The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
LettersFull Access

Improving Mental Health Referrals Between Schools and Community Agencies

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.52.1.112

To the Editor: A national movement to develop expanded school mental health programs is under way. These programs augment services provided by school-hired mental health professionals and offer a comprehensive range of services to youths in special and regular education (1). Typically the programs involve close collaboration between community agencies and schools. Advantages include increased access both to and for youth and the provision of care in a natural setting (2). Preliminary findings from program evaluations have been positive (3,4). These factors, combined with a growing disenchantment with more passive service delivery approaches, have led to progressive growth of expanded school mental health programs (5).

When a student's needs cannot be served in the school-based program, the student must be referred out. Anecdotal reports highlight problems in the referral process. We attempted to better understand referral processes occurring in a school mental health program in Baltimore.

In 1996 and 1997, 12 school-based clinicians tracked all referrals they made to outside agencies. The 12 clinicians represented all those working in middle or high schools. Ninety-eight referrals were made to 33 different agencies in the city, including specialized clinics, outpatient mental health centers, hospital-based programs, and inpatient centers. The clinician making the referral rated the outcome on a 7-point Likert scale, with 1 indicating poor and 7 indicating excellent (98 ratings). When possible, the youths also rated the outcome (73 ratings) as did the parents (79 ratings).

The ratings of clinicians, youths, and parents were highly correlated (p<.001). The overall mean±SD rating was 4.7±2.08. About half of all ratings were either 6 or 7. About 30 percent of both the clinicians and the parents were dissatisfied with the outcome of the referral (a rating of 3 or less). Students were generally more satisfied with the referrals; only 18 percent gave ratings of 3 or lower.

Clinicians and parents provided reasons for their dissatisfaction with the referral. Most of the clinicians' concerns were related to problems with the services provided, poor follow-through by families, and insurance companies' refusals to cover care. Similarly, parents' low ratings mostly reflected concerns about the way services were provided and insurance-related obstacles.

Given the complexity and severity of stressors affecting inner-city youths and families, the success of referrals between agencies is essential for an effective system of care. Problems in community agencies such as long waits for a first appointment, limited appointment times, and financial barriers are clear impediments to the success of referrals. In addition, school-based programs often fail to approach referrals in the energetic, proactive style that is necessary to ensure that students follow through and connect with community agencies.

In the national movement toward expanded school mental health programs, increasing numbers of programs are offering intensive services such as medication. Obviously, providing more intensive services in schools will obviate many of the referral problems discussed here. However, many schools will not be able to provide intensive services, which points to the need for all stakeholders—youths, families, school staff, community agency staff, and community leaders—to join in an effort to develop a true system of mental health care for youths. In this work it will be important to identify and address barriers to referrals between schools and community agencies. We hope that findings from our pilot study provide some encouragement for this important work.

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by project MCJ-24SH02-01-0 from the Maternal and Child Health Bureau.

The authors are affiliated with the department of psychiatry at the University of Maryland School of Medicine in Baltimore.

References

1. Tashman NA, Waxman RP, Nabors L, et al: The PREPARE approach to training clinicians in school mental health programs. Journal of School Health 68:162-164, 1998Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

2. Weist MD: Expanded school mental health services: a national movement in progress. Advances in Clinical Child Psychology 19:319-352, 1997Google Scholar

3. Evans SW: Mental health services in schools: utilization, effectiveness, and consent. Clinical Psychology Review 19:165-178, 1999Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

4. Weist MD, Paskewitz DA, Warner BS, et al: Treatment outcome of school-based mental health services for urban teenagers. Community Mental Health Journal 32:149-157, 1996Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

5. Flaherty LT, Weist MD: School-based mental health services: the Baltimore models. Psychology in the Schools 36:379-389, 1999CrossrefGoogle Scholar