department of psychology and counseling clinical …...the program evaluation report is located on...

The program evaluation report is located on the CMHC program’s webpage. Stakeholders were emailed

and directed to the webpage to locate this report. July 31, 2020

Department of Psychology and Counseling

Clinical Mental Health Counseling

Program Evaluation Report (2019-2020)



APPENDICES

Structured Group Interview Format Appendix A

Gender & Ethnicity Report Appendix B

Individual Interview Form Appendix C

Student Enrollment, Retention, and Graduation Appendix D

Alumni Survey Appendix E

Site Supervisor Survey Appendix F

Site Supervisor Evaluation of Trainee Appendix G

Clinical Assessment & Mental Status Exam Appendix H

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment Appendix I

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment 601A Appendix J

Helper Skill Competency 601 A Appendix K

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment 601B Appendix L

Helper Skill Competency 601B Appendix M

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment 641 Appendix N

Final Exam 602 Appendix O

2020 Faculty Evaluation of Practicum/Internship Students Appendix P

Informed Consent for Telecounseling Appendix Q

Free Counseling Conference Appendix R



1

The following report is written in accordance with CACREP Standard I.AA. which states that:

“Program faculty members engage in continuous systematic program evaluation indicating how the

mission, objectives, and student learning outcomes are measured and met.”

CACREP Standard I A.A. EVALUATION

1. A review by program faculty of programs, curricular offerings, and characteristics of program

applicants.

Curricular Offerings – Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program

The Clinical Mental Health Counseling (CMHC) program reviews program curriculum three times per

year. Curriculum offerings are rather consistent for fall, spring, and summer; however, each semester the

program director reviews the course offerings and works to ensure each course is offered so students

have the opportunity to complete the program within three years of full-time study. Presently, there have

not been any indications to alter the required program of study. The faculty discuss additional one-credit

offerings to expand student knowledge beyond the core curriculum. The one-credit course in

Understanding Self-Injurious Behavior in Children and Adolescents was reviewed with the adjunct (Dr.

Jane Thompson) teaching this in the fall. Per her feedback, she believes students are entering this course

already prepared and knowledgeable of self-injurious behavior seen in clients and is working with the

Program Director to develop a new one-credit course of Gender Identity. The tentative plan is to offer this

elective course in the spring of 2021. The program continues to offer the well-received one-credit elective

courses entitled Counseling Inner City Youth (Dr. Deneen Miller), and Proactive Grief Counseling

Strategies (Dr. David Martinson). This last course was offered for the first time in the summer of 2019

and has been a highly enrolled course, to include this current summer. Religious and Spiritual Values in

Counseling was a new, on-credit elective course that was offered in the spring 2020 semester and taught

by Dr. David Hunt. At this time, we plan to offer this one-credit course again in the spring of 2021.

Two of the full-time counseling faculty members are seeking certification in different areas and plan to

offer additional one-credit course in these context areas. Dr. Rachel Vannatta is working on a certification

in Perinatal Mental Health, and Dr. Tracy Stinchfield has completed the certification and examination for

telemental health counseling and is now Board Certified in Telemental Health Counseling (BC-TMH).

Dr. Stinchfield is offering a one-credit elective, Introduction to Telemental Health Counseling, this fall.

Characteristics of Program Applicants

Characteristics of program applicants are reviewed each semester. In accordance with CACREP standard

K (Section I), the CMHC faculty held group interviews for all program applicants. The program director

works closely with Graduate Admissions throughout the interview process. The program offers two group

interviews in the fall, spring, and summer semesters. All applicants are evaluated by program faculty.

Faculty use the following protocol for group interview structured activities and as a way to evaluate the

applicants on several areas (Appendix B). The group interview format has been reviewed by program

faculty and we have decided to continue the process as outlined without change as it has been consistently

effective. The Office of Institutional Research created the fall 2019-spring 2020 CMHC Gender and

Ethnicity report (Appendix C).



2

Addendum: The CMHC program faculty held group interviews on February 3, 2020 using the reported

procedures. In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, the university officially finished out the spring

semester using an on-line [synchronous] format. Consequently, the previously scheduled group interviews

for April were distributed among the CMHC faculty for individual interviews using either Zoom or

Google Meet. The individual interviews followed the same procedure and questions that were initially

used when the program was first accredited (Appendix C). The program faculty are currently

implementing this procedure over the summer, on a rotating basis, to interview all interested applicants

for fall and spring semester start dates. We will continue with this procedure while the university is closed

to in-person meetings, and interviews.

CMHC Enrollment and Graduation

The CMHC program received 66 applications for the 2019-2020 academic year. The program enrolled

15 (fall 2019) and 9 (spring 2020) new students. Of those enrolled, a total of 24 new students were new

in the program from fall of 2019 through spring of 2020, with an additional 2 new students in the summer

of 2020. There were 129 total students enrolled in the CMHC program in the fall of 2019, and 127 for

spring 2020. During this same time period, a total of 12 students graduated in the fall of 2019; 20 students

graduated in the spring of 2020; and summer applications for graduation are currently being accepted in

the Graduate Office. Student Enrollment, Retention, and Graduation (Appendix D) rates were reported

by The Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness and are presented in the attached table. In

reviewing the past four academic years, new applications have risen, while enrollment declined. The

sharp drop in enrollment warranted a closer look, and upon researching the decline, what emerged was a

local university offering the master’s degree in Clinical Mental Health Counseling received accreditation

which increases competition for applicants.

fall 20119-spring 2020

fall 2018 -spring 2019



New applications 69 71 47 39

Total enrollment (ave/year) 128 127 149.5 141.5

Graduated 32 24 36 25

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

CMHC Applications through Graduation

New applications Total enrollment (ave/year) Graduated



3

2. Formal follow-up studies of program graduates to assess graduate perceptions and evaluations of

major aspects of the program.

Alumni Survey

An Alumni Survey was sent out to all former CMHC graduates (August 2019; N=13); (Fall 2019;

(N=12); and (Spring 2020; N=20) for a total of 45 alumni on May 29, 2020. Survey recipients were given

until June 26th to complete the survey, with a follow up reminder sent out on June 12th and a final

call/thank you email sent on June 23, 2020. The following report was generated by the Office of

Institutional Research in collaboration with the CMHC program director). The CMHC program director

collaborates with the Office of Institutional Research, which prepares the written report for the survey generated by the CMHC program director. “Thirty-two of 45 program alumni responded in the 2020

survey, equating a response rate of 71.1%. While the 2020 survey response rate is excellent, trend data

should be considered in the context that the numbers of respondents and response rates from some prior

surveys are smaller (n=12 in 2019; n=12 in 2017; n=3 in 2016)” (IRE, 2020, p.1).

A five-point evaluation scale was used to rate elements of the program and student experience (Excellent

-5; Very Good – 4; Good – 3; Fair – 2; and Poor -1). There were five areas to highlight strengths of the

program and two areas to consider improvements. In terms of strengths of the program, alumni reported:

1) continued high satisfaction with their experience in the program (which include professors, course

content, and practicum and internship); 2) high satisfaction with development of counseling skills; 3)

areas of assessment to include helping relationship and professional identity; 4) positive employment

outcomes (84% were currently employed in the counseling field); and 5) alumni relations. Specifics can

be found in the Alumni Survey.

The two areas identified by alumni for improvement opportunities can be found in comments as to how to

improve the program (p. 2) and trends in rating scores. With regard to alumni comments, there weren’t

clearly identified concerns, but areas to consider. For example, alumni mentioned licensure and diversity

and social justice. At the end of this report the reader will find these areas addressed. The program

director is working to create a Zoom meeting for alumni where steps towards licensure will be addressed

as well as specific licensure questions. Note this is in addition to the Steps to Licensure in PA that was

prepared and upload to Moodle a year ago. The program has increased its focus on Social Justice with the

town hall that became the Conversation of Care. Please see details at the end of this report.

Three of the 24 rating scales in the survey decreased from 2018-2019 to 2019-2020: Assessment, Career,

and Research and Program Development. The Assessment course added a new Assessment assignment

that covered Clinical Assessment and Mental Status Exam. It is anticipated that over the next few years, this new assignment will show the curriculum change added to students experience with the course. At

the time of the survey, most students would not have likely taken the course with the new assignment.

The GEN Methods of Research course was required by all CMHC students up until two years ago. Given

that our program now offers the COUN 600 Research and Program Evaluation course in place of the

GEN course, it is also reasonable to assume most students likely took the GEN Methods of Research

Course. The ratings for this area are expected to increase over the next year to reflect the new course and

instructor (whose student evaluations reflect a high level of course satisfaction). The program faculty will

review the final course, Career Development, to see if there is a need to adjust the course.



4

The program faculty will meet to review the survey results and address any areas as needed.

3. Formal studies of site supervisors and program graduate employers that assess their perceptions

and evaluations of major aspects of the program.

Site Supervisor Survey

Dr. David Martinson, Field Site Coordinator, sent an email to all site supervisors of Immaculata’s CMHC

practicum and internship students on June 1, 2020 requesting their feedback regarding our training

preparation of the current practicum and internship students. Supervisors were given a two-week window

to respond the survey by June 15, 2020. A second email was generated on June 9, 2020, reminding site

supervisors to take this opportunity to formally share their feedback with the program regarding the

preparedness of students in our program. All 42 site supervisors were emailed the survey link, with a total

of 17 completed surveys for a response rate of 40.5%. Cecilia Oswald, Director of Institutional

Research, collected all survey responses and generated the final survey report (Appendix F). “For those

questions that request a rating, a 5-point evaluation scale was used (Extremely Well Prepared – 5; Well

Prepared– 4; Adequately Prepared – 3; Poorly Prepared – 2; and Unprepared – 1). N/A responses were

not included in mean calculations. Ratings statements are written such that a high score is the desired

result” (IRE, 2020, p.2).

Although the final report is included in this Annual Report, there were several areas to highlight. Site

supervisors rated our practicum and internship students as “well-prepared, [with] strong clinical skills,

and thoughtfulness.” Of the knowledge areas (core CACREP courses) listed, site supervisors rated

students strongest in knowledge/application of counseling skills (4.12), human growth and development

(4.06). It is significant to note that ratings on student knowledge/application of Human Growth and

Development, and Research Methods and Evaluation were up from the previous years’ scores. Longitudinally, this level of satisfaction is consistent. Finally, site supervisors also rated students high on

their receptivity (4.31), ethics (4.06), and ability to cope (supervisors’ perception of student’s depth,

attitudes, ability to handle difficulty decisions, higher order thinking, confidence, and initiative) (4.19).

Site supervisors rated practicum and internship students lower of knowledge/application of Career (3.73)

and Assessment (3.76; down from 4 last year). Two comments for this section indicated career was not a

primary focus for the site, which might be reflective of the lower rating. A final lower rating was received

for the knowledge and application of assessment data (3.76), which in 2019 was rated 4.0 by supervisors.

The Office of Institutional Research reported stated, “Since supervisors rated the other 15 students as

“adequately prepared” to “well-prepared”, it is assumed that this rating dip (-.24) is due to the impact of

two students on a small sample size. The overall rating of this category remains satisfactory” (2020, p.2).

Site supervisors were given the opportunity to enter comments at the end of the survey, which 6 of the 14

chose to enter a comment. Comments included: “I am so impressed with the program. I wish my graduate

school had been so thorough!”; “Immaculata practicum students are well-prepared and thoughtful, with

good basic skills and a willingness to learn more advanced skills, along with professional development.”

The Site Supervisor Survey was reviewed in conjunction with the Employer Survey since these surveys

largely go to the same individuals. Many of our internship students are offered employment at their

internship sites, and to have a supervisor complete an end of semester evaluation, Site Supervisor Survey,



5

and then potentially an Employer Survey seemed to be too much to ask of one person/supervisor. As a

result, the program director worked with Cecilia Oswald, Director of Institutional Research, adding a

question to the Site Supervisor Evaluation of Trainee to address employer feedback.

Employer Survey (now collected via Site Supervisor Evaluation)

The 2018-2019 Annual Report stated the hurdles we have experienced obtaining employer feedback on

our graduates. In our last report, the Program Director collaborated with the Office of Institutional

Research and Effectiveness [IRE] to determine action steps to identifying employers once students

graduate. The IRE generated a short survey/questionnaire that was sent out to all students enrolled in

COUN 693. Students will receive this email two weeks before the end of their last semester and will be

reminded to complete the survey/questionnaire while in Internship. The survey/questionnaire will ask

students to provide employment information (i.e., where they are employed as well as their direct

supervisor name and contact information) and will be reassured that the results of the Employer Survey

will remain confidential and will not be identifying any particular student. We planned to initiate this

process during the summer 2019 semester; however, we only received a small number of student replies,

and most significantly, realized we were asking the former site supervisors to complete an Employer

Survey for the same student/former student. In an effort to not overextend our ask of site supervisors, the

program director and IRE worked to adjust the Site Supervisor Evaluation to include information relevant

to employment of graduating students (COUN 693 Internship II students). Data collected from the spring

2020 Alumni Survey indicate the following employment status of our graduates: 83.0% (N=26) indicated

they are currently employed in the counseling field; 9.7% (N=3) stated they were not currently seeking

employment; 3.2%(N=1) indicated employment outside the counseling field, and 3.2% (N=1) preferred

not to answer. Of the three students who were not currently seeking employment, one was looking for a

position and two were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

4. Assessment of student learning and performance on professional identity, professional practice,

and program area standards.

Professional Identity Standards (Section II):

Section B:

Characteristics of Applicants:

Comprehensive Examination

Twelve students registered for the fall 2019 Comprehensive Examination. Of these 12 students, 11

students passed the examination, which yields a 91.6% Pass rate. In the spring of 2020, 20 students

registered for the Comprehensive Examination and all 20 students passed the examination, which yielded

a 100% pass rate. The combined Pass rate for the Comprehensive Examination for the 2019-2020

academic year is 95.8%, which is up from last year’s combined pass rate of 93.5%. Of the fall 2019

registrants, one student failed to complete a section of the examination and was ‘counted’ as a fail. This

student registered for and passed spring 2020 comps. Last year, the program director created a ‘Comps

Tips’ for all registered students taking comps. The intention was to identify common errors [i.e., make

sure the treatment plan is theory-specific] to reduce loss of potential points. The graduate office

coordinates the collection of comprehensive examinations prior to faculty grading the exams. This year,



6

the program director had the Associate Dean send out the ‘Comps Tips’ to all registered comp students

for summer of 2020.

National Counselor Examination

A second evaluation format, the National Counselor Examination (NCE), was used as an outcome

measure of student knowledge. On October of 2019, 13 students from Immaculata University took the

NCE, and 12 passed. Twelve of 13 students passed the NCE with a pass rate of 92.30%, which is

significantly higher than the unusually low pass rate in the fall 2018 of 67%.

Addendum: Students were not able to sit for the NCE this past April due to the closing of testing sites in

response to COVID-19. Students are working directly with NBCC to reschedule their testing dates.

During internship this summer, two students reported taking and passing the NCE. A formal report from

NBCC will provide the larger pass rate once students are able to take the examination.

*October 2019 results:

Items

Program

Results - Mean

Program –

Stand. Dev.

National

Mean

National

Stand. Dev.

Human Growth &

Development

13 6.62 1.89 7.36 1.53

Social & Cultural Diversity 4 2.85 .55 2.57 .92

Helping Relationships 56 8.00 2.48 8.88 2.09

Group Work 25 10.54 2.37 11.99 2.22

Career Development 18 36.69 5.96 39.00 7.32

Assessment 27 16.38 2.81 17.31 3.05

Research & Program

Evaluation

7 13.38 3.88 16.24 4.46

Professional Orientation &

Ethical Practice

10 4.69

.85 5.08 1.26

Score 160 99.15 15.44 108.43 18.01

Items

Program

Results -

Mean

Program –

Stand. Dev.

National

Mean

National

Stand. Dev.

Professional Practice and

Ethics

19 8.85 2.38 11.46 3.26

Intake, Assessment, and

Diagnosis

19 11.77 2.92 12.19 3.07

Areas of Clinical Focus 47 30.46 4.74 32.80 5.25

Treatment Planning 15 10.69 1.70 11.05 2.13

Counseling Skills and

Interventions

48 29.92 5.81 32.88 6.16

Core Counseling Attributes 12 7.46 1.66 8.05 1.90

Score 160 99.15 15.44 108.43 18.01

Course Assignment Data



7

The CMHC program operates from a course mapping matrix (Appendix G) which clearly identifies the

CACREP standards and how each standard is being met. The program identified key signature

assignments to assess student learning over the course of the program as outlined in the Annual Review

Procedures (Appendix H). Each signature item to assess student learning is paired with a method for

evaluation or review as indicated.

Upon program completion, successful students will demonstrate professional knowledge, skills, and

practices necessary to address a wide variety of circumstances within the clinical mental health

counseling community. Specific knowledge outcome areas focus on the core CACREP standards.

Overall, the CMHC program faculty operate under a three-year review cycle to assess student learning

outcomes. During this current review period, the following data were used to evaluate specific knowledge

outcomes:

COUN 641 Client Assessment

Project (spring, 2020)

COUN 602 Final Examination;

COUN 601 Tape 1 & 2 (fall,

2021)*

Characteristics of Applicants

(spring, 2020)

Assignment Rubric

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment form (PPR)

Assignment Rubric-Final Exam

Helper Competency Scale

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment form (PPR)

spring 2020 COUN 601 SDSA collapsed data

CMHC Interview Checklist

*We made a modification to the COUN 601 tape data collection. The class was moved online and it was

important to see how this impacted skill development.

COUN 641: The Client Assessment Project title was changed (see 2018-2019 report) to the Clinical

Assessment and Mental Status Exam (CAMSE assignment). Students enrolled in the spring 2020 COUN

641 course all passed the assignment. The CAMSE rubric reports, 17 of 17 students scored 80% or higher

on the Report writing; 10 out of 17 earned a passing grade on the Recording, while 7 of 17 were

‘excused’ from the recording component due to COVID-19 related challenges; and 17 of 17 earned 95%

or higher on the Reflection component.

COUN 602: The COUN 602 Theories of Counseling final exam is part of the on-going student evaluation

in addition to the SDSA. All 15 students scored an average of 95.8% on the multiple-choice examination,

which demonstrates a high level of theory knowledge. The same students were also evaluated by the

course instructor using the SDSA form (COUN 602 SDSA). All 15 students received scores of 3’s or 4’s,

which indicates there all students’ development and performance are academically, professionally, and

personally competent.

COUN 601: Tape Evaluation

Section A: Students are evaluated on skills throughout the semester and graded on two tapes of skill

demonstration. The final tape evaluation [Helper Skill Competency] for section A indicated that all but

one student demonstrated skill competency. The one student that did not demonstrate competency will

retake the course.

Section B: Students are evaluated on skills throughout the semester and graded on two tapes of skill demonstration. The final tape evaluation [Helper Skill Competency] for section B indicated that all but



8

one student demonstrated skill competency. The one student that did not demonstrate competency will

retake the course.

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment

Students in both COUN 601 and COUN 641 were further evaluated using the Systematic Developmental

Student Assessment (Appendix I) as a method to evaluate students throughout the program (CACREP

Standard Section 1.P.). This form allows for documentation of student concern by faculty and provides

the first step to discussing concerns with students. If a concern continues to exist, or if a faculty member

is concerned about the student, the faculty member is to meet with the student to discuss the concern. If

the concern persists, it is brought to the CMHC program meeting and discussed. If necessary, the

department chair is notified, and a remediation plan is generated. Once a remediation process is approved,

a faculty member is identified as the faculty on record for student remediation.

COUN 601 Section A: During this reporting period for these students assessed, three students (in COUN

601 A) were identified as of concern and two were given remediation plans [see below]. Students are

evaluated by the course instructor using a Likert scale: 4-1, where 4 indicates the student is consistently

exceling in qualities measured; 3 indicates student demonstrates qualities listed; no evidence of major

problem or concern; 2 student inconsistently demonstrates qualities; student is in need of growth and

development, but is open and receptive to feedback and demonstrating progress; and 1 indicates student

does not demonstrate qualities; student is not receptive to feedback, or after receiving it, is not making

efforts to progress; performance is unsatisfactory and in need of remediation. Of the 9 students enrolled in

601 A, 6 students received scores of 3 or higher; however, 3 students received one or more scores of 2,

which warrants further action. Two of the 3 students will work with S. Jeannine O’Kane in the fall of

2020 on remedial skill work and development. The remaining student did not pass the course and will be

required to retake COUN 601. [SDSA 601 section A]

COUN 601 Section B: In section (B), there were 9 students who were evaluated as part of our on-going

student evaluation while in the program using the Systemic Developmental Student Assessment form

[SDSA sp20 B]. Eight of the 9 students received scores of 3 or 4 on the SDSA, which of the 9 students,

one student received a score of 2 on five items and was marked as in need of remediation. Eight of the 9

students did pass the course and one student, who receive the five scores of 2, did not pass the course and

is required to retake it.

Students are evaluated on skills throughout the semester and graded on two tapes of skill demonstration.

The final tape evaluation [Helper Skill Competency] for section B indicated that all but one student

demonstrated skill competency. The one student that did not demonstrate competency will retake the

course.

COUN 641 [SDSA 641] All students in COUN 641 were evaluated as part of our on-going student

evaluation while in the program using the Systemic Developmental Student Assessment form. All 17

students received ratings of 3 or 4, where 3 equates to “Student demonstrates qualities listed; no evidence

of major problem or concern, and 4 equates to “Student excels in demonstrating qualities listed; is

confident and competent”. None of the students were rated as in need of remediation and therefore no

further action was taken.



9

The SDSA form is further used if a faculty or instructor has a concern about a student that is not a current

student in the class identified as formally being assessed. At this time of evaluation, no additional student

was identified as a student of concern.

Professional Practice standards (Section III):

Professional Practice standards are specific to the Practicum and Internship experiences. The Alumni

Survey (Appendix J) asked alumni to comment on their experiences in Practicum and Internship. Alumni

responses indicated overall high satisfaction (rating 4.41 out of 5) with their practicum and internship

experiences. After graduation, 84% of alumni report being employed in the counseling field.

Site supervisors and program faculty complete an end of semester evaluation of all practicum and

internship students. The program has developed a method for compiling collected faculty and site

supervisor feedback into a spreadsheet. The document allows faculty to further assess student

competencies connected to Professional Practice. Specific standards are outlined in the course syllabi and

in the course mapping matrix. An example of the faculty evaluation spreadsheet is embedded into this

document. The spring 2020 Faculty Evaluation is attached and includes both practicum and internship

sections. All scores were higher for internship, which demonstrates increased skill development and

demonstration.

Addendum: Students registered for spring 2020 Practicum and Internship were significantly impacted by

the COVID-19 outbreak. The weekly group supervision courses were all moved to an on-line format for

synchronous meetings using Zoom or Google Meet. Practicum and Internship continued on the same

day/time for the remainder of the semester, though meeting remotely instead of face-to-face. These same

on-line platforms were also used for individual supervision as well as additional weekly meetings to

support students whose sites were closing, or not allowing practicum students back on site. The program

made several adjustments to this semester to support students:

1. The Program Director created an excel spreadsheet with all practicum and internship student

information to track direct and indirect hours, availability to engage in telemental health,

assignment completion, and whether the student needed a plan to complete required hours. All

program faculty, to include adjuncts teaching either practicum or internship, had access to this

document and updated the document weekly.

2. The Field Site Coordinator was in contact with all practicum and internship students, as well as

site supervisors to communicate university policies specific to allowing students to physically be

present at sites.

3. The Field Site Coordinator worked with two students to offer a support group for IU

undergraduates in collaboration with the Bruder Center and the Director of Counseling Services,

Jessica Gilpert.

4. The Field Site Coordinator and Program Director held two Zoom meetings for all CMHC

students to discuss practicum, internship, and the summer on-line format.

5. The program faculty required all summer 2020 practicum students to view a Telecounseling

Information Video, respond to questions following the video, and submit responses to the Field

Site Coordinator prior to the start of practicum.

6. The Field Site Coordinator uploaded additional resources (i.e., informed consent for

telecounseling; free telecounseling conference) onto the Moodle folder for all Practicum and

Internship students.

7. The Program Director enrolled in a Telehealth Certification Institute to become more competent

in telehealth procedures, ethical and legal issues, as well as emergency management procedures.



10

She has completed the certification, attended a three-day telehealth virtual conference, and has

submitted final paperwork to NBCC to become Board Certified in Telehealth. She will be

offering a one-credit course in the fall of 2020 entitled Introduction to Telemental Health

Counseling.

Program Area standards:

The final section of the program addresses the content knowledge relevant for Clinical Mental Health

Counseling students. All three categories of Knowledge, Counseling Prevention and Intervention, and

Diversity and Advocacy, in the program continue to prepare students to become CMHC professionals in

the areas of knowledge, skills, and practice. Specific foundational knowledge remains consistent with the

2009 Self-study report submitted and approved by CACREP.

5. Evidence of the use of findings to inform program modifications.

Each year the program is reviewed, modifications are made if warranted, and finally publicized in the

program’s Annual Report. Alumni rated moderate to high satisfaction with the program on all ten areas

assessed, notably high satisfaction with instruction by program professors, practicum and internship

experiences, and appropriateness of course content. Per the Alumni Survey report generated by IRE, it is

noted that half of the ratings improved beyond the reported 2019 ratings (IRE, 2020). Alumni continue to

indicate the level of “enthusiasm and knowledge of faculty and the small class size and supportive

atmosphere as best aspects of the program” (IRE, 2020, p. 1). Within this level of satisfaction for the

course content and instruction by program faculty, we will not be making any course-level modifications.

It should be noted that COUN 641 added an assignment last year following the Alumni Survey feedback

specific to students desiring additional intake practice/knowledge. The Clinical Assessment and Mental

Status Exam was added to the course and focused on intake and mental status examination.

Although the current report has documented how changes to the program have unfolded over the past

year, the program faculty will continue the annual review process. More specifically, the Alumni and Site

Supervisor Surveys will be reviewed by faculty and action items will be identified and acted upon when

necessary.

One area that has received several alumni comments over the past three years of surveying has been

advisement. The program faculty have reviewed this feedback on two separate occasions and believe we

have set up a process that allows the student to be successful, and at the same time, requires student

engagement and responsibility. It is important to note that the ratings on the Alumni Survey have

increased since the survey began in 2016. In response to “Experience – Advising and availability of

academic advisor, alumni rating advising as follows:

Advising –

availability of

faculty advisor

2020

Mean = 4.09

2019

Mean = 4.00

2018

Mean = 3.74

2017

Mean = 4.0

2016

Mean = 3.33

At this time, we believe the level of opportunity and availability of academic advising is excellent (as

indicated in the current Alumni Survey).



11

Implementations prior to Alumni Survey:

The program faculty held a town hall where all current CMHC students were invited to come together to

discuss the current violence directed towards Black Americans in the United States. All program faculty

were present and connected with 18 students at this town hall back in May of 2020. From this town hall,

three students have been appointed to Liaisons between faculty and students in the CMHC program. The

program director met with the three Liaisons to discuss our purpose, potential recommendation to create a

chapter for Counselors for Social Justice in our program, and potential activities and events. This is an

unfolding and evolving program effort to address systemic racism in our society.

The second area to be addressed with be state licensure as a Licensed Professional Counselor in the state

of Pennsylvania. In addition to the Steps towards PA Licensure that is available to all current students,

and available on our MA Intern Moodle page, the program is looking to hold a virtual meeting with

graduates to discuss licensure steps and address questions.

6. Distribution of an official report that documents outcomes of the systematic program evaluation,

with descriptions of any program modifications, to students currently in the program, program

faculty, institutional administrators, personnel in cooperating agencies (e.g., employers, site

supervisors), and the public.”

The program evaluation report will be added as a link to the CMHC program, and made public to

institutional administrators, current and potential students, and personnel in field sites affiliated with the

program. Additionally, institutional administrators were emailed a copy of this report on July 30, 2020 in

addition to each CMHC program faculty member.



1

APPENDICES



2

Appendix A

Structured Group Interview Form



3

Immaculata University

Department of Psychology and Counseling

Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program

Master's Admissions Interviews

Instructions for Small Group Co-Leaders

1. Please familiarize yourself with the accompanying materials for use on interview day, April 16, 2018.

2. We meet in the department, where the admissions staff checks in the applicants. Each applicant will

be assigned to a group that will be facilitated by two CMHC faculty. Faculty will collect their group

of applicants and proceed to the assigned room.

3. All the materials you'll need will be made available via email.

4. Here is a schedule for the interviews.

9:00-9:45: Applicants will begin to arrive and will be greeted by Graduate Admissions staff.

9:45-9:50: Faculty identify applicants and proceed to assigned rooms.

10:00 - Structured Group Interview (see attached)

10:30 - Values/Consensus Task (see attached)

11:15 - Positive/Negative Traits of Counselors (see attached)

11:45 - Strength Bombardment (see attached)

12:15 - Assessment (see attached)

12:30 - Writing Sample (see attached)

After writing sample is complete, the applicant takes it to Sueann in the Green Room for lunch.

Sueann will collect all writing samples and return them to the CMHC faculty.

5. Suggested time allotments are exactly that: suggested. Use your own judgment about the group's

readiness to move on. At the same time, please be mindful of the need both to use the full 2.5 hours to

get the most valid "snapshot" of each applicant as well as to be finished with activities by 12:45.

6. Enjoy! This job doesn't carry the responsibility of group therapy. The activities are designed to

encourage active participation that reveals applicants' interpersonal skills and some intrapsychic

material without getting into "deep" psychological material. Do what you can to make the group a

safe place for people to express themselves. The more they participate, the more data you have to

make your decisions about how promising each applicant looks as a potential counselor.

7. Please don't discuss your impressions of students with your co-leader until both of you have

submitted your ratings. If, after the group has dispersed, you want to compare your impressions, that's

fine. And, once again, thanks!

8. We can tell everyone they will receive official notification of admission after the group interviews.

For individuals who submit materials that make us question appropriateness for admission we could

still do individual interviews if there aren’t any red flags.

9. After the group interviews are over, plan for a working lunch where we will review the ratings,

discuss any concerns, and evaluate the interview process.



4

Appendix B

Gender and Ethnicity Report



5

Summary of Student Gender and Ethnicity in CMHC Program

2019-2020

Enrolled Students in CMHC Program Enrolled Students in CMHC Program

Fall 20192,4

Spring 20203,4

Fall 20182,4

IPEDS Ethnicity Category1

Female Male

Other / Prefer

not to Answer Female Male

Other / Prefer

not to Answer

American Native or Alaskan Native --- --- ---

Asian 1 --- --- 1 2

Black or African American 8 5 1 8 4 1

Hispanic/Latino 11 --- --- 11

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 1 --- --- 1

Non-resident alien 2 --- --- 2

Two or more races 3 --- --- 3

Unknown 1 --- ---

White 91 10 2 91 8 2

Subtotal 118 15 3 117 14 3

Total Enrollment for Term 136 134

Notes:

1) Ethnicity and gender categories are those stipulated by IPEDS federal reporting.

2) Fall 2019 enrollment based on October 15, 2019, frozen fall student data.

3) Spring 2020 enrollment based on March 6, 2020, frozen spring student data.

4) Headcounts include students with CMHC as primary major (128 in fall term; 126 in spring term) plus 8 students per term

enrolled CMHC as second degree program.

Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

June 16, 2020



6

Appendix C

Individual Interview Form



7

Immaculata University Psychology & Counseling Department

Clinical Mental Health Program Applicant Interview

EXPLANATION OF RATING SCALE Rating________________________________________________________________________________

1 2 3 4 5 Very Poor Poor Adequate/average Good/strong Outstanding

1. There are many different human services professions, what motivates you toward becoming a

clinical mental health counselor?

Rating____________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 Confused/poor organization of ideas Clear organization of ideas Little depth of thought Good depth and range of ideas Minimal use of professional concepts/terminology Solid knowledge base, application of counseling concepts

COMMENTS: Response reflected consideration of other helping professions and determination that counseling, specifically, was a good fit for her goals.

2. What do you want to do with this degree once you graduate?

Rating____________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 Confused/poor organization of ideas Clear organization of ideas Little depth of thought Good depth and range of ideas Unrealistic plans or little forethought Well organized plan for future goals

COMMENTS:

Applicant: ____________________________________________

Interviewer: Date & Time:

Experiences/Attitudes selected from application file for exploration in interview:

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________



8

1. Counselors are ethically mandated to be multiculturally sensitive. What is your understanding of a multicultural sensitive approach to counseling?

Rating____________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 Confused/poor organization of ideas Clear organization of ideas Little depth of thought Good depth and range of ideas

COMMENTS:

2. How do you handle conflict and stress? Please give an example from your life.


COMMENTS:

3. Self-awareness is key to your work as a counselor. What personal issues do you think could be potential negative triggers for you as a counselor? How might you address these issues to support your ability to effectively counsel clients?


COMMENTS:

4. What do you feel will be your greatest obstacle to success in this program and how will you address it?


COMMENTS:

5. What would someone who knows you will say about you?


COMMENTS:



9

1. As you approach this commitment to a rigorous master’s program, how would you describe your support system?


COMMENTS:

2. Describe activities or hobbies in which you engage and talk about your approach to self-care.


COMMENTS:

3. How would you describe your writing ability and experience, for example, have you done research papers, major projects, theses?


COMMENTS:

Acceptance Decision Reject: _____ Accept: __ __ COMMENTS: This interview was done via Zoom and I did not have the correct interview form, therefore I asked a slightly different set of questions. I do not have any concerns about this applicant and believe she is appropriate for our program.

____________________________________ 2020

Signature Date



10

A rejection requires a second core faculty member to complete the following:

I have reviewed the file of the applicant as well as the interview material provided for me with the faculty

interviewer and agree that the Clinical Mental Health Program at Immaculata is not a good fit for this

applicant. _______________________________________________________

Name of the applicant

COMMENTS:

_____________________________________________________________________________________

______________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

______________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

______________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

______________

Thank you.

____________________________________ _____________________

Signature/ 2nd faculty member Date



11

Appendix D

Student Enrollment, Graduation and Retention

The program evaluation report is located on the CMHC program’s webpage. Stakeholders were emailed and directed to the webpage to locate this

report. July 31, 2020

12

Summary of Enrollment, Graduation and Retention in CMHC Program Immaculata University

Cohort Total CMHC Cohort Size1

Student Program Type Number CMHC

Graduates (thru May 2020)4

% CMHC Graduates

(thru May 2020)4

Number of Students Enrolled/Active in

CMHC Program (Spring 2020)3

% Retention

% (Retention + Graduation) CMHC only

Students in Cohort

MAMT+CMHC Students in

Cohort2

Summer 2014 25 25 --- 21 84% 1 4% 88%

Fall 2014 47 47 --- 29 62% 2 4% 66%

Spring 2015 31 31 --- 23 74% 2 6% 81%

Summer 2015 11 11 --- 7 64% 1 9% 73%

Fall 2015 47 47 --- 39 83% 1 2% 85%

Spring 2016 8 8 --- 4 50% 1 13% 63%

Summer 2016 6 6 --- 3 50% 2 33% 83%

Fall 2016 28 28 --- 12 43% 10 36% 79%

Spring 2017 14 14 --- 9 64% 3 21% 86%

Summer 2017 8 8 --- 2 25% 5 63% 88%

Fall 2017 36 35 1 14 39% 15 42% 81%

Spring 2018 11 11 --- 1 9% 8 73% 82%

Summer 2018 10 9 1 0 0% 7 70% 70% Fall 2018 20 20 --- 0 0% 17 85% 85%

Spring 2019 12 10 2 0 0% 12 100% 100%

Summer 2019 11 9 2 0 0% 10 91% 91%

Fall 2019 16 14 2 0 0% 16 100% 100%

Spring 2020 10 10 --- 0 0% 10 100% 100%

Totals 351 343 8 164 47% 123 35% 82% 1 Cohort Size is determined by the number of new students enrolled with CMHC major code during the term indicated (full term or second part of term). A student is assigned to the cohort based on the first term they have enrolled in classes, which is not necessarily the same term the student was admitted to IU. 2 Number of students who have dual enrollment in the Master of Music Therapy (MAMT) and CMHC program. 3 Spring enrollment reported as of the Spring 2020 data freeze date, 3/6/2020. 4 Graduates from CMHC program are reported here. There is a small group of students who initially enrolled in CMHC but transferred into Immaculata’s PsyD program or other graduate programs. These students are not included in CMHC graduation or retention numbers.



13

Appendix E

Alumni Survey



14

Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program Alumni Survey Report

Summer 2020 Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

Executive Summary As a required component of CACREP accreditation, a Clinical Mental Health Counseling Alumni Survey was administered in the summer of 2019 to recent alumni (August 2019, Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 program graduates) of the Clinical Mental Health Counselor Master’s of Arts program. Similar surveys were administered in the summers of 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. These surveys provide five years of comparable data regarding student opinions on their experiences in the Clinical Mental Health Counseling (CMHC) program at Immaculata University that has been accredited by CACREP accreditation since 2016. Thirty-two of 45 program alumni responded in the 2020 survey, equating a response rate of 71.1%. While the 2020 survey response rate is excellent, trend data should be considered in the context that the numbers of respondents and response rates from some prior surveys are smaller (n=12 in 2019; n=12 in 2017; n=3 in 2016). Key findings from the survey are as follows:

1) Overall Continued High Satisfaction with CMHC Program Experience – As reported in previous years, students indicated moderate to high satisfaction in all ten areas of the CMHC program (rated >3.90 of 5), including instruction by course professors (4.44 of 5), practicum and internship experiences (4.41 of 5), and appropriateness of course content (4.28 of 5). Although CMHC program satisfaction ratings were already satisfactory, IRE notes that 5 of the 10 ratings improved above the 2019 levels and were based on nearly three times as many respondents. Please refer to question 7 for all program experience ratings and question 8 for comments related to these ratings. Students cite the enthusiasm and knowledge of faculty and the small class size and supportive atmosphere as best aspects of the program (question 9).

2) Overall Continued Satisfaction in Development of Counseling Skills - Students report continued moderate to high satisfaction in the development of their counseling skills through the CMHC program in all areas assessed (see question 3). Ratings of the five counseling skills statements ranged from 3.69 to 4.38 out of 5. Highest satisfaction scores relate to foundations of clinical mental health (4.38 of 5) and development of counseling skills (4.34 of 5). Student comments pertaining to these ratings are provided in question 4.

3) Overall Continued Satisfaction in Development of Assessment Areas - Students report continued

moderate to high satisfaction in the development of their assessment skills through the CMHC program (see question 5). Ratings of the nine assessment statements ranged from 3.31 to 4.28



15

out of 5. Students provided the highest satisfaction scores for professional identity (4.28 of 5) and helping relationships (4.25 of 5). Comments pertaining to these ratings are provided in question 6.

4) Positive Employment Outcomes – Within less than one year after graduation, 84% of responding

alumni report having jobs in the counseling field (see question 12). The majority (71%) of students working in the counseling field have obtained jobs in a mental health setting (see question 13). Students also report employment in the substance abuse/addiction setting (21%). The high job placement rate and employment in a variety of settings suggests that students are well-prepared to enter the job market following completion of the CMHC program. These positive employment outcomes are based on the responses of almost three-fourths (71%) of 2019-2020 program graduates.

5) Increased Alumni Engagement – The overall survey response rate of program graduates more than tripled in the 2020 survey. As it is often difficult to compile and collect alumni employment and ratings data from graduate students, the 71% response rate for program graduates is very high. These results suggest an increase in CMHC alumni engagement.

6) Opportunities for Consideration – When prompted to share the aspect of the CMHC program that

they liked the least (question 10), students provided a variety of responses. Comments related to career preparedness, communication regarding program information, contact with advisors, cost of tuition, and course offerings. When specifically prompted for suggestions for improvement to increase the overall quality of the CHMC program, students recommended additional practicum/internship experiences, comprehensive counseling practice, greater licensure preparation, and more interactions with advisors (question 11). Respondents also offered suggestions throughout the survey such as the need for more therapeutic interventions and theoretical orientations, further emphasis on the exploration of social injustice, additional group therapy experience, greater support during the practicum search process, and additional course offerings. Each of the various suggestions was offered one to two comments; there was no student consensus in the 2020 survey regarding a particular area of focus for improvement.

7) General Comment related to Trends in Rating Scores– The CMHC survey includes 24 statements for alumni to assess using a 5-point Likert scale. From 2018 to 2019, 22 of the 24 ratings increased, indicating an increase in overall satisfaction with the program. The 2019 survey report included a summary of three key recent program changes attributed to the improved ratings: (a) adding grief counseling and self-injurious behavior as new elective classes, (b) offering a program specific Methods of Research course, and (c) course updates and a new course to increase exposure to intake assessment. This survey evaluates whether those increases were sustained from 2019 to 2020. Of the 24 statements, 12 of the 24 statements in the survey remained stable (within +/-.15 points of the improved 2019 level) and 2 statements had further ratings increases in the 2020 survey relative to the 2019 ratings. Ten ratings statements decreased from 2019 to 2020; however, 7 of the 10 ratings with decreases still had mean scores >4.0, indicating high satisfaction. It is also worth noting that the 2020 ratings scores are based on the opinions of nearly three times



16

as many students relative to 2019, so there is higher confidence in the high ratings being reflective of most graduates. Three ratings statements that experienced a ratings drop from 2019 to 2020 and have satisfaction scores less than 4.0 are as follows: (a) Assessment – 3.44 of 5; (b) Career Development – 3.44 of 5; and (c) Research and Program Development – 3.31 of 5. The statement with the highest ratings drop was Assessment, with a 0.64 drop from 2019.

8) Student Diversity – The majority of survey respondents were white (75%) and female (94%), which is reflective of the gender and ethnicity distribution of program graduates in 2020 (80% white; 86% female in 2019-2020). Twenty-two percent of enrolled CMHC students in 2019-2020 are minority students.

IRE asked Dr. Tracy Stinchfield, CMHC Program Director, to provide a summary of implemented program improvements since the last survey to provide context for this year’s report. Topic 1 - Career Preparedness and Licensure:

• Dr. Stinchfield created a reference document, Steps for the Licensure Application,” and uploaded it to Moodle for interns to use as career resource and to address student concerns related to the licensure process.

• In addition, Dr. Martinson, CMHC Faculty and Internship Director, maintains an MA Intern folder on Moodle, which is a detailed resource on all aspects of the CMHC Internship requirement.

Topic 2 – Advisement/Communication

• In addition to communication from the College of Graduate Studies, the CMHC Program now sends program-specific emails via the department’s administrative support staff on a variety of topics, including information regarding course registration, advising and new student orientation.

Topic 3 – Course Offerings

• Course offerings remain consistent for required courses, which are offered in the fall, spring and summer. One-credit and three-credit electives are offered on an annual basis. Updates to the Assessment course were implemented over the past academic year, particularly with regard to intakes.

• One-credit course offerings have greatly increased over the past two year. The one-credit course, Religious and Spiritual Values in Counseling, was offered for the first time in Spring 2020. In Fall 2020, a new one-credit course will be offered, Introduction to Telemental Health Counseling, which filled to capacity during the first week of course enrollment.

• Regarding the student comment related to the Group Manual and the GEN Methods of Research Course, the CMHC program notes that the Group manual is no longer an assignment for COUN 604 and hasn’t been for the past two years, nor is the GEN Methods of Research a current course requirement. Student concerns related to these requirements led to



17

programmatic changes two years ago, so these student must have taken the courses prior to the curriculum changes.

Topic 4 – Social Justice

• Conversation of Care - The program faculty held a town hall meeting in spring 2020 to address the social injustices happening in our current society. From this town hall, fourteen students joined our eight CMHC faculty to begin a Conversation of Care. Three students were identified as liaisons between CMHC faculty and students, and Dr. Stinchfield met with this small group of liaisons on July 15, 2020,to explore the direction for this group. The CMHC Program intends to hold another town hall and invite all CMHC students to attend with the intent of determining how best for students and faculty to work together to increase awareness of social injustices and create learning experiences and opportunities to engage in action.

Dr. Stinchfield notes that program faculty will meet to review these survey comments and to determine if action steps are necessary to address concerns. These action steps will be documented and implemented where applicable. Methodology In Summer 2020, the Clinical Mental Health Counseling program invited recent alumni to complete the Clinical Mental Health Counseling Alumni Survey via web link to an online survey instrument in Survey Monkey. Participants were assured of confidentiality and that all data would be evaluated in aggregate format. The survey invitation and the two subsequent survey reminders were issued by Dr. Tracy Stinchfield, Professor and CMHC (CACREP) Program Director. The survey was open for response for a period of four weeks, from May 29 to June 26, 2020. Survey reminders were sent by Dr. Tracy Stinchfield on June 10 and June 23. Out of the possible 45 alumni who received the survey, a total of 32 completed the survey, equating a response rate of 71.1% (29% in 2019; 58% in 2018; 48% in 2017; 33% in 2016). The Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness provided analyses for this report. All tables are arranged from highest to lowest average for the current year’s aggregate data, unless options were presented on a scale. Percentages reported are based on the number of respondents to that particular question. For those questions that request a rating, a 5-point evaluation scale was used (Excellent – 5; Very Good – 4; Good – 3; Fair – 2; and Poor – 1). N/A responses were not included in mean calculations. Ratings statements are written with the convention such that a high score is the desired result. Responses to open-ended questions have been provided exactly as submitted. Each bullet point contains the response of a single respondent in the various comment sections.



18

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Q1. What is your gender?

2020 2019 2018 2017 2016

Options # % # % # % # % # %

Female 30 94% 9 75% 20 80% 11 92% 3 100% Male 2 6% 3 25% 3 12% 1 8% 0 0%

Other 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Prefer not to answer 0 0% 0 0 2 8% 0 0% 0 0%

Total 32 100% 12 100% 25 100% 12 100% 3 100%

Q2. What is your racial/ethnic background?

Options

2020 2019 2018 2017 2016

# % # % # % # % # %

White, non-Hispanic 24 75% 9 75% 22 88% 11 92% 2 67%

Two or more races 4 13% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Black or African American, non-Hispanic

2 6% 2 17% 1 4% 1 8% 0 0%

Hispanic or Latino 2 6% 1 8% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% American Indian or Alaskan Native

0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Asian 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Other (please specify) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Prefer not to say 0 0% 0 0% 2 8% 0 0% 1 33%

Race/ethnicity unknown 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Total 32 100% 12 100% 25 100% 12 100% 3 100%



19

SKILLS ASSESSMENT Q3. Please rate your skills in the following areas, as a result of your education in the Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program:

2020 2020 Response Distribution 2019 2018 2017 2016

Skill Mean

(n= 32) Excellent

Very Good

Good Fair Poor Mean (n=12)

Mean (n=24)

Mean (n=12)

Mean (n=3)

Foundations of clinical mental health

4.38 13 18 1 0 0 4.17 4.04 4.25 4.67

Development of counseling skills

4.34 14 15 3 0 0 4.58 4.38 4.33 4.67

Implementation of counseling skills

4.06 10 16 4 2 0 4.50 4.17 4.25 4.33

Intake interviews 3.94 10 13 6 3 0 3.92 3.38 3.75 3.00 Diagnosis and treatment of clients

3.69 5 14 11 2 0 3.75 3.79 3.92 3.33

Q4. Comments related to your above responses

[8 alumni responded; 24 skipped this question]

• Could have spent more time on theories and specific interventions within those theories.

• I believe excellence comes with experience.

• I feel more confident in treatment than diagnosis.

• I feel that the review of different theories and techniques were instrumental in helping me to identify my personal therapeutic voice. The support I received and ability to process my skills, and the skills of my classmates, built me into the competent and confident counselor that I am today.

• I feel that we were never taught the many different interventions to help our clients. Also any time that I would ask for assistance in different interventions they were not explained but I was told to review my notes from theories class.

• I thoroughly enjoyed the hands-on experience in class through role-plays that helped us to practice!

• My education at Immaculata along with my Internship have really helped my counseling skills and have enabled me to gain employment with two companies at this time. I am very grateful.

• Neither of my internships allowed me the opportunity to really make diagnoses or conduct intake interviews in depth; however, I believe I have a clear understanding of what is required for each.



20

Q5. Please rate your knowledge and understanding in the following assessment areas, based on what you learned in the Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program:


Assessment Area Mean (n=31 to 32)

Excellent Very Good

Good Fair Poor Mean (n=12)

Mean (n=22 to 23)

Mean (n=12)

Mean (n=3)

Professional identity 4.28 14 13 5 0 0 4.50 4.14 4.17 4.00 Helping relationships 4.25 12 16 4 0 0 4.58 4.35 4.42 4.67

Group work 4.19 12 14 4 1 0 4.42 4.00 4.17 3.00

Consultation/supervision process

4.06 12 12 6 2 0 4.17 3.74 4.42 4.00

Human growth and development

4.03 9 16 6 1 0 4.25 4.09 4.25 3.67

Social and cultural diversity

4.03 10 14 7 1 0 4.50 4.00 4.33 3.67

Assessment 3.44 6 10 10 4 2 4.08 3.39 3.92 3.00

Career development 3.44 3 12 13 4 0 4.00 3.61 4.00 3.67

Research and program development

3.31 3 10 13 6 0 3.58 3.48 3.42 2.67

Q6. Comments related to your above responses: [7 alumni responded; 25 skipped this question]

• For social/cultural diversity I feel that the program could use a revamp of bringing more awareness to the social injustices that are going on in the world, especially the racial injustices that have been brought to light more recently. I also feel that the program did not shed much light or information on the LGBTQ+ community. I also felt that from the diversity class, the professor should thoroughly teach through each ethnic and minority group instead of having group projects as we were all students learning about these groups and may miss out on important information that should be taught.

• Group manual did not prepare for actual group therapy. Would have liked to go over the actual process of group therapy, as well as, interventions used.

• Group work class could be expanded a bit more. While I appreciated the manual project, implementation of skills lacked in the class during my experience.

• I believe the program provided me with a clear and well-rounded understanding in the above areas. The consultation and supervision processes were in depth, informative and very appreciated.

• I learned what to look for and how to structure supervision through internship classes. I believe all the teachers and coursework was informative and Gabe me room to explore and learn. I wish there was more information and a clearer course schedule for career counseling, as it was the only course I did not feel confident in throughout the program. I believe this was predominantly due to the teacher of that course.

• I took Research Methods with a non-counseling/psychology professor in my first semester who, to me and my counseling peers, did not seem to take psychology/counseling as a serious scientific



21

endeavor and seemed to dismiss the field altogether, which was confusing to my peers and I who had just entered the program.

• My certification in addiction studies and therapeutic practice have enabled me to work well at my internship.

Q7. Please rate your experience in the following areas:


Area of Experience Mean (n=31 to 32)

Excellent Very Good

Good Fair Poor Mean (n=11 to 12)

Mean (n=24)

Mean (n=12)

Mean (n=3)

Instruction by Course Professors

4.44 18 10 4 0 0 4.50 4.30 4.25 4.00

Practicum and Internship Experience

4.41 17 12 2 1 0 4.27 4.35 4.33 4.67

College of Graduate Studies 4.31 18 7 6 1 0 4.00 3.95 4.08 4.33 Appropriateness of Course Content

4.28 14 13 5 0 0 4.33 4.17 4.17 4.00

IU Graduate Application 4.16 12 13 7 0 0 4.17 3.95 4.25 4.33

Availability of Courses 4.13 9 18 5 0 0 4.25 3.74 4.17 4.00 Advising - availability of faculty advisor

4.09 16 7 5 4 0 4.00 3.74 4.00 3.33

University Library Services 4.06 11 13 7 1 0 3.91 3.70 3.92 4.67 Advising - accuracy of information provided

3.97 12 9 7 3 0 4.08 3.78 4.17 3.33

CMHC Website 3.91 8 13 11 0 0 3.83 3.74 3.67 4.00

Q8. Comments related to your above responses: [7 alumni responded; 25 skipped this question]

• Although I did not utilize the University's library often, it served it's purpose and had what I needed when I happened to walk in there. The advising, availability and supervision of the professors in this program were outstanding and truly enhanced the graduate experience for me. They were all extremely supportive, empathetic and understanding with any challenges that arose or needed to be addressed.

• Generally, I have learned an exceptional amount from this program. Some of the professors that I had I felt did not care as much about the material and cared more about impressing the students or they did not care to teach that class and it was very clear. There are some classes I wish I could have gotten more out of even though I was putting in a lot of work already.

• I am looking forward and hope I can come back for my PSYd at Immaculata because of the wonderful experience and faculty that have done nothing but give me support, kindness, and knowledge to be a competent Counselor. I cannot say enough about Dr Martinson, Dr. Miller, and Dr. Stinchfield. They are wonderful professor’s and I am eternally grateful to have had them teach me.

• I wish all courses were available at all semesters, but I did not utilize my advisor for course planning, so that may be a personal issue.



22

• Internship experience was pretty bad. No direction or training.

• Practicum/internship: there should be more support from all the professors to finding field placement for students, and it should start from early on in the program. That was a very stressful situation that crept up quickly and most of the sites that were listed on the CMHC site were not even accepting students anymore. I also think having a more diverse group of students talk about their placement. I remember when I went to that meeting most of the students were all from the same site.

• While my assigned advisors assistance was rated fair other professors guidance was excellent.

Q9. What aspects of the IU Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program have you liked the best? [27 alumni responded; 5 skipped this question]

Faculty [9 of 27 responses]

• I loved the IU Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program and would reenroll if given the choice to do it all over. The support and dedication of the professors is beyond admirable and appreciated as a graduate student and their encouragement was a key factor in my success as a newly graduated master’s student.

• Professors were excellent, very approachable and knowledgeable.

• The amazing professors that mentored me, and continue to do so.

• The faculty by far is above standard. So supportive and work with you to help you gain the knowledge you need to be an excellent counselor.

• The faculty were amazing, their experience dedication, and professionalism were clear. I learned so much from them.

• The presence and connection of professors to the coursework helped me connect with the material best.

• The professors are willing to go above and beyond for the young professionals in the program

• The professors were great and very knowledgeable.

• The professors.. available and truly invested.

Class Size/Supportive Atmosphere [9 of 27 responses]

• I enjoyed my interactions with nearly every professor who taught me during my time in the CMHC program. I liked the balance wherein I was treated as a student but also as a developing professional. There was so much emphasis on group discussion, which facilitated learning and understanding from various viewpoints. I appreciated the constant emphasis on diversity and continuing one's education to maintain cultural competency.

• I really enjoyed how professional, supportive, and knowledgeable the professors are. I also enjoyed that it is a smaller program and feels more personal. Most of the people in the program were helpful and also supportive.

• Internship and Practicum course having smaller class size and support from cohort class

• IU feels like a family - I enjoyed the overall connection with my peers and professors the most.

• Positive atmosphere and the ability to grow within the program.

• Small class size

• The feeling of home I get from most of the professors and the connectedness I felt. I felt safe to share and knew that I was respected.



23

• The intimacy the small classes afforded and the relationship between the students and professors which allowed most students freely express.

• The support of faculty and students

Academic & Practical Experiences [5 of 27 responses]

• Internships

• I've enjoyed learning from different perspectives and experiencing the different facets of counseling.

• Overall, I like the way the program is set up. There were many courses that I believe prepared me for working in the field. Specifically, human development, psychopathology, addiction education, practicum and internship.

• Practicing my skills through role-plays, internship and practicum assignments.

• The amount of course work was fair and appropriate. I also enjoyed the content of each course and felt I was given many opportunities to expand my knowledge in different aspects of the mental health counseling field.

Multiple [4 of 27 responses]

• I like the diversity and the new changes within the courses that were made.

• Knowledge of staff, and the curriculum for the most part

• The wonderful, supportive, and caring faculty as well as the excellent core courses and electives!

• What I found to be most helpful was the support of my professors and classmates. The classes I took also prepared me well for my current job.

Q10. What aspects of the IU Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program have you liked the least? [23 alumni responded; 9 skipped this question]

• N/A (3)

• After working in the field for almost a year after graduation, I have found some instances where I felt that the program could have done more to help benefit my work in the field. I understand that the program cannot cover everything that we will be faced with in the field. I feel that maybe having the theory and skills classes in the beginning of the program may be more beneficial to students. I also think that including more diversity and cultural competencies in each class would be helpful as well, and as I mentioned earlier in the survey I think there should be more of a presence of learning about LGBTQA+. And as much as I stressed about the group manual, I do have to say in the end I was very proud of my work.

• Although there may have been aspects of the program that were time consuming (such as transcribing sessions) I do believe that even those assignments proved to be beneficial and a great learning experience.

• Assessment and Research- I feel like could have been taught differently where it was easier to understand.

• Extracurricular meetings lacked content and interest door me.

• Gen eds



24

• I didn't leave as prepared as I thought I would once I began working in the field. I think 10-20 minutes of each class should be devoted to mock sessions. Those provided in some of the coursework were ok, just not sufficient.

• I disliked both assessment and research methods courses but I believe that to be a personal preference. I do not believe I utilized much from either of those classes in my work as a counselor thus far. While important in the field, personally- I implemented them the least.

• I felt that you did not get a lot of direction in terms of what classes to take when.

• I think there could be better communication among the department and the student body.

• I would have liked more transparency from the professors about life after grad school and the process of licensure.

• It was very difficult, financially-speaking, to devote adequate time to practicum and internship while still working enough to earn a living at my paid job, and also having to be in class at least once weekly by 4:30 P.M. (which is still during the work day for most people). Between all of those things, I was working or on campus most weeks between 50-60 hours and it was exhausting. I wish there had been more preparation for us to fully understand the financial implications of practicum/internship before we made it to that point and had to face it with limited understanding.

• Nothing that I can think of.

• Some of the electives taught at Immaculata like Play Therapy because of the professor’s teaching style.

• Some of the information related to practicum/internship sites was dated and inaccurate.

• sometimes mediocre commitment of fellow students to learning

• The CACREP transition period. It seemed like unless you fit into a niche in the program, it may not have suited everybody’s needs.

• The facilities. Lack of info regarding post-graduation such as LPC information.

• The lack of communication is not okay. Throughout the years I went there a lot changed without the students being told, and if the student asked a question attitude was given back.

• Weekend electives only being offered one time a semester. (Example if there was one I wanted to take but was not able to dye to a prior commitment and they aren’t offered every semester)

• While I know this won’t change, I wish classes were available during the day rather than night.

Q11. What specific changes could be made to the Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program to improve its overall quality? [21 alumni responded; 11 skipped this question]

• N/A, Nothing I can think of (3)

• Clinical progress note taking should be a required course. I also think the program needs to focus more on teaching students counseling interventions to utilize with future clients.

• Concrete expectations and requirements for Practicum & Internship. It seemed that my peers were always told different information than I was and each professor provided different information about the same question.



25

• I think it would be beneficial for future students to have information sooner about what to expect in practicum, internship, and exams such as the NCE.

• I think it would be helpful if students who were later in the program were able to pick classes first. It would also be more helpful if a detailed class outline was given and consistently reviewed.

• I would like to see a more broad-spectrum program that allowed for more diversity.

• I would love to see more holistic approaches taught in the curriculum; maybe a holistic counseling course offered as an elective or requirement. Similarly, I would have really enjoyed a three-credit grief counseling course offered within the required curriculum.

• I would recommend having the professors teach more of the content before having group presentations of the students teaching the content. As I mentioned earlier in the survey, as a student we are all there to learn and although we can learn from each other, some students take projects more seriously than others. There have been group projects that I found to be very helpful and were very well researched, however there have also been a handful of group projects that I did not find helpful and struggled to understand what they were supposed to be teaching. I also think that the crisis and trauma class can be better trauma informed. I would also recommend for the program to hold an informative meeting on what happens next after graduation. Talking about where to find resources to keep track of LPC hours, or if students want to continue their education and go on to a doctoral program, or even the steps of how to become certified in other areas of the field.

• I would recommend informing students of the hour requirements before entering the program in order for them to prepare, especially for those that work full-time or have a family to be able to accommodate.

• Incorporating some sort of work/volunteer/intern experience early into the program maybe throughout the orientation class not related to counseling per say but somehow related to working in the mental health field. I noticed my peers that didn’t have that experience weren’t able to apply the info we learned in the way that I was as I was working in the field through the program.

• Increased counseling practice within classes i.e. using assessments on classmates, career counseling practice with peers etc.

• Making sure to check in with students honestly about the class and make a change if it is needed. Listen to the students more.

• Mandatory meetings with advisor, at least once in the program.

• Maybe a little more work on preparing students for the licensure exam.

• Maybe adding additional support, course, or time to assist with understanding the NCE and its process.

• More diagnostic focused classes. Most jobs before licensure rely heavily on Medicaid and therefore revolve around diagnoses. Despite my orientation and personal belief in over diagnosing, it is a reality at beginning levels. I also wish I would have been prepared for a clinician interview.

• More interaction with my advisor

• More prep with treatment planning and paperwork



26

• Practicum experience earlier on in the program



27

OUTCOMES Q12. Are you currently employed in the counseling field? [1 respondent skipped this question]

Options

2020 2019 2018 2017

Count % Count % Count % Count %

Yes 26 83.9% 10 90.9% 14 66.7% 7 63.6%

Not currently seeking employment (please elaborate)

3 9.7% 0 0% 3 14.3% ** **

No, I am employed outside the counseling field

1 3.2% 1 9.1% 1 4.8% 2 18.2%

Prefer not to answer 1 3.2% 0 0% 1 4.8% 2 18.2%

No, I am currently attending graduate school

0 0% 0 0% 2 9.5% 0 0.0%

Total 31 100% 11 100% 21 100% 11 100%

**Option not offered in 2017 survey.

Please elaborate

• COVID-19

• Looking for a job

• Waiting for the pandemic to allow me to be hired at my internship Q13. If YES, could you please share in which area you are currently working as a counselor? Note: This question was posed only to those alumni who responded YES to Question 12 (n=26).

Options

2020 2019 2018 2017

Count % Count % Count % Count %

Mental health setting 20 71.4% 6 60.0% 6 42.9% 6 85.7% Substance abuse/addiction setting

6 21.4% 0 0% 5 35.7% 1 14.3%

Other (please specify) 2 7.1% 2 20.0% 1 7.1% 0 0%

School setting 0 0% 2 20.0% 2 14.3% 0 0% Total 28 100% 10 100% 14 100% 7 100%

Other (please specify) [2 alumni responded]

• Homeless Shelter Program

• N/A



28

Report Prepared by Cecelia Oswald Director, Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness Deanna Eilenberger Graduate Assistant, Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness CMHC Program Context Provided by Dr. Tracy Stinchfield Professor and Director, Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program



29

Appendix F

Site Supervisor Survey

Clinical Mental Health Counseling Site Supervisor Survey Summer 2020

n = 17 30

Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program Site Supervisor Survey Report

Summer 2020 Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

Executive Summary As a required component of CACREP accreditation, a brief Clinical Mental Health Counseling Site Supervisor Survey was administered in the summer of 2020 to current site supervisors of the Clinical Mental Health Counselor Master of Arts program internship/practicum students. This survey provides data regarding site supervisor opinions on their experiences with intern/practicum students from the Clinical Mental Health Counseling (CMHC) program at Immaculata University. Seventeen of 42 site supervisors responded in the 2020 survey, equating a response rate of 40.5%. Site Supervisor survey data from prior years are provided for longitudinal comparison. Key positive findings from the survey are as follows:

1) High Overall Satisfaction with Student Preparation – Aggregate ratings and open-ended responses regarding internship/practicum students indicates that site supervisors continued to have moderate to high satisfaction with Immaculata students. Ratings regarding internship/practicum students ranged from 3.73 to 4.31 of 5 for the 13 statements evaluated in this survey. Supervisor comments cite well-prepared students, strong clinical skills, and thoughtfulness. Please read each of the comment sections in their entirety for complete review of site supervisor evaluations. One reviewer stated that their Immaculata internship/practicum student “exceeded expectations in every way.”

2) Satisfaction with Student Knowledge and Application – Site supervisor ratings demonstrate moderate to high satisfaction with the knowledge of internship/practicum students in a wide variety of topics as well as their ability to apply this knowledge to their work (see question 1). The nine areas of knowledge listed received ratings ranging from 3.73 to 4.12 of 5. “Knowledge/application of counseling skills” (4.12 of 5) and “knowledge and application of human growth and development” (4.06 of 5) received the highest scores. Two areas had strong ratings improvements relative to prior years: “Knowledge and application of human growth and development” (+0.30 in 2020) and “Knowledge, understanding, and application of research methods and evaluation” (+0.29 in 2020). Longitudinal data mirror these findings, indicating continued satisfaction with the knowledge of IU students and application of such knowledge.


n = 17 31

3) High Satisfaction with Receptivity, Ethics, and Coping Skills of Students – When asked to rate internship/practicum students in the areas of receptivity, ethics, and coping skills, site supervisors rated each of these practical aspects as >4.00 of 5 (see question 2). The statement “open and receptive to supervision and feedback” received the highest rating in this category (4.31 of 5). These ratings data suggest current site supervisors are satisfied with the CMHC program’s ability to prepare students for supervised practice in the field and longitudinal data support this finding as a continued trend.

The data indicate two possible areas for consideration within the CMHC program:

1) Knowledge and Application of Career Counseling – Of all the knowledge and application considerations, student “knowledge and application of career counseling” continued to receive the lowest ranking (3.73 of 5) although this area’s ratings score improved relative to last year (+0.20 in 2020) and is within the satisfactory range. Dr. David Martinson, CMHC Faculty and Field Site Coordinator, notes that CMHC students complete a suite of classes designed to prepare students for placement, including coursework in “Career and Vocational Counseling” (COUN 609).

2) Knowledge and Application of Assessment to Clients – The ratings of “knowledge and application of assessment data” dipped from 4.00 in 2019 to 3.76 in 2020, including two students rated “poorly prepared.” Since supervisors rated the other 15 students as “adequately prepared” to “well-prepared,” it is assumed that this ratings dip (-0.24) is due to the impact of two students on a small sample size. The overall rating of this category remains satisfactory. Dr. David Martinson, CMHC Faculty and Field Site Coordinator, notes that CMHC students also complete a suite of classes designed develop assessment skills, including Crisis Intervention & Trauma (COUN 630), “Group Counseling” (COUN 604), and “Assessment for Counselors” (COUN 641). Faculty continue to revise these course based on feedback received

Methodology In Summer 2020, the Clinical Mental Health Counseling program invited current site supervisors to complete the Clinical Mental Health Counseling Site Supervisor Survey via web link to an online survey instrument in Survey Monkey. Participants were assured of confidentiality and that all data would be evaluated in aggregate format. The survey invitation and subsequent survey reminder were issued by Dr. David Martinson, Associate Professor and Field Site Coordinator for the CMHC (CACREP) Program. The survey was open for response for a period of 2 weeks, from June 1 to June 15, 2020. One reminder was sent by Dr. David Martinson during the course of the survey administration on June 9, 2020. The survey invitation was issued to site supervisors of IU’s CMHC internship and practicum students. Out of the possible 42 site supervisors who received the survey, a total of 17 completed the survey, equating a response rate of 40.5%.


n = 17 32

The Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness provided analyses for this report. All tables are arranged from highest to lowest average for the 2020 aggregate data, unless options were presented on a scale. Percentages reported are based on the number of respondents to that particular question. For those questions that request a rating, a 5-point evaluation scale was used (Extremely Well Prepared – 5; Well Prepared– 4; Adequately Prepared – 3; Poorly Prepared – 2; and Unprepared – 1). N/A responses were not included in mean calculations. Ratings statements are written such that a high score is the desired result. Shading provided in the response distribution counts for Likert scale questions reflects the response with the highest number of selections for that particular statement. Responses to open-ended questions have been provided exactly as submitted. Each bullet point contains the response of a single respondent in the various comment sections.


n = 17 33

Q1. Based upon your experience with an Immaculata University CMHC practicum and/or internship student, please indicate the extent to which you think IU prepared the student for the following: Part A: Knowledge and Application Preparation

2020 2020 Response Distribution 2019 2018

Area of Knowledge

Mean (n = 15

to 17)

Extremely Well

Prepared

Well Prepared

Adequately Prepared

Poorly Prepared

Un-prepare

d

Mean (n = 16 to 17)

Mean (n = 17 to 18 )

Knowledge and application of counseling skills

4.12 6 7 4 0 0 4.18 3.89

Knowledge and application of human growth and development

4.06 6 6 5 0 0 3.76 3.72

Knowledge, understanding, and application of research methods and evaluation

4.00 6 5 6 0 0 3.71 3.56

Knowledge and application of counseling theories

3.94 4 8 5 0 0 3.94 3.89

Knowledge of diverse populations and competent application to clients

3.94 5 6 6 0 0 4.06 3.82

Knowledge and application of assessment to clients

3.76 4 7 4 2 0 4.00 3.78

Knowledge and application of group counseling skills

3.76 4 6 6 1 0 3.69 3.67

Knowledge of and application of crisis and trauma to clients

3.76 5 5 5 2 0 3.76 3.50

Knowledge and application of career counseling to clients

3.73 3 6 5 1 0 3.53 3.44

Comments related to the above responses: [2 supervisors responded; 15 skipped this question]

Area of Knowledge 2020 Responses

Knowledge and application of career counseling to clients

• We are a clinical program

• Unknown


n = 17 34

Q2. Based upon your experience with an Immaculata University CMHC practicum and/or internship student, please indicate the extent to which you think IU prepared the student for the following: Part B: Site Role Preparation (Receptivity, Ethics, and Coping Skills)

2020 2020 Response Distribution 2019 2018

Area of Experience Mean (n = 16)

Extremely Well

Prepared

Well Prepare

d

Adequately Prepared

Poorly Prepare

d

Un-prepare

d

Mean (n =16)

Mean (n = 18)

Open and receptive to supervision feedback

4.31 7 7 2 0 0 4.38 4.39

Ability to reflect and cope (your perception of student's depth, attitudes, ability to handle difficult decisions, higher order thinking, confidence, and initiative).

4.19 6 7 3 0 0 3.94 3.94

Knowledge of professional and ethical issues

4.06 6 5 5 0 0 4.06 4.11

Prepared for supervision

4.06 7 4 4 1 0 4.19 4.17

Comments related to the above responses: [0 supervisors responded; 17 skipped this question] Q3. Please provide any additional comments or feedback regarding your experience with an Immaculata University CMHC practicum/internship student. [6 supervisors responded; 11 skipped this question]

• [Student name removed] is very conscientious and well prepared!

• Exceeded expectations in every way.

• I am so impressed with the program. I wish my graduate school had been so thorough!

• I had a good experience with Immaculata University student. I hope we can continue to work in partnership

• Immaculata practicum students are well-prepared and thoughtful, with good basic skills and a willingness to learn more advanced skills, along with professional development.

• N/a


n = 17 35

Report Prepared by

Cecelia Oswald Director, Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness Deanna Eilenberger Graduate Assistant, Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness



Appendix G

Site Supervisor Evaluation of Trainee



Final Evaluation

Clinical Mental Health Counseling Department of Psychology & Counseling

S per isor s E al ation of Trainee

Counseling Field Placements

Name of Trainee: ________________________________ ___________________________

Trainee s Signat re

Name of Supervisor: ______________________________ _____________________________

S per isor s Signat re

Name of Field Site: _______________________________ Date of Evaluation: ______________

Poor Weak Average Above Average

I. Professional Conduct A. Keeps hours responsibly 1 2 3 4

B. Completes paperwork promptly 1 2 3 4

C. Gets along with staff 1 2 3 4

D. Demonstrates ethical behavior 1 2 3 4

E. Respects client confidentiality 1 2 3 4

II. Technique & Theory

A. Applies theory 1 2 3 4

B. Relates technique to theory 1 2 3 4

C. Identifies/understands how 1 2 3 4

personal conflicts may

interfere with process

III. Case Conceptualization

A. Uses diagnostic reasoning 1 2 3 4

B. Applies appropriate treatment 1 2 3 4

interventions

IV. Supervision

A. Is open to alternative views 1 2 3 4

B. Uses s per isor s inp t 1 2 3 4

C. Displays appropriate autonomy 1 2 3 4

V. Other

A. Desires to learn and grow 1 2 3 4

B. Respects others 1 2 3 4

C. Empowers Others to Grow 1 2 3 4

D. Extends self to others 1 2 3 4

E. Communicates ideas effectively 1 2 3 4

F. Thinks logically and critically 1 2 3 4

G. Engages in independent study 1 2 3 4

H. Demonstrates concern for social

issues 1 2 3 4

I. Is sensitive to multicultural 1 2 3 4

influences



Appendix H

Clinical Assessment and Mental Status Exam (scores)

The program evaluation report is located on the CMHC program’s webpage. Stakeholders were emailed and

directed to the webpage to locate this report. July 31, 2020

Clinical Assessment and MSE. Each student will locate one participant who will volunteer to take the Outcome

Questionnaire 45.2 (Lambert et al., 2004), allow for the release of a video-recorded test result interpretation, and

provide answers to an intake interview and mental status examination (MSE). Participants may not be a part of the

student’s immediate family or a student in this department. The recorded interview, test report, and interpretation

are to be submitted for evaluation. Guideline data sheets are provided below. Please submit the recording, written

report, and consent form (see Appendix A) together. Points will be deducted if all are not submitted together.

Reasons for testing, testing conditions, behavioral observations, demographic

information

2

Test results and test interpretations 2

Summary and recommendations 2

Personal reactions to this project (e.g., How did it feel to be sitting across from a

real client? How did you feel about the results? What did you learn about yourself?

What did you learn about the testing process?)

2.5

Redo interview: What would you do differently if you were given the opportunity

to redo the interview and Outcome Questionnaire 45.2 interpretation?

2.5

The following will be used to evaluate the interpretation:

Recording

Building rapport 1

Intake interview 1

MSE administration 1

Description of the instrument and purpose of the activity 1

Interaction with the client 1

Interpretation of the Outcome Questionnaire 45.2 1

Attention to diversity and social justice considerations 1

Integration of assessment information, including external information as relevant 1

Planning and summary 1

Spring 2020 Outcomes

Report (15 points available)

100% (15 points) – 6/17 students

95% (14.25 points) – 7/17 students

90% (13.5 points) - 1/17 students

87.5% (13.125 points) - 1/17 students


80% (12 points) – 1/17 students

Reflection (5 points available)

100% (5 points) - 16/17 students


Recording (Pass/Fail) *points for content included in report score above

10 students earned a passing score for this task and 7 students were “excused” of this requirement due to COVID-

19 related challenges.



Appendix I



Student Name: ________________________________

Immaculata University

Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment

Semester/Year of Review: fall/ spring/ summer 20_____

Faculty Reviewer: ____________________________________________ Course: ___________________________________

Instructions and Purpose: Each course instructor is asked to complete the following form to assist

the CMHC program faculty in assessing each student in an on-going manner. This form will be

submitted to the Graduate Office along with a copy of your grades each semester. All collected

student data will be used by the program to track student learning outcomes outlined in the Council

for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs [CACREP] standards.

Thank you,

Tracy A. Stinchfield, Ed.D., CMHC Director

Evaluation Criteria: Please evaluate the student along the following continuum 1 – 4 for each of

the three categories [Academic Performance; Professional Development; Personal Development].

Place an “X” in the column that best describes the student’s performance in each category.

Example:

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 4 3 2 1

Demonstrates reading comprehension X

4. Student consistently excels in demonstrating qualities listed; is confident and competent.

3. Student demonstrates qualities listed; no evidence of major problem or concern.

2. Student inconsistently demonstrates qualities listed; Student in need of growth and

development but is open and receptive to feedback and demonstrating progress.

1. Student does not demonstrate qualities listed; Student is either not receptive to feedback, or

after receiving it, is not making efforts to progress; Student performance is unsatisfactory

and in need of remediation.

4 Student consistently excels in demonstrating qualities listed; is confident and competent. 3 Student demonstrates qualities listed; no evidence of major problem or concern. 2 Student inconsistently demonstrates qualities listed; Student in need of growth and development but is open

and receptive to feedback and demonstrating progress. 1 Student does not demonstrate qualities listed; Student is either not receptive to feedback, or after receiving it, is

not making efforts to progress; Student performance is unsatisfactory and in need of remediation.

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 4 3 2 1



Demonstrates reading comprehension Articulates ideas clearly Meaningfully connects concepts learned Demonstrates critical thinking Writing skills reflect current APA format Demonstrates multicultural respect and competence

Please provide comments to support marks of 2 or below.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

4 3 2 1

Present and on time for class Professional demeanor in class Respectful of boundaries Demonstrates collaborative qualities Demonstrates ethical knowledge and behavior

Please provide comments to support marks of 2 or below.

PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

4 3 2 1

Appropriately engaged in class Demonstrates proper self-disclosure Receptive to feedback [peers and instructor]

Student is a good fit for the program Please provide comments to support marks of 2 or below.

*** I am concerned about this student – YES / NO.

Have you addressed concerns with student? Yes/No.



Appendix J

SDSA COUN 601 Section A

The program evaluation report is located on the CMHC program’s webpage. Stakeholders were emailed and directed to the webpage to locate this

report. July 31, 2020

Academic Performance 4 3 2 1 Demonstrates reading comprehension 5 4 0 0 Articulates ideas clearly 5 3 1 0 Meaningfully connects concepts learned 4 4 1 0 Demonstrates critical thinking 4 2 3 0 Writing skills reflect current APA format 6 3 0 0 Demonstrates multicultural respect and competence 7 2 0 0

Professional Development 4 3 2 1 Present and on time for class 9 0 0 0 Professional demeanor in class 8 1 0 0 Respectful of boundaries 8 1 0 0 Demonstrates collaborative qualities 8 1 0 0 Demonstrates ethical knowledge and behavior 8 1 0 0

Personal Development 4 3 2 1 Appropriately engaged in class 5 4 0 0 Demonstrates proper self-disclosure 9 0 0 0 Receptive to feedback [peers and instructor] 7 2 0 0 Student is a good fit for the program 4 3 2 0

2 scores: 2 students will do remedial skill work in fall 2020; 1 student withdrew and will retake the course



Appendix K

Helper Competency Skills 601 A

The program evaluation report is located on the CMHC program’s webpage. Stakeholders were emailed and directed to the webpage to locate this report. July 31, 2020

Student Name:

Helping Skills

Exceeds

Expectations;

Demonstrates

Competency (5)

Meets

Expectations;

Demonstrates

Competency (4)

Near

Expectations/Dev

eloping

Competency (3)

Below Expectations;

Unacceptable or

Lacking Competency

(2)

Harmful (1) Comments:

1. nonverbal skills includes body position, eye contact,

posture, distance from client, voice

tone, etc.* 6 2 0 1 0

2. encouragers includes minimal encouragers and

door openers* 4 3 1 1 0

3. questions use of appropriate open and closed

questions*(not interrogation, or

probing out of self interest) 4 3 1 1 0

4. paraphrasing basic reflection of content of client

story 5 1 3 0 0

5. feeling reflections basic reflection of client feeling from

story 2 2 4 1 0

6. reflection of meaning reflection of values and core beliefs

(takes counseling to deeper level)* 0 4 1 0 0

7. summarizing a brief synopsis of the session3 3 1 0 0

8. challenging challenging client to recognize

inconsistencies and evaluate

inconsistencies* 3 2 0 0 0

9. reframing helping client see alternative way of

viewing situation; additional

perspective taking 0 3 1 0 0

10. immediacy "when helpers disclose how they are

feeling about the client, about

themselves in relation to the client, or

about the therapeutic relationship"

(Hill, 2009, p.254). 4 2 1 0 0

11. use of silence helper allows client to tell their story;

doesn't talk over the client; allows the

client time to process without filling

the space 3 0 1 0 0

The program evaluation report is located on the CMHC program’s webpage. Stakeholders were emailed and directed to the webpage to locate this report. July 31, 2020

Student Name:

Exceeds

Expectations;

Demonstrates

Competency (5)

Meets

Expectations;

Demonstrates

Competency (4)

Near

Expectations/Dev

eloping

Competency (3)

Below Expectations;

Unacceptable or

Lacking Competency

(2)

Harmful (1) Comments:

Ethical behavior

12. informed consent Helper covers all dimensions of

consent to counseling, including

limitations to confidentiality 8 0 0 0 013. culturally competent helper is respectful of client's culture

and does not impose own personal

attitudes, beliefs, and/or values onto

client 8 0 1 0 014. maintains boundaries helper focuses on client concern;

helper remains in professional role

rather than role of a friend; helper

uses self-disclosure minimally and for

the sole purpose of benefitting the

client; helper does not act as the

'expert' doing to the client, but is

collaborative with client 5 3 1 0 0*reference Young, M. (2017), p. 293-295.

Grading:

/100 points



Appendix L

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment 601B



Appendix M

Helper Skill Competency 601B



Appendix N

Systematic Developmental Student Assessment 641



Appendix O

Final Exam 602



COUN 602 Final Exam Scores

Student Final Exam Score (out of 30)

1 30 2 28.5

3 28

4 28 5 30 6 29.5

7 27.5 8 30

9 29

10 26.5 11 29 12 27 13 29 14 27 15 28



Appendix P

2020 Faculty Evaluation of Practicum/Internship Students



IMMACULATA UNIVERSITY

CLINICAL MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING

FACULTY SUPERVISOR’S EVALUATION OF STUDENT

Directions: This evaluation is to be completed by all faculty supervisors at the end of each

semester. The student evaluation form is to be completed collaboratively with the student and

reviewed after completion. Final evaluations are completed the second to last week of the

semester. The student is responsible for returning the signed evaluation to their group

supervision instructors. Please provide specific feedback in each comment section.

Name of Student Counselor:

Name of Internship Site:

Site Supervisor Name:

Term or Period Covered by this Evaluation:

Rating Scale Directions: Place an X in the number which best describes your evaluation of the

student counselor at this moment in his or her development. This evaluation is intended to

represent the student’s work along a developmental continuum.

Outstanding Very Good Adequate Unsatisfactory Not Observed

4 3 2 1 N/A

PERSONAL/PROFESSIONAL

CHARACTERISTICS

4 3 2 1 N/A

Sensitivity to others

Ability to accept others’ values

Openness to growth and learning

Awareness of own strengths and areas for continued

growth

Maintains therapeutic boundaries with client/family

Adheres to professional code of ethics

Non-judgmental towards client’s behaviors and concerns

Comments on the Student’s Personal/Professional Characteristics:

SKILLS IN COUNSELING 4 3 2 1 N/A



Able to apply knowledge to counseling and/or

client/family situation

Consistently demonstrates verbal/non-verbal attending

skills

Demonstrates respect for client/family

Is genuine and congruent with client/family

Can develop client/family affective awareness through

empathic responses

Paraphrases content statements

Effectively demonstrates confrontation skills

Uses probing questions to deepen client/family

exploration

Uses immediacy statements in session

Concretely expresses client concerns

Reflects client/family concerns

Accurately summarizes during and at the end of sessions

Comments of Student’s Skills in Counseling:

CONCEPTUALIZATION 4 3 2 1 N/A

Ability to generate theory-based hypotheses concerning

client/family behavior

Integrates verbal/non-verbal behaviors into

conceptualization

Ability to identify areas where additional information is

needed to adequately conceptualize the client/family

Attends to cultural factors

Demonstrates intentionality in sessions

Comments of Student Conceptualization:

PERSONALIZATION/COUNTERTRANSFERENCE 4 3 2 1 N/A



Awareness of and sensitivity to client/family’s impact on

self

Ability to critique and analyze own taped sessions

Able to integrate supervision feedback into sessions

Recognition of personal values and experiences and how

they influence counseling

Comments of Personalization/Countertransference:

COMMUNICATION SKILLS 4 3 2 1 N/A

Works collaboratively with others

Able to consult with others while maintaining client

confidentiality

Reports suspected or actual child abuse/neglect to

supervisor and Child Protective Services within 24 hours

Able to effectively convey clinical information orally and

in written form

Accepts and completes assigned tasks

Comments of Communication Skills:

Yes No

Has this evaluation been discussed with the student counselor?

Is remediation necessary?

Student’s Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________

[Student signature indicates that the instructor and you have reviewed and discussed the

evaluation. The student is welcome to provide written comment on the back of the form.]

Supervisor’s Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________



Appendix Q

Informed Consent for Telecounseling



Appendix R

Free Counseling Conference

department of psychology and counseling clinical …...the program evaluation report is located on...

Documents