Trauma‐Informed Care for Individuals with Serious Mental Illness: An Avenue for Community Psychology's Involvement in Community Mental Health

Individuals with serious mental illness are at particularly high risk for trauma; however, service environments with which they interact may not always be trauma‐informed. While community mental health and other human services settings are moving toward trauma‐informed care (TIC) service delivery, a variety of TIC frameworks exist without consensus regarding operationalization, thereby leading to challenges in implementation. TIC is principle‐driven and presents substantial overlap with community psychology values and competencies, including ecological frameworks, second‐order change, empowerment, and citizen participation. One way to address barriers to TIC implementation is to draw on the strengths of the field of community psychology. With a particular emphasis on the applicability of TIC to individuals with serious mental illness, this paper identifies key implementation issues and recommends future directions for community psychologists in clarifying the service framework, its adaptation to specific service contexts, and improving delivery through consultation and evaluation. Community psychologists may work with various disciplines involved in the TIC field to together promote a more conscious, actionable shift in service delivery.     

Population Health and Trauma‐Informed Practice: Implications for Programs,Systems, and Policies

Population studies indicate that trauma exposure is ubiquitous and has a significant impact on health. Trauma‐informed practice seeks to address the health consequences of trauma through integrative responses that incorporate an understanding of the effects of trauma, the multiple pathways to recovery, and the potential for re‐traumatization. Current trauma‐informed practice considers trauma exposure an individual clinical problem rather than a societal problem with population health consequences. Population health refers to the aggregated health status of individuals who share some characteristic, such as trauma exposure, and includes the study of determinants that shape the distribution of health outcomes in specific populations. In this paper, we describe a population health perspective for trauma‐informed practice that complements the current clinical perspective, and then discuss implications of that perspective for programs, systems, and policies. We summarize essential concepts about trauma over the life course and describe principles of population health science relevant to trauma‐informed practice. We then discuss implications of these principles by identifying four priorities for trauma‐informed practice from a population health perspective: (a) adopting trauma‐informed policies to prevent trauma exposure and to foster resilience in the aftermath of trauma; (b) infusing trauma‐informed practice into everyday activities so it is a routine part of interpersonal transactions; (c) incorporating trauma‐informed practices into existing service systems; and (d) adapting existing treatments to incorporate trauma‐informed principles for population health impact.     

Trauma‐Informed Programs Based in Schools: Linking Concepts to Practices and Assessing the Evidence

When children experience stress and adversity in their homes and communities, schools become a critically important setting in which to intervene and foster their resilience. Changing practices within schools so that vulnerable and traumatized children are better understood and more compassionately served is a goal shared by many school professionals, yet schools remain poorly equipped to address the needs of these children. Any number of school‐based programs have the potential to benefit children with an elevated risk for academic difficulties and mental health disorders, although questions remain as to which programs are most promising, effective, and sustainable. Questions also remain about which programs best serve diverse populations and which have potential to reach the largest number of children, including those who do not outwardly manifest behaviors consistent with an underlying disorder but nonetheless require support. In this review, we take stock of existing programs used in schools to address the social, emotional, and academic needs of children with trauma histories. We summarize components of a various trauma‐focused programs, categorized as: (a) individual and group‐based approaches, (b) classroom‐based approaches, and (c) school‐wide approaches. For each category, we review and comment on the state and quality of research findings and provide illustrative examples from the literature to show how programs address trauma in the school context. Findings of the review suggest that empirical evidence currently favors individual and group‐based approaches, although classroom‐based and school‐wide programs may be better positioned for integration, access to services, and sustainability. Implications and recommendations center on future research, practice, and policy.     

Applied and Translational Research on Trauma‐Responsive Programs and Policy: Introduction to a Special Issue of the American Journal of Community Psychology

The special issue highlights work across systems that include child welfare, education, juvenile justice and health, as well as agencies serving adults who are at‐risk for high levels of childhood and adult trauma exposure. While articles appearing in the special issue are not divided equally across these systems, they cover important and overlapping concepts within each. Some articles span more than a single system or domain of research, whereas others fit primarily within single area or domain. Articles provide new insights from research on practices, programs, and policies that help to transform systems so they are increasingly more responsive to the needs of vulnerable populations.     

A Community's Response to Adverse Childhood Experiences: Building a Resilient,Trauma‐Informed Community

Adverse childhood experiences, or ACEs, may be mitigated by trauma‐informed social environments—programs, services, systems, communities—that offer responses to trauma that promote healing, recovery, and resilience. However, there is currently little empirical evidence to support the use of specific approaches to do so. Guided by a population health perspective, this paper describes a participatory community change process in response to ACEs that seeks to build a resilient, trauma‐informed community in Pottstown, PA. We examine the initial implementation phase of this change process, centered originally on the education sector and the social and behavioral health services sector, and then eventually expanding to 14 community sectors across two years. A variety of data sources and methods are used to track individual and organizational processes, as well as service system network processes. A central feature of this research is the use of data to generate hypotheses rather than test them. Data were also used to guide understanding and decision‐making during implementation. The results show that moving forward the community is well‐positioned to establish stronger inter‐agency and system supports for trauma‐informed practice in the service system and in the broader community. We discuss results for their implications for building resilient, trauma‐informed communities.     

The Integration of Family and Group Therapy as an Alternative to Juvenile Incarceration: A Quasi‐Experimental Evaluation Using Parenting with Love and Limits

The current study employed a quasi‐experimental design using both intent‐to‐treat and protocol adherence analysis of 155 moderate‐ to high‐risk juvenile offenders to evaluate the effectiveness of Parenting with Love and Limits® (PLL), an integrative group and family therapy approach. Youth completing PLL had significantly lower rates of recidivism than the comparison group. Parents also reported statistically significant improvements in youth behavior. Lengths of service were also significantly shorter for the treatment sample than the matched comparison group by an average of 4 months. This study contributes to the literature by suggesting that intensive community‐based combined family and group treatment is effective in curbing recidivism among high‐risk juveniles.