. The initial phase was the observation period which happened over two weeks. The second phase was the intervention period which lasted three weeks. Apart from being present as an observer during the implementation of the model, the researcher held sessions with the social worker after each session of intervention. This was important so as to evaluate the previous session and discuss the way forward for the next phase of the model. The general findings showed that in the period where the model was implemented, the client's affective, cognitive and behavioural coping had improved after intervention. Furthermore, the worker found the model easy to use, focused, measurable and consistent. By the positive effects of this model which was implemented over such a short period of time, it seems likely that with more dedication to the six-step Gilliland (1982) Crisis Intervention model, workers will have found the tool which will give them more precise and more reliable results in their work with future clients.