The Brief Intervention for School Clinicians (BRISC) has been the subject of two research studies funded by the Institute for Education Sciences (IES). In the most recent study (grant number R305A160111), 48 high schools in three states (WA, MD, MN) were recruited and assigned to BRISC (n=23) or school-based services as usual (SAU; n=25) using stratified blocked random assignment. Mental health clinicians and school counselors working in schools in the experimental condition received training and consultation to implement the four-session BRISC model while practitioners in SAU schools provided services as usual. Students seeking or referred to school-based mental health treatment received BRISC (n=259) or SAU (n=198), depending on their school’s assignment. The research team assessed students at baseline, two, and six months post-baseline. Practitioners also completed measures over time. Mixed effects regression modeling was used to assess within- and between-group differences on outcomes.
The main findings of this multi-site, randomized efficacy study were as follows:
- Clinicians working in schools assigned to BRISC gave positive ratings of BRISC feasibility, learnability, and acceptability. Some clinicians expressed concern about applicability to the full range of students served, especially those presenting with high levels of mental health need. These findings provide important guidance for schools and districts seeking an efficient School mental health (SMH) strategy that can be applied to a wide range of students’ needs.
- Students served by practitioners in BRISC-assigned schools were more likely to report receiving SMH services at 2 months, more likely to have discharged from SMH by 6 months, and less likely to have received other MH services at 6 months. This provides support for greater efficiency of BRISC than SAU.
- Students served by practitioners in BRISC-assigned schools reported significant resolution of their self-reported problems over time and were significantly more likely to move out of the clinical range for anxiety and overall mental health impairment. No MH outcomes were more positive for the SAU group. This provides support for greater efficacy of BRISC in addressing MH symptoms.
- Academic outcomes (e.g., number of office discipline referrals, total suspensions, credits earned, days absent, cumulative end-of-year GPA) were no different for BRISC versus students receiving SAU. These results align with previous studies showing that school mental health interventions can confer meaningful mental health and functioning benefits without concurrently observed academic outcomes. Ongoing research will examine whether students who showed mental health improvement also experienced improved academic outcomes.
The results from this study provide evidence of BRISC’s potential to improve mental health, and behavioral outcomes for high school students. The study also provides evidence for BRISC’s acceptability and feasibility, and its potential to affect the clinical practices of school mental health providers and improve the efficiency of SMH services.
In addition to manuscripts described above, the research team is also using data from the BRISC study to examine the types of presenting problems of high school students referred to or seeking school mental health treatment, the level of use of evidence-based elements used in SMH services, and differential impacts of BRISC (and SMH services in general) on students of different racial backgrounds.
The BRISC developers and research team have worked with instructional design experts to develop a BRISC e-learning platform with supports (e.g., manual, implementation guide) that is now available for license.
Peer-reviewed presentations and publications:
Pilot test of an engagement, triage, and brief intervention strategy for school mental health (2019)