Prevalence, Best Practice Use, and Member Engagement on School Mental Health Teams

• Published in: Behavioral sciences Vol. 14; no. 8; p. 716
• Main Authors: Wargel-Fisk, Katelyn, Kerr, Amy M, Hall, Margaret D, Litvitskiy, Nicole S, Flaspohler, Paul D, Meyer, Amanda L
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 01-08-2024; MDPI
• Subjects: Behavior; Best practice; Case studies; Education; Elementary schools; Finance; Interdisciplinary aspects; Learning; Mental health; multi-tiered school mental health program; Participation; Problem solving; program implementation; Psychiatric services; School boards; school mental health; Students; team engagement; Teams; United States > US; team engagement; program implementation; teams; multi-tiered school mental health program; school mental health
• ISSN: 2076-328X; 2076-328X
• DOI: 10.3390/bs14080716

School mental health (SMH) teams have been widely recommended to support multi-tiered mental health program implementation in schools. Available research suggests emerging best practices that promote effective SMH teaming and indicates the importance of having team members who are highly engaged (e.g., actively involved, retained on the team). Despite evidence that these factors improve team functioning, there is limited knowledge of SMH team prevalence, best practice use, and factors impacting member engagement among a diverse sample of elementary schools. This study surveyed a cross-sectional sample of elementary principals (
= 314) across the United States whose schools implement multi-tiered SMH programs. Most principals (89%,
= 280) reported using teams to organize these programs. Schools in urban/suburban communities, with 300 or more students, or with specific school funding for SMH activities were more likely to have SMH teams. Only one-third of principals reported that their team members participated in related training. Other SMH team best practices were commonly reported (by two-thirds or more teams). Results of a linear regression model indicate that larger teams (six or more members) and teams with access to resources had significantly higher member engagement scores. The study's findings provide recommendations for practice and future research directions.