Effective Planning for Groups

Janice L. DeLucia-Waack, Amy G. Nitza

• Publisher: SAGE Publications, Inc
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781483317915
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Bildung
• Subtopic: Bildungsberatung

Any intentional group is based on a coherent group plan. This book will identify the elements that are basic to any plan and will apply these elements within an ongoing example. Among the elements to be included are: Identifying the Population, Need and Environmental Assessment, Goals, Rationale for Using Group, Type of Group, Conceptual Framework Used, attention to Group Developmental stage and to Group Dynamics, Group Size, Group Composition, Session-by-Session plans, Evaluation Methodology.

---

1	Introduction

---

Current best practice (Thomas & Pender, 2008) suggests that groups are essentially designed and planned before the first group member is interviewed. In practice, however, this is often not the case. In fact, popular myth suggests that planning somehow signifies incompetence. Bob Conyne (1999) said it best in Failures in Group Work: How We Can Learn From Our Mistakes: “In fact, not so long ago, it was believed by many (some to this day) that if group leaders were ‘really good,’ not only did they not need to plan but the planning would distract from their spontaneity and effectiveness as group leaders” (p. 8).

In contrast, the Association for Specialists in Group Work (ASGW) Best Practice Guidelines (Thomas & Pender, 2008) suggests three major emphases in best practice for groups: planning, performing, and processing. Planning is essential to effective group leadership. Planning often takes as much time and energy as, sometimes even more than, the actual group leadership. Good planning ensures that group members have been carefully selected and prepared for group, group goals match individual goals, group interventions have been selected to meet group goals, and coleaders have a good working relationship and an agreed-on plan for the group.

Planning is different depending on the type of group, but each group requires substantial planning time. Task groups involve people who come together for a common goal; group supervision, planning meetings, clubs, task forces, staff development, community presentations, and classrooms are all examples of task groups. For a task group, much of the planning time may be spent on an ecological assessment where leaders listen to their community and see what the needs are. For example, a school principal might decide that an ecology club is needed. Focused discussion with teachers would indicate those teachers who are willing to act as advisors to such a club and who have expertise and interest in land and water conservation and in ways to leave less of a carbon footprint. Discussions with students would indicate whether land and water conservation are of interest to them. Discussion with the local community agencies would indicate whether there was need for a campaign and interventions around water conservation and water pollution. If so, the club advisor might decide to partner with the local water conservation council to create public service announcements and volunteer on a local water conservation project. The ecological assessment is the major focus for a task group and leads into goals and activities of the group. The teacher advisor would also have to create a schedule and familiarize him or herself with the guidelines of how to lead an effective task group (Thomas & Pender, 2008; Wilson, Rapin, & Haley-Banez, 2000). DeLucia-Waack and Nitza (2011) provided suggestions for leading task groups, as well as specific guidelines for task groups in schools (DeLucia-Waack & Nitza, 2010).

For psychoeducational groups, once the goals of the group have been decided based on the needs of potential group members, group leaders need to spend time reviewing the current literature on group practice and research to identify resources and group interventions that will be helpful as they plan the group. Case examples are provided in Chapter 7 and throughout this book. For help in planning psychoeducational groups, see Bauman and Steen (2010, 2012); DeLucia-Waack (2006); DeLucia-Waack, Bridbord, Kleiner, and Nitza (2006); DeLucia-Waack, Segrist, and Horne (2008); Foss, Green, Wolfe-Stiltner, & DeLucia-Waack (2008); Morganett (1990, 1994); Salazar (2009); and Smead (1995, 1996).

MacGowan and Hanbidge (2013) provide an excellent example of planning for an evidence-based counseling group:

Rosa Gutiérrez is a newly hired group worker at a community mental health center (CMHC) located in a large metropolitan area. She recently graduated with a master’s degree in social work and had brief previous experience working at another CMHC. She is fully bilingual and considers herself a bicultural Latina, the population mostly served by the center. Rosa was asked to lead a group for Latinas diagnosed with depression and without medical insurance. To fulfill her mandate, Rosa felt she needed to get a better idea of the best available evidence for providing services that were culturally responsive to depressed Latina groups. Her supervisor’s limited knowledge about evidence-based practices caused Rosa some initial concern; however, she recommended that Rosa speak with a field instructor who had access to relevant, summarized literature located in peer-reviewed journals. At a team meeting, Rosa advocated for and was supported by the organization in the development of a new evidence-based group work (EBGW) intervention. A Spanish-speaking bilingual staff member named Maria, who was knowledgeable about evidence-based practice, volunteered to cofacilitate the Latina depression group with Rosa.

To begin the EBGW process, Rosa formulated a question: In establishing a culturally relevant group for Latinas, what relatively brief (10–12 sessions) group intervention will best reduce depression? Evidence was collected from the literature to see if there was an effective group approach for low-income Latinas or if a mainstream option would need to be adapted. Group treatments for depression, primarily using cognitive behavioral and interpersonal therapy, had been rated as “well established” for adolescents and adults (Johnson, 2008; Levy & O’Hara, 2010, cf. Table 1). Other culturally appropriate material (Muñoz, Ippen, Rao, Le, & Dwyer, 2000; Muñoz & Mendelson, 2005; Muñoz & Miranda, 1986) was identified, without the need for substantial modifications. Rosa and Maria critically appraised the evidence for its rigor, impact, and applicability, and then applied the evidence to address Rosa’s question. They related the three areas of rigor, impact, and applicability to Bond, Drake, and Becker’s (2010) nine “ideal features” of a mental health intervention and decided to implement the cognitive behavioral group therapy model, as it was developed specifically for low-income Latino/as. They utilized the 12-week model, which included the core elements of the intervention but not the extra 4-week module related to health issues, as it was not deemed relevant (Muñoz & Miranda, 1986). The manual was available electronically in Spanish and English (Muñoz et al., 2000). Rosa and Maria also included discussion about challenges in the acculturation process, which may contribute to depressive symptoms (Levy & O’Hara, 2010), included group content that recognized acculturation as a bidirectional process, and addressed acculturation issues related to gender (e.g., mother and child challenges, financial stressors). Group sessions would also include information about accessing no-cost community resources.

In terms of process, Rosa and Maria reviewed the American Group Psychotherapy Association (AGPA, 2007) and Association for the Advancement of Social Work with Groups (2005) practice standards and the ASGW diversity competence principles (Singh, Merchant, Skudrzyk, & Ingene, 2012) to prepare and implement the intervention. Specifically, ethnically and linguistically matched therapists offering the group in client-preferred languages is important and improves outcomes (Smith, Rodríguez, & Bernal, 2011). It is also important to explicitly emphasize the cultural values of the clients throughout group sessions (Griner & Smith, 2006). Rosa would also selectively disclose personal information to enhance a personalized professional relationship with group members that would help build the therapeutic alliance, reflecting personalismo, or value for the personal connection in relationships. In addition, they would monitor how the group received the material.

To secure referrals, Rosa shared information with the local hospital’s family health clinic, noting that transportation vouchers would be offered (Stacciarini, O’Keeffe, & Mathews, 2007). The Group Selection Questionnaire (Burlingame, Cox, Davies, Layne, & Gleave, 2011) was administered to select group members. Additionally, to maximize cohesion, the maximum number of group members would be set at nine. Group orientation sessions were arranged so prospective group members could meet Rosa and Maria over coffee and pastries, with specific information about the group shared in those sessions (AGPA, 2007). They discussed handouts (in Spanish) that oriented group members to the group experience. For an outcome measure, the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ–9; available in English and Spanish) was used to measures both depression symptoms and their severity (Martin, Rief, Klaiberg, & Braehler, 2006). The PHQ–9 was selected because it is brief, easy to administer, and free of charge (available at www.integration.samhsa.gov/images/res/PHQ%20-%20Questions.pdf). Depression scores would be measured every couple of weeks and charted over time. In addition, group members would complete a brief evaluation of each session (Rose, 1984), which would ask them to rate on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very highly satisfied), “How satisfied were you with today’s session?” (in Spanish), and to comment if they wished. These ratings would be reviewed weekly. To assess cohesion, the Group Psychotherapy Intervention Rating Scale (GPIRS) was used (Chapman, Baker, Porter, Thayer, & Burlingame, 2010).

At the end of the group sessions, Rosa and Maria reviewed both the outcomes and process of the group. Reflecting on the MAP (Member-relevant, Answerable, Practice question). question, the main purpose of the group was to reduce depression. She and Maria reviewed the depression progress chart, member satisfaction scores, and ratings from the GPIRS to determine group effectiveness and cohesion. Process and outcome results were communicated with the agency team to determine the implications for offering another Latina depression group.

The ASGW Best Practice Guidelines (Thomas & Pender, 2008) delineate the following steps as part of the planning process:

 

• Assessment of values and skills related to type of group
• Ecological assessment
• Group development and design
  • Type of group and how it meets community needs
  • Purpose and goals of group
  • Fees, schedule, and meeting place (unique accommodations based on population)
  • Techniques and leadership style
    • Activities and group plans from the literature
    • Adaptation from literature and empirically supported treatments to this group population
  • Recruitment materials
  • Screening and selection criteria and outline
    • Professional disclosure statement
    • Procedures for informed consent
    • Information about confidentiality (and limits of)
  • Preparation materials
  • Evaluation measures (outcome and process)

 

This book is designed to lead readers through the specific steps of designing and planning a group, focusing on psychoeducational and counseling/ therapy groups. A specific outline will be provided sequentially as a guide for the planning process. Included will be suggestions about how to select, organize, and arrange activities, as well as relevant resources. Important topics to be discussed in this book include pregroup decision making based on the goals and population of the group, selection of interventions, securing agency and school support, recruitment strategies, selection criteria, leadership preparation, and supervision.

There are several good reasons why group leaders often skip one or more of these vital steps in the planning process. Long before the group starts, several important decisions need to be made about the structure, content, and interventions to be used. However, these decisions cannot be made in a vacuum; information must be gathered about what has been shown to be effective, the setting, and potential participants’ needs and interests.

Purpose of the Book

---

Any intentional group is based on a coherent group plan. This book will identify the elements that are basic to any plan and will apply these elements within an ongoing example. The following chapters focus on identification of a population, type of group, and group goals; rationale for using groups; procedural decisions based on best practices; leader preparation; planning group sessions; and case examples.

---

2	What Type of Group for Whom With What Goals?
	Identification of a Target Population, Type of Group, and Group Goals

---

Planning for a group involves several steps. The first and arguably most important, as it determines the content and procedures of all other steps, is identification of a target population and subsequent identification of type of group and group goals. Once the target population and the type of group are identified, goals should be easily identifiable. This chapter leads you through these key steps with illustrative examples.

Identification of a Population

---

This decision comes from the setting where you work and the people with whom you work. Who are your clients or potential group members? Are they students in your school, clients in your agency or work setting, or possibly colleagues for whom you have been asked to provide training and/or supervision? Once you decide who will be the recipient of the group intervention, you can begin to work on the type of group and goals based on what is needed.

Needs and Environmental Assessment

---

A needs assessment is the first step in the gathering of essential information to plan a group. There are several ways to do this. One is to ask potential group members. In the schools, even elementary schools, students can be provided with a list of potential group topics and asked to indicate which, if any, groups they would like to participate in. Experience in schools suggests that it is helpful to ask students not only what groups they would be interested in but also what groups other students might find useful. In an agency or other settings, clients may be asked about what groups they would perceive as helpful and/or be willing to participate in.

Staff who work with potential group members are also a valuable source of information about what kinds of groups would be useful. In schools, parents and teachers can provide a suggested list of helpful group topics. Additionally, counselors in the schools and community agencies who are working with clients individually are a good source of information about groups that would be appropriate. Once data have been collected using a survey and/or staff and counselor input, group leaders may then begin to decide what groups are most needed at this time. For example, parents may suggest that students need a school survival group that focuses on time management and organizational skills. Teachers might suggest that students need a coping skills group to manage stress. In an agency, counselors might suggest a psychoeducational group that focuses on teaching basic communication skills and also a counseling group that helps group members identify and change the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that are currently causing problems in their relationships.

Choosing a Type of Group

---

The next step in the design of a group plan is to determine what type of group may be the most appropriate and effective to address the identified needs. The Association for Specialists in Group Work (ASGW) classifies three different categories of groups focused on individual growth and change: psychoeducational, counseling, and therapy groups (Wilson, Rapin, & Haley-Banez, 2000). While there is overlap among these types of groups, they each emphasize different types of goals and mechanisms for achieving those goals.

Psychoeducational groups promote the development of skills and coping strategies, and provide information and opportunities for practice. Psychoeducational interventions assist group members in sharing and developing improved ways of functioning to deal with new or difficult situations; goals may be cognitive, affective, and/or behavioral. These groups generally emphasize learning through content and may use learning strategies to introduce and teach new skills, or to practice and strengthen existing skills. Psychoeducational groups teach specific skills and coping strategies in an effort to prevent problems (such as anger management, social skills, stress management, conflict resolution, assertiveness, cognitive restructuring). Relatedly, they tend to be more structured than other types of groups, with activities designed to facilitate discussion of a topic and/or development of new skill...

Table of contents

• Cover page
• Title
• Copyright
• Brief Contents
• Contents
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: What Type of Group for Whom With What Goals?: Identification of a Target Population, Type of Group, and Group Goals
• Chapter 3: Rationale for Using Groups
• Chapter 4: Making Decisions About Your Group Based on Best Practices in Group Work
• Chapter 5: Group Leader Preparation
• Chapter 6: Planning Group Sessions
• Chapter 7: Planning Group Sessions
• Chapter 8: Case Examples in Planning a Group
• APPENDICES
• REFERENCES
• INDEX
• ABOUT THE AUTHORS