Mental Health at KU€¦ · Mental health includes our emotional, psychological, and social...

Mental Health at KU: Addressing Stigma,

Barriers and Resources

Prepared by the 2019-20 KU Staff Fellows

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

INTRODUCTION 3

RESEARCH 4

FOCUS GROUPS 6

SURVEYS 9

RECOMMENDATIONS 10

REFERENCES 15

KU STAFF FELLOWS 17

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 18

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Focus Groups 19 Appendix B: Survey Questions 20

Appendix C: Survey Results 21

Executive Summary

It has become apparent that we live in an age of perpetual fluidity. While our institutional mission remains steadfast, our operations continue to morph rapidly in concert with the global environment. More than ever before, the foundation of our collective strength is our people.

Few issues have such a direct impact on employees and their productivity as mental health; however, traditional employer benefits programs often fall short in proactively addressing this realm of support. The 2019-20 Staff Fellows were tasked with finding support shortfalls and identifying opportunities to improve employee mental health support at the University of Kansas.

Our preliminary work included research in the following realms:

• Current state of internal services and resources available to University of Kansas faculty and staff;

• External services available within the wider regional community; and• Services utilized by other public institutions or private businesses that

may be relevant in addressing gaps in current services.

We then turned our investigation inward, conducting focus groups with staff, faculty, and graduate student employees in order to collect firsthand experiences and impressions of the current state of mental health support services for KU employees. This series of interviews was followed by an online survey of KU employees.

Several KU leaders engaged with the Staff Fellows in conjunction with this project, helping to shape research and influence our approach. During her visit, Provost Barbara Bichelmeyer identified four levers that can be shifted to effect institutional improvement: 1. Hiring with capacity; 2. Skills and knowledge; 3. Resources; and 4. Motivation and incentive.

Within the framework of these levers, we have identified several recommendations for action spanning five key domains: communication, leadership, services, policy, and research. We believe proactive advancement across these domains will elevate the four levers in support of employee mental health.

KU STAFF FELLOWS 2019-20 REPORT 2

Introduction

The 2019-20 Staff Fellows cohort comes from a wide variety of departments, pooling together a diverse skillset of knowledge and experience and a shared passion for mental health. As our relationships with one another grew, it became clear we were all motivated to create a better mental health culture for staff and faculty at the University of Kansas. We came together as a group. We planned our project. We conducted our research. Then, in March of 2020, the new reality of COVID-19 struck the KU community.

None of us could have predicted the effects the pandemic would have on our community, our careers, and our individual lives. As the previously well-defined lines between work and home, between professional and personal life, have dissolved amidst this pandemic, the concept of employee health as a whole-life issue has become even clearer. Faculty and staff need flexible, effective, and accessible mental health support available anywhere, whether it be on the Lawrence campus, a remote research site in Alaska, or their living room. This need became even more pressing as employees found themselves isolated from the rest of the KU community and their normal support systems.

It is our sincere hope that our efforts for this project will help address some of these issues. As is fitting for such a personal topic, most of us completed this work in our home offices, connected to the rest of the cohort only by the internet. We are immensely proud of the final product. Still, we know that the work is not done. We look forward to future research and projects addressing staff and faculty mental health as we progress past this pandemic and into whatever else the 21st century may offer.

We understand investing in our community’s mental health – our stability and resilience – is not only key to our individual satisfaction, productivity, and broader culture of compassion, but is of utmost importance in propelling our institution.


Mental health includes our emotional, psychological, and social well-being. It affects how we think, feel, and act. It also helps determine how we handle stress, relate to others, and make choices.

Mental health is important at every stage of life, from childhood and adolescence through adulthood.Over the course of your life, if you experience mental health problems, your thinking, mood, and behavior

could be affected. Many factors contribute to mental health problems, including: Biological factors, such as genes or brain chemistry; life experiences, such as trauma or abuse; and family history of mental health problems.

(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services)


Research

Internal findingsThe internal group found Watkins Memorial Health Center Staff Clinic treats staff for acute onset problems and can provide referrals for mental health conditions. The Staff Clinic is open during regular business hours and accepts employee health insurance plans.

The KU Psychological Clinic offers a wide variety of mental health services to staff and their families. They do not accept insurance, but employees can use their flexible spending and health savings accounts to pay the sliding-scale fee. The clinic is staffed by graduate students from the Department of Psychology who are overseen by KU professors. There is currently a four-month waiting period to begin services.

The KU Public Safety Office trains all police officers in Mental Health First Aid and crisis intervention. The department offers trained in-house peer support to its employees, as well as an extensive, county-provided phone application for self-evaluation and access to vetted mental health resources for first responders.

KU Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS) provides mental health services to students, including graduate students. However, they do not provide counseling services for staff or faculty. CAPS also offers a formal, eight-hour Mental Health First Aid training to groups of faculty and staff.

The KU Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) resource guide created by the ADA Resource Center for Equity and Accessibility connects users with several resources, but the internal group found the guide can be hard to locate online (accessibility.ku.edu).

The State of Kansas Employee Assistance Program (KU EAP) offers eligible KU staff and faculty access to mental health resources, including up to eight counseling sessions per year, per issue.

External findingsThe external group found many of the agencies they contacted relied heavy upon EAPs to support their employees. Most state agencies, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and various peer academic institutions used their associated EAPs for all mental health concerns.

The Staff Fellows cohort researched the current state of mental health resources within the University of Kansas, its peer institutions, and relevant corporate settings. The goal was to evaluate existing campus resources that may be underutilized, resources that are available and in use in other locations, as well as resources that are not in use, but could benefit KU faculty and staff.

Staff Fellows divided into two groups: internal and external. The internal group focused on the current state of resources available within the University of Kansas community. The external group researched potential resources outside of the university, both in higher education and in corporate business.


ComPsych and Silver Cloud were commonly used as EAP mental health contractors. Lyra Health, which provides mental health services to companies including Zoom, provided a white paper. Their findings suggest that traditional EAPs, insurance companies, and some therapies (up to as much as 80%) are ineffective, and that communications and technology fall short in supporting organizations’ mental health efforts.

Mobile device mental health applications and telemedicine/teletherapy options were found to be growing in popularity. For example, Walgreens provides a robust telemedicine program and has partnered with the National Council for Mental Health to provide assessment and referral to their pharmacists. Mobile and teletherapy options often provide more timely access to support than traditional face-to-face therapies. In the months since the external group conducted their research, public and private enterprises have been moving increasingly toward providing virtual therapy options to their employees, with so many working remotely while enduring social isolation due to COVID-19.

Locally, Lawrence Memorial Hospital (LMH Health) is exploring ways to incentivize engagement with mental health resources. They developed the Lavender Project as a model to provide services to employees who have experienced trauma. Employees so affected receive information and resources to support them, along with a lapel pin that can be worn to signify to colleagues their connection to an incident of trauma – a gesture aimed at reducing stigma and supporting a culture of compassion.

Bert Nash Community Mental Health Center has redefined much of their organizational engagement through a decidedly trauma-informed care lens with increased transparency. They formed a team of employees which meets monthly and issues a newsletter promoting resiliency practices for employees. Bert Nash is attempting to shift the culture around stigma by moving beyond a focus on crisis intervention to emphasize education around “mental health hygiene.”

The Lawrence-Douglas County Health Department has formed a coalition including LMH Health; Bert Nash; the Lawrence-Douglas County Housing

Authority; DCCCA, Inc.; Heartland Community Health Center; and Heartland Regional Alcohol and Drug Assessment Center (RADAC) in an attempt to become more proactive in helping the community. The Health Department has worked closely with Lawrence Public Schools (USD497) on the Zero Suicide program and has collaborated extensively with schools to increase awareness around issues of mental health and wellness.

Other local efforts include a trend towards peer support services. LMH Health, the Lawrence Public Library, and the Health Department rely upon peer support employees in their mental health response plans. Headquarters Counseling Center, based in Lawrence, provides a 24-hour suicide prevention hotline for Kansans, as well as counseling, education, and resources. Due to the nature of their work, Headquarters has worked to build a sense of community among staff and volunteers, encouraging teambuilding and mentorship. They have partnered with KU and other local agencies in the past to help establish a student peer-to-peer network.

Within university law enforcement, the most robust program was found at Iowa State University (ISU). ISU has a full-time mental health advocate working within their police department. The advocate responds to mental health crises on campus, including incidents involving staff. She has two therapy dogs who also attend staff wellness activities. A University Well-Being Alliance meets regularly to discuss resources for faculty and staff. Additionally, a Faculty and Staff Safety Team (FASST) meets weekly to evaluate any faculty or staff who may be struggling and need assistance. This program appears to be similar to the student care referral team (SCRT) model KU uses for students. In general, within peer institutions, the law enforcement response focused on crisis intervention, though some departments had access to first-responder peer support programs in other jurisdictions. The more comprehensive programs had robust, clear communications and easy-to-find resources.

Research on peer universities with medical centers indicated that many institutions use their teaching programs to support counseling sessions for staff and faculty who need mental health support. Other universities gave staff and faculty access to mental health resources originally designed for students.

RESEARCH


Focus Groups

MethodologyDue to the limits of time and resources, Staff Fellows determined focus group attendance would be targeted to connect with approximately 1% of KU’s workforce. Participants could enroll in a chosen session via KU’s MyTalent Learning Management System.

Each session was scheduled for 75 minutes with a maximum of ten participants. Nine sessions were open to faculty and staff, and one session was dedicated specifically to graduate student employees. Note: We felt it was important to provide a distinct opportunity for graduate student employees to participate, as their barriers, stigma experience, and access to resources differ considerably from faculty and staff. Undergraduate student employees were not invited to participate as their specific needs fell outside the scope of our research.

One member of Staff Fellows facilitated each session, while a second fellow captured responses. Nine questions (Appendix A) were posed to each focus

group, designed to explore an understanding of mental health barriers, stigma, resources, and culture at KU. ParticipationActual focus group size ranged from three to nine participants. A total of 66 participants out of a possible 100 took part in the process.

A number of staff, faculty, and graduate student employees reached out to Staff Fellows to express interest in the focus group exercise. While they were unable to participate due to various reasons (e.g., conflicting schedules, work location, etc.), they were invited to take part in the subsequent online survey process.

AnalysisText analysis was used to study focus group participant responses, with an emphasis on identifying common themes.

From February 17-20, 2020, Staff Fellows conducted ten focus group sessions with KU faculty, staff, and graduate student employees at various locations on the KU Lawrence Campus to explore mental health perceptions and experiences around a range of targeted topics.


Results

The focus group sessions began by exploring attitudes toward employee mental health at KU within an employee’s unit and within the university in general.

The focus group sessions next explored participant awareness of mental health supports at KU as well as ADA protection around mental health diagnoses.

Some participants expressed sensing:

• A lack of support from leadership, supervisors, and colleagues;

• A lack of communication regarding mental health from the organization, leaders, and supervisors;

• Mental health being more of a joke than a reality; and/or

• Pressure to meet deadlines with few resources.

Some participants expressed feeling:

• Guilt when taking vacation/sick time for any reason including mental health;

• Supported within their department by colleagues and supervisors;

• Surprise at available resources outlined during the onboarding process; and/or

• Empowered to help others in their immediate team if a colleague was struggling.

During a review of the focus group responses, it became evident employees’ perspectives and experiences varied dramatically based on the department in which they worked, as well as

the attitudes, experience, and training of their supervisors.

Based on the comments shared, it is clear some unit leaders understand, or seek to understand, the mental health needs of the individuals they supervise. These departments are often the ones participants indicated as environments where employees are encouraged to take vacation and/or sick days, attend training events, and work less rigidly structured schedules.

Leaders in other areas appear to not acknowledge mental health as a need. These leaders seemed to expect employees to be available outside of typical work hours and while on vacation. Support for professional development opportunities around “soft skills training” and flexibility in work schedules seem minimal to nonexistent. It was noted some of these leaders were also unwilling to make accommodations employees had sought out within the protections covered by ADA.

• 52.5% of participants indicated an awareness that mental health diagnoses were covered by the ADA and that individuals could receive accommodations in the workplace.

• 46.9% of participants indicated an awareness of how to seek mental health support.

• Among known mental health supports at KU (Appendix A, Table 1), the EAP was the single most commonly known resource or service. However, less than one-third of participants were aware of its existence.

FOCUS GROUPS


Next, the focus groups explored barriers to employee mental health resources.

Once barriers had been identified, the facilitators asked participants what resources they would like to see made available at KU.

When participants were asked if they had made use of any mental health resources on campus, one-third answered affirmatively. Continuing the conversation, participants were asked how they felt when seeking support for mental health.

Lastly, the focus groups explored what they would like the mental health culture at KU to be.

A recurring theme throughout focus group responses was lack of training for employees and supervisors. Specific areas identified as lacking awareness included:

• Understanding of KU’s definition of mental health;

• University of Kansas Human Resource Management policies, such as the sick leave policy and its application to mental health;

• Available employee and supervisor resources, protections, and accommodations provided under ADA; and

• Ways to respond when faced with a staff member or colleague in crisis.

Other barriers expressed by participants included:

• Potential for bias or lost opportunity in the workplace related to disclosure of mental health condition or struggle;

• Retaliatory behavior for taking time off or seeking accommodations;

• Lack of resources specific to diverse populations;

• High cost of treatment; and• Lack of flexible scheduling to allow access to

resources.

This list outlines recurrent suggestions:

• Mandatory mental health awareness and invisible disability training;

• Dedicated resource on campus to provide mental health services to staff and faculty;

• Increased flexibility in scheduling work hours; and

• Increased communication and/or training related to resources currently available.

Similar to the responses regarding attitudes at KU, participants had a wide variety of experiences:

• Difficulty accessing services through the EAP;• EAP policies not always being followed;• Fear of repercussion or discovery by colleagues

or supervisors;• Lack of clear, open support from supervisors

and leadership;

• Lack of funding to provide necessary accommodations;

• Inconsistent training and/or knowledge regarding mental health and ADA accommodations; and/or

• Variability of accommodations and leadership and/or supervisory support from department to department.

FOCUS GROUPS

Education, awareness, and training were mentioned in every session. Participants expressed a desire to have KU leaders openly acknowledge personal mental health struggles as a way of normalizing and

destigmatizing the issue. They want to see mental health issues treated with the same importance granted to physical health issues, in both policy and practice.


Surveys

Participation915 people answered at least 1 survey question (for Questions, see Appendix B). With a workforce approximately 10,000 strong, the survey participants represent almost 10% of the population. Of these participants, 60% were staff (n=551), 25% were graduate student employees (n=229), 14% were faculty (n=127), and 1% preferred not to answer (n=8). Only 6% of survey participants indicated attending a focus group. AnalysisSurvey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Question response options were set up as a Likert scale. Results were synthesized for analysis into three categories (Agree—Neither Agree nor Disagree—Disagree) from an initial seven categories (Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Somewhat Disagree—Neither Agree nor Disagree—Somewhat Agree, Agree, Strongly Agree).

ResultsReflecting upon the results, several positive indicators emerged. More than half of the survey participants believe employees have positive attitudes toward mental health (Appendix B, fig. 1). Additionally, more than two-thirds indicated awareness that ADA applies to diagnosed mental health conditions (Appendix B, fig. 5), and that KU

provides resources for employee mental health (Appendix B, fig. 6). These results show resources exist to reduce barriers and stigma surrounding mental health. These resources are our employees.

Results also point toward several clear areas of concern. Less than half of survey participants feel comfortable discussing personal mental health issues with colleagues and/or supervisors (Appendix B, fig. 4). Nearly one-quarter have experienced barriers to accessing mental health resources provided for employees (Appendix B, fig. 8). One of the most troubling results is that 61% of survey takers have witnessed or experienced stigma related to mental health (Appendix B, fig. 10).

It should be reiterated that the timing of this survey coincided with significant local and global transformation, and the degree to which this may have influenced results is uncertain. Even so, our staff and faculty indicated the persistence of stigma and expressed interest in greater support for mental health. As we seek ways to provide additional resources during this unprecedented time of social isolation, fear, and economic uncertainty, we see opportunity to transform employees with positive attitudes into champions who will stand up and refuse to allow stigma and bias towards mental health to be a part of our university.

To further gauge mental health attitudes and awareness within the KU community, Staff Fellows created an anonymous online survey which was released via email March 11, 2020, to all faculty and staff. That same day, the Spring Break extension and transition to online classes was announced. By the end of the survey window, only essential staff remained on campus.


Recommendations

We believe the following proposed actions would serve to enrich our employees’ skills and knowledge (lever 2), better equip them with access to essential resources (lever 3), and incentivize self-care and compassion toward all in our community (lever 4). Clear and persistent action in these areas will help demonstrate our commitment and attract those who will further champion mental health (lever 1), propelling us toward our aspirational culture of support.

The following recommendations were forged from our research and shaped by the needs of our own colleagues. The suite of suggestions span a mix of short- and long-term timelines and intersect across five key domains: Leadership, Policy Development, Support Services, Communication, and recommendations for Further Research. We have also indicated our sense of prioritization among the suggestions to follow.

As the provost shared in conversation with the Staff Fellows, institutional changes can best be accomplished through the elevation of four key levers:

Hiring with capacity

Increasing skills & knowledge

Providing resources

Motivating people

1

2

3

4

Key

DOMAINS:

Leadership

Policy Development

Support Services

Communication

Further Research

Shorter-term goal

Longer-term goal

Priority to pursue


Leadership

Focus group and survey responses indicated a desire for supervisors and university leaders to demonstrate that employee mental health is a central institutional value.

1. Develop robust strategic communications plan and campaign, to include: • Creation of a central website where all resources

and services can clearly be aggregated and promoted to all employees on an ongoing basis (among an array of other tactics);

• Consistency in positive, affirming language that makes issues visible and normalizes stigma-free and supportive discussions around mental health;

• Emphasis on the value of life-work integration, promoting flexibility as campus moves towards a new spectrum of “normal” operations; and

• Use of multi-layer and multi-directional communication channels.

2. Recruit and encourage leaders to be ambassadors on this topic, championing their support and sharing personal mental health experiences to spark meaningful conversation, normalize dialogue and reduce stigma. • Interviews with contacts throughout our research

highlighted the instrumental value this approach can have in initiating cultural shift.

3. Create a University Standard of Care, which is modeled by leaders and serves to foster a culture of teambuilding, recognition, and compassion. The policy should support and integrate elements of other KU policies that support work/life integration: • Ability to work remotely; • Ability to take vacation or other time off without

repercussion; and • Support for cross-training within departments and

related areas as necessary to facilitate flexibility in employee leave.

Conversations with campus leaders and mentors, as well as responses from staff and faculty, indicate a need for new perspectives for the organization.

4. Integrate organizational psychology perspective into the Workplace Improvement Team processes through staff representation, strengthening attention to unit health/wellness as situations are being evaluated.

5. Build in accountability for change within areas experiencing challenges that contribute to workplace stress or decline in mental health. • Currently, Human Resources makes

recommendations for change after observation; however, there is no requirement for the department to act upon those recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Policy Development

Survey and focus group responses indicated a lack of understanding related to the sick leave policy application to mental health.

1. Update Human Resources Management Sick Leave Policy to include a definition of “health care provider,” using plain language which contains a non-exhaustive list of physical and mental health provider titles.

2. Examine new hire orientation and other Human Resource Management trainings which reference sick leave policy, revising for clear communication of appropriate use by employees and supervisors.

Participants indicated a desire to earn additional HealthQuest points for mental health wellness activities.

3. Research how to develop agency-specific wellness activities through HealthQuest. • Emporia State University utilized thist option during

their Healthy Hornets Challenge in early 2020 which allowed participating staff to earn 4 wellness points.

4. Develop annual agency-specific wellness activities to target mental health, and lobby the State Employees Health Plan to incorporate additional mental health-related wellness activities that can be pursued for points. • Not only might this help incentivize employee

participation in activities that connect to mental health, but it may also support a reduction in stigma.

Focus group and survey responses requested increased training for faculty, staff, supervisors, and departmental leadership.

5. Develop mandatory online training to be completed by all faculty, staff, and student employees.• An appropriate director should be assigned to oversee

this process and seek employee accountability. • Training may be stand-alone or integrated into

relevant courses.• Training should include the following objectives:

• Clarify legal rights and accommodations available under ADA;

• Offer inclusive definitions of mental health, mental health crisis, neurodiversity, and acute and chronic mental illness; and

• Employ scenario exercises to illustrate appropriate ways to discuss and support neurodiversity and mental health in the workplace.

6. Develop and implement mandatory training for any employees who supervise others (whether student employees, staff, or faculty members), as well as for department chairs and leadership. • Accountability for completion of training should be

built into the policy to ensure standard practices across campus.

• Based on narratives, this training should include: • Basic human resources management matters such

as time reporting, leave policies, and employment laws – highlighting flexible work accommodations that will support stronger work/life integration among employees;

• Scenarios for handling specific employee relation issues; and

• Outlines of resources available to supervisors for use when issues arise outside their experience or knowledge base.

• Research and implement incentives for employees to attend training events and for supervisors to support employees in attending development activities that serve to broaden their awareness of practices and resources that support mental health.

RECOMMENDATIONS


Support Services

Focus group and survey responses identified a strong desire for better access to on-site counseling and/or assistance connecting to resources (beyond referral to KU’s EAP).

1. Explore and pursue connection with Douglas County’s Peer Fellows Program, seeking a means for providing dedicated, on-site crisis counseling and liaising for faculty and staff.• In 2019, Douglas County started a Peer Fellows

Program which provides training and covers some start-up costs for on-site certified peer support personnel. These peers have personal experience with mental health conditions and/or crisis. They listen and help guide individuals towards appropriate resources. The program is currently being used by Bert Nash, LMH Health Emergency Department, and the Lawrence Public Library. Douglas County Director of Behavior Health Bob Tryanski has indicated openness to partnering with KU and advised a peer could potentially be dedicated toward serving KU faculty and staff. Further discussion is necessary to determine long-term costs and responsibilities for KU.

2. Research successful student programs and services that may be duplicated or expanded to serve staff and faculty. • Explore development of a referral process for

employees like the Care process used with students. • Investigate feasibility for on-site counseling center

like CAPS, but housed separately to maintain confidentiality and reduce barriers to treatment for employees concerned about encountering their students in that context.

3. Create a stand-alone department, or expand staffing and resources within an existing department, dedicated to employee mental health/wellness. • Ideally, staff within this unit would be able to provide

peer counseling, liaise to share key resources, and possess knowledge to act when faced with an individual in mental health crisis.

• Structural affiliation of such a unit is worth careful consideration (e.g., feedback suggested that the ADA or Ombuds offices might be perceived more neutrally than others).

Focus groups and survey responses related to KU’s EAP indicated a lack of program awareness and mixed experiences regarding its effectiveness.

4. Prepare and submit a report summarizing KU employee feedback and recommendations for modification to the state-contracted EAP. • This report could be shared with the Kansas

Department of Health & Environment Wellness Communications Coordinator over the EAP, State Employees Health Care Commission, and/or Health Care Commission Employee Advisory Committee, as appropriate.

• Feedback may highlight the need for better accountability and integration of teletherapy services within our existing EAP, or recommend consideration of a different provider.

5. Increase awareness of our existing EAP (including services therein) among eligible employees. • Communication tactics should consider that many

employees do not regularly check email or work on a computer.

6. Explore related services such as a self-assessment tool or mobile application which could be made available to KU employees to more effectively supplement existing EAP services.• Development could be explored with KU faculty

and students.

RECOMMENDATIONS


Communication

RECOMMENDATIONS

In articulating these recommendations, we found communication to be the most interconnected domain of all. Clear and considerate communication is central to many of the suggestions put forth in the domains of Leadership, Policy Development, and Support Services.

We are cognizant of the significant financial constraints we face as a public higher education institution — inherently, and particularly as we evolve amidst the pivotal impact of this pandemic. Staff Fellows recognize that the university may not have the resources to pursue all of these recommendations immediately, though a number

may be well-suited for grant opportunities or private support. In addition, many of the communications-based recommendations should be relatively easy to move forward at low expense.

We believe that dedicated investment in people’s mental wellness has perhaps never, in recent times, been so essential to our strength and forward motion. Amidst an era of perpetual flux, isolation, and the strains brought on by a blending of work and life, compassionate and connective communication will be key in supporting our resilience as individuals and a community.

Staff Fellows identified several areas related to employee mental health that call for further investigation:

A graduate student employee focus group exposed gaps in resources for that specific segment of campus staff. Further research is recommended regarding graduate student needs, resources, and obstacles that prevent access to those resources. This may include a distinct care service to protect graduate student confidentiality as some graduate students expressed concerns about using the same resources as their students. Further research should also include adjunct faculty, who may not have access to the same resources as permanent faculty and staff. In addition to research regarding the unique circumstances of graduate students and adjunct faculty, this cohort was not able to research the variability of mental health support access across diverse populations. Further research is recommended concerning potential variability in

service and support in terms of race, ethnicity, work hours, employee status, wages, and other factors and identities that could affect individual access to internal and external services.

The focus groups provided anecdotal evidence that the current EAP is not delivering a sufficient level of service and may not even provide the level of service advertised on the State of Kansas website. More research may be needed in terms of the EAP’s effectiveness to assess whether that service can be revised, or at least supplemented by the university itself to offer better benefits and coverage to our employees. This includes teletherapy services, which were identified as a need amongst KU employees and a service that would be utilized if available. The COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized the need for staff and faculty to be able to connect to university mental health services no matter where the employees are currently located.

Recommendations for Further Research


References

Aber, Ben. Police Officer, Washburn University Police Department. Personal interview by Jack Campbell. 9 Dec. 2019.

Auten, Jared. Training Coordinator, Headquarters Counseling Center. Personal interview by Courtney Foat. 21 Jan. 2020.

Bajuk, Katherine. Attorney & Wellness coordinator, New York County Public Defenders Services.

Personal interview by Leah Terranova. 16 Jan. 2020.

Branting, Amanda. Director of Partnerships, Lyra Health. Personal interview by Leah Terranova. 24 Jan. 2020.

Brown, Angie. Assistant Director for Communications and Worklife, Office of Human Resources, University of Florida. Personal interview by Wendy Bridges. 8 Jan. 2020.

Burns, Nikita. Account Manager, State of Kansas, ComPsych. Personal interview by Chris Bell. 16 Dec. 2019.

Campbell, Jack. Detective, KU Office of Public Safety. Personal interview by Jen Humphrey. 24 Jan. 2020.

Chandler, Colt. Captain, Oklahoma State University Police Department. Personal interview by Jack Campbell. 3 Dec. 2019.

Cole, Melissa. Benefits Manager, Human Resource Management, University of Kansas. Personal interview by Chris Bell. 11 Dec. 2019.


Criqui, Scott. Director of Human Resources, Bert Nash Community Mental Health Center. Personal interview by Courtney Foat. 24 Jan. 2020.

Danehy, Beth. Director, Faculty and Employee Assistant Program, University of Virginia. Personal interview by Wendy Bridges. 13 Jan. 2020.

Fuszard, Susan. Employee Assistant Consultant, University of Wisconsin – Madison. Personal interview by Wendy Bridges. 16 Jan. 2020.

Herl, Corey. Captain, Wichita State University Police Department. Personal interview by Jack Campbell. 9 Dec. 2019.

Hite, Stuart. Chief, Pittsburg State University. Personal interview by Jack Campbell. 2 Dec. 2019.

Hunter, James D. Director, Employee Assistance Program, University of Missouri – Columbia. Personal interview by Wendy Bridges. 9 Jan. 2020.

Hurst, Derrick. Director, Integrated Crisis Team, LMH Health. Personal interview by Courtney Foat. 14 Jan. 2020.

Kirk, Sarah. Director, KU Psychological Clinic. Personal interview by Megan Belaire. 2 Dec. 2019.

Lyra. (2019) Evaluating quality in mental health care: The shortcomings of traditional EAPs and health plan networks and how to overcome them. https://www.lyrahealth.com/quality-matters/.

Maestas, Michael. Director, Counseling and Psychological Services. Personal Interview by Megan Belaire, 24 Jan. 2020.

Mirabile, Jennifer. Senior HR Programs Coordinator, Employee Assistance Program, University of Oregon. Personal interview by Wendy Bridges. 9 Jan. 2020.

Moeller, Andrew. Lieutenant, Kansas State University Police Department. Personal interview by Jack Campbell. 2 Dec. 2019.

Phillips, Kinsey. Mental Health Advocate, Iowa State University. Personal interview by Jack Campbell. 17 Feb. 2020.

Provines, Jessica. Assistant Vice President, Student Affairs, Wellness Director, CAPS. Personal interview by Jack Campbell. 9 Dec. 2019.

Simpson, Matt. Captain, Washburn University Police Department. Personal interview by Jack Campbell. 2 Dec. 2019.

Tryanski, Bob. Director, Behavioral Health Projects. Lawrence/Douglas County Health Department. Personal interview by Courtney Foat. 16 Jan. 2020.

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, “What Is Mental Health?” Mentalhealth.gov. 5 Apr. 2019, www.mentalhealth.gov/basics/what-is-mental-health.

Vernon, Kristin. Director of Counseling, Headquarters Counseling Center. Personal interview by Courtney Foat. 21 Jan. 2020.

REFERENCES


KU FAMILY FRIENDLY POLICY WORKGROUP REPORT 5

2019-20 Staff Fellows

Jan Abney-Klohr | Accountant Senior, KU Operations

Megan Belaire | Academic Advisor, College Office of Graduate Affairs

Chris Bell | Grant Coordinator, O’Leary Shared Service Center

Melissa Bissey | Payroll Manager, Payroll Office

Wendy Bridges | University Calendar Administrator and Events Coordinator, Event Management & Protocol

Jack Campbell, Jr. | Detective, Public Safety Office

Courtney Foat | Assistant Director of Communications, KU Libraries

Andrew Foster | Emergency Management Coordinator, Public Safety Office

James Herynk | IT Project Manager, Achievement and Assessment Institute

Jen Humphrey | Associate Director for External Affairs, Life Span Institute

Megan Nemec | Complex Director, Student Housing

Leah Terranova | Assistant Dean for Academic & Student Affairs, School of Law

Roberta Woodrick | Collections Conservator, KU Libraries

Program CoordinatorsMike Rounds | Vice Provost for Operations,

Human Resources Management

Kathleen Ames-Stratton | Associate Director for Learning & Development, Human Resources Management

Alex Urso | Administrative Assistant, Human Resources Management

Deva Freeman | Administrative Assistant, Human Resources Management

Project SponsorCatherine Johnson | Director, ADA

Resource Center for Equity & Accessibility

Images: KU Marketing Communications, Courtney Foat, LeAnn Meyer

Megan B. Chris

Jan

Melissa Wendy

Jack Courtney

Andrew James Jen

Megan N. Leah Roberta

Acknowledgments

In addition to this project, the Staff Fellows program provides leadership development opportunities for staff at the University of Kansas. As is fitting with a project that intersects the professional and the personal, we found that interviews with our assigned mentors and other University of Kansas leaders offered valuable insights into our research topic. The 2019-20 Staff Fellows would like to recognize and thank the following individuals who conversed with the cohort ( • ) and/or served as mentors ( + ) for the program participants:

Simon Atkinson, Vice Chancellor, Research •

Barbara Bichelmeyer, Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor •

Mike Broadwell, Executive Director of Administrative Services, KU Libraries +

Chris Brown, Vice Provost, Faculty Development •

Jeff Chasen, Associate Vice Provost, Integrity and Compliance • +

John Colombo, Interim Dean, College of Liberal Arts & Sciences •

Mike Denning, Director, Graduate Military Programs +

Tammara Durham, Vice Provost, Student Affairs • +

Ben Eggleston, Associate Dean, College of Liberal Arts & Sciences +

Doug Girod, Chancellor •

Diane Goddard, Chief Financial Officer and Vice Provost, Finance • +

D.A. Graham, University Ombuds • +

Derek Kwan, Executive Director, Lied Center +

Carl Lejuez, Interim Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor •

Callie Long, Associate Vice Provost, Operations +

Linda Luckey, Chief of Staff, Office of the Provost +

Jennifer Ng, Interim Vice Provost, Diversity and Equity • +

Shannon Portillo, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Academic Affairs, Edwards Campus •

Jean Redeker, Assistant Vice Provost, Academic Affairs +

Mary Walsh, Chief Information Officer, Information Technology +

We would also like to recognize Kandace Fleming, of Research Design and Analysis at the Life Span Institute, who assisted with data analysis.


APPENDIX AFocus Groups

2019-20 KU Staff FellowsEmployee Focus Group Questions

1. What do you think the attitude is toward employee mental health at KU? Consider your unit and KU in general.

2. Raise your hand if you are aware of how to seek mental health support as it relates to your role at KU.

3. Are you aware that individuals with mental health diagnoses such as anxiety and depression are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and can receive accommodations in the workplace?

4. What mental health resources are you aware of on campus for faculty and staff? 5. What do you think might impede access to resources for employee mental health? 6. What resources would you like to see made available to employees at KU? 7. Have you used any mental health resources on campus? 8. How have you felt when seeking support for mental health? 9. What do you wish the mental health culture at KU looked like?

Table 1: Responses to Question 4:What mental health resources are you aware of on campus for faculty and staff?

Total participants: 66


APPENDIX BSurvey Questions

2019-20 KU Staff FellowsEmployee Survey Questions

1. I believe employees at KU have positive attitudes about mental health. 2. I believe employees at KU have negative attitudes about mental health. 3. I feel comfortable talking about personal mental health issues with colleagues in my unit. 4. I feel comfortable talking to my supervisor/advisor about personal mental health issues. 5. I am aware the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to any individual with a

mental health diagnosis. 6. I am aware there are mental health resources for employees at KU. 7. I have accessed mental health resources provided for employees at KU. 8. I have experienced barriers that have kept me from accessing mental health resources at KU. 9. I would like there to be additional mental health resources for staff and faculty at KU.10. I have experienced or witnessed stigma surrounding mental health at KU. 11. Have you attended one of the Focus Groups provided by Staff Fellows?


APPENDIX CSurvey Results


3. I feel comfortable talking about personal mental health issues with colleagues in my unit.

Agree

Neither Agree/Disagree

Disagree

1. I believe employees at KU have positive attitudes about mental health.

Agree


Disagree

2. I believe employees at KU have negative attitudes about mental health.

Agree


Disagree

4. I feel comfortable talking to my supervisor/advisor about personal mental health issues.

Agree


Disagree

5. I am aware the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to any individual with a mental

health diagnosis.

Agree


Disagree

6. I am aware there are mental health resources for employees at KU.

Yes

No

61%20%

19%

Figure 1 Figure 2

Figure 3 Figure 4

Figure 5 Figure 6

22%

25%53%

46%

11%

43% 46%

10%

44%

70%8%

22%

69%

31%

7. I have accessed mental health resources provided for employees at KU.

8. I have experienced barriers that have kept me from accessing mental health resources at KU.

APPENDIX CSurvey Results


Yes

No

9. I would like there to be additional mental health resources for staff and faculty at KU.

10. I have experienced or witnessed stigma surrounding mental health at KU.

Yes

No

11. Have you attended one of the Focus Groups provided by Staff Fellows?

Figure 7 Figure 8

Figure 9 Figure 10

Figure 11

17%

83%

23%

76%Yes

No Response

No

1%

Yes

No Response

No

61%35%

4%

Yes

No Response

No

61%35%

4%

94%

6%

Date post:	04-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times

Mental Health at KU€¦ · Mental health includes our emotional, psychological, and social...

Documents