Cafety

The purpose of this article is to provide a rationale for using a strength-based assessment approach in planning services for children. First, a definition of strength-based assessment, its advantages, and principles are provided. Then, a standardized measure, the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS), that assesses the emotional and behavioral strengths of children is described. Finally, a case study is presented to demonstrate the use of the BERS in assessing emotional and behavioral strengths and involving families, professionals, and natural supports in service planning.

Introduction

Deficits, problems, and pathologies! Deficits, problems, and pathologies! When children and youth are referred for specialized services, professionals typically label and describe them in terms of the deficits, problems, and pathologies they present. Deficit-oriented terms such as "conduct disordered," "depressed,""psychotic," and "socially maladjusted" are oftentimes used to describe children. In special education, mental health, and other social service disciplines, there exist numerous instruments that assess the emotional and behavioral disorders of children. While many of these instruments have strong psychometric properties and are useful in identifying a child’s situation, these instruments tell us very little about a child’s strengths, competencies, preferences, resources, and supports.

Education and social service plans that are based on the deficits, problems, or pathologies of children direct the attention of professionals to only one view of the child. Specifically, they tell us what a child does poorly. As Kral (1989) stated, "If we ask people to look for deficits, they will usually find them, and their view of the situation will be colored by this. If we ask people to look for successes, they will usually find it, and their view of the situation will be colored by this" (p. 32). Strength-based assessment directs the professional to identify and build upon the existing strengths and skills that the child and family presents.

Introduction

Historically, when it comes to assessment, direct service providers have largely been trained to identify deficits and pathologies for specialized services. Problem focused assessment often leads to a laundry list of the things that are considered to be "wrong" or dysfunctional with children and their families. Unfortunately, practitioners can become stuck in their view of the child and family because they have too much information about the problem and not enough information about strengths and solutions. According to Berg (1994), once we feel overwhelmed by the difficulties a child and his or her family presents, we tend to rationalize the failure of our professional efforts by describing children and their families as "unmotivated," "resistive," "lacking insight," and/or "not ready" for change. More importantly, when we become too discouraged, we run the risk of communicating this to the child and his or her family.

In response to the limitations associated with a problem or deficit-oriented approach to assessment, practitioners in social work, mental health, family services and education have expressed a heightened interest in strength-based assessment (e.g., Dunst, Trivette, & Deal, 1994; Nelson & Pearson, 1991). Strength-based assessment has been defined as, "the measurement of those emotional and behavioral skills, competencies, and characteristics that create a sense of personal accomplishment; contribute to satisfying relationships with family members, peers, and adults; enhance one’s ability to deal with adversity and stress; and promote one’s personal, social, and academic development" (Epstein & Sharma, 1998, p. 3). As such, strength-based assessment offers a strategy for empowering children and their families by building on the personal strengths and resources that are frequently overlooked or given minimal attention in more problem oriented approaches to assessment.

A strength-based assessment approach provides several advantages for practitioners and those individuals they serve. First, focusing on strengths allows practitioners to involve children and their families in service planning in a positive way by underscoring what is going well in a child’s life. Second, strength-based assessment provides a method for documenting a child’s strengths and competencies and offers a way for establishing positive expectations for the child. Third, through strength-based assessment family members are empowered to take responsibility for the decisions that will effect their child’s life (Johnson & Friedman, 1991; Saleebey, 1992).

Strength-based assessment is founded on four important assumptions.

1. Every child, regardless of his or her personal and family situation, has strengths that are unique to the individual.
2. Children are influenced and motivated by the way significant people in their lives respond to them.
3. Rather than viewing a child who does not demonstrate a strength as deficient, it is assumed the child has not had the opportunities that are essential to learning, developing, and mastering the skill.
4. When treatment and service planning are based on strengths rather than deficits and pathologies, children and families are more likely to become involved in the therapeutic process and to use their strengths and resources.

The Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS) (Epstein & Sharma, 1998) was developed to respond to the growing demand for a standardized tool for assessing and evaluating strengths. The BERS is a 52-item scale designed to measure the emotional and behavioral strengths of children and adolescents. The scale offers practitioners a highly valid and reliable method of assessing five domains of childhood strengths: Interpersonal Strength, Family Involvement, Intrapersonal Strength, School Functioning, and Affective Strength. The first dimension, Interpersonal Strength, measures a child’s ability to regulate his or her emotions and behaviors in social settings (e.g., "uses anger management skills", "shares with others and apologizes to others when wrong"). Second, the dimension of Family Involvement evaluates the quality of the relationship between the child and his or her family (e.g., "interacts positively with parents", "complies with rules at home"). Intrapersonal Strength measures a child’s perception of his or her competence and accomplishments (e.g., "enjoys a hobby", "is popular with peers"). School Functioning assesses a child’s competence in school (e.g., "pays attention in class" and "completes tasks on time"). Affective Strength assesses on the child’s ability to express feelings and accept affection from others (e.g., "acknowledges painful feelings," "asks for help").

The BERS can be used by any adult who is knowledgeable about the child’s behavior. When completing the BERS, respondents are asked to rate the items on a four point Likert-type scale (0 = not at all like the child, 1 = not much like the child, 2 = like the child, 3 = very much like the child; the higher the score the greater the perceived strength). In addition, there are eight open-ended questions designed to collect information about the child’s interests, preferences and resources. The following case study illustrates how the BERS can be used in service and intervention planning.

Jake

Jake, a 15-year-old White male, was referred to an intensive outpatient mental health treatment center for evaluation, crisis stabilization, and treatment. Jake lived with his biological mother and younger brother in a suburban community and was attending ninth grade in a local high school. His parents divorced when he was five years old. Jake has not had contact with his father since the divorce, and described him as an alcoholic.

Jake had three prior outpatient treatment episodes for aggressive behavior and had been diagnosed with the DSM diagnosis of Intermittent Explosive Disorder. He had a repeated history of violent, aggressive, and oppositional behavior at home. After threatening to hurt his mother with a knife, Jake was referred to the Center for Assessment and Crisis Planning. The Department of Social Services was contacted, and department staff were considering placement in a residential treatment center.

Assessment Results

At the treatment center, clinical staff conducted a comprehensive psychological evaluation. As part of the evaluation, Jake’s therapist completed the BERS in an effort to identify Jake’s personal strengths. It was anticipated that this information would be useful in identifying what is going well in Jake’s life, documenting competencies that Jake had mastered, and identifying resources that would support Jake and his family in the community. Overall, the information would be useful in developing a comprehensive life plan for Jake and his family. Jake‘s subscale scores on the BERS are described in Table 1.

Table 1.  BERS Subscale Scores for Jake

Jake demonstrated competence based on above-average subscale scores in the areas of Intrapersonal Strength and School Functioning. The Intrapersonal Strength dimension broadly assessed Jake’s outlook on his competence and accomplishments. Jake’s score reflected specific item responses such as his ability to identify personal strengths, his popularity with peers, his ability to enjoy a hobby, and his age-appropriate hygiene skills. Jake also was rated highly in the area of School Functioning, which measured his level of competence in school. His score indicated that he completed homework regularly, used note taking and listening skills in school and demonstrated an aptitude for performing at or above grade level in reading and math.

Conversely, fewer strengths were perceived in the areas of Interpersonal Strength, Family Involvement, and Affective Strength. The Interpersonal Strength dimension revealed Jake experienced difficulty controlling his emotions and/or behaviors in social situations. Jake had limited skill development in his ability to manage anger, react to disappointments calmly, and consider the consequences of his behavior. Jake’s Family Involvement subscale score, reflected a minimal level of communication and involvement with family members. On the Affective Strength subscale, Jake scored below average based on the difficulty he had accepting affection from others and expressing feelings.

Jake’s therapist was able to identify several other strengths through the open-ended question portion of the BERS. Jake's favorite hobbies included drawing, skiing, and mountain biking. He enjoyed playing the guitar and participated in several community league sports, including basketball and baseball. Jake also had a couple of close friends, a positive relationship with his grandparents, and a supportive math teacher.

Once Jake’s initial evaluation was completed, a family planning team meeting was arranged. The team consisted of Jake, his mother, his primary therapist at the treatment center, a child protective service case worker, his maternal grandparents, the school counselor, Jake’s best friend, his former basketball coach, and his favorite math teacher. The results of the BERS served as a catalyst for generating many solutions for addressing Jake’s needs and the family’s challenges. The following is a summary of the family planning team’s recommendations.

The team members initially focused on how to promote and preserve Jake’s strengths. After reviewing Jake’s intrapersonal and academic strengths, the team made several recommendations to support Jake in pursuing his positive interests, including joining the high school basketball team, becoming a peer tutor in math, pursuing volunteer work, and structuring free time with peers through participation in supervised community activities.

Areas targeted for skill development included improving interpersonal and affective skills as well as increasing family involvement. The team agreed to work on the former through participation in an intensive anger management program for youth and their families. Jake also agreed to meet with the school counselor on a weekly basis to discuss problems he may be having with peers and to establish concrete goals in an effort to increase his understanding of the consequences of his actions.

Providing support to Jake’s mother in developing her behavior management, problem solving, and communication skills through in-home family preservation services interrupt the pattern of escalating conflict in the family and thus increase family involvement. Family communication would also be enhanced by making a commitment to have a family meal together at least three times per week, and hold family meetings at least once a week.  Also, Jake’s grandparents agreed to spend time with Jake’s younger brother so that Jake and his mother could begin to go on weekly outings. They agreed as well to occasionally take both boys for a day or an overnight visit to give his mother a respite from the challenges of being a single parent.

Summary

Jake’s family planning team met every 4 weeks to review the goals, monitor Jake’s progress, identify further needs, and establish additional goals. Jake responded very well to the implementation of his service plan. He was able to continue to live at home, was active on the high-school basketball team, and continued to excel in math. The in-home family preservation worker reported that family communication had improved significantly and that Jake was responding appropriately to limits set by his mother. In addition, Jake was actively participating in an anger management group and was developing skills to manage his emotions more effectively in social situations. The BERS would be used as part of Jake’s six-month reevaluation.

Conclusion

In summary, strength-based assessment in general, and the BERS in particular, offer an approach to treatment and service planning that empower families by recognizing and building on their strengths. When assessment is used to focus on strengths, it provides a method for mobilizing competencies and resources that can make a positive difference for children and their families. The BERS appears to be well constructed and has strong psychometric properties. The primary purposes of the BERS are as a planning tool and an outcome measure.

About the Authors

Suzanne M. Rudolph, Ph. D., is a therapist specializing in family systems.  Her research interests include adolescents with emotional and behavioral problems, strength assessment, and family involvement.  Michael Epstein, Ed. D., is the William Barkley Professor of Special Education at the University of Nebraska.  His research interests include educating children with emotional and behavioral disorders, strength-based assessment, and comprehensive systems of care.  He can be contacted at:  Department of Special Education and Communication Disorders, 202 Barkley Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583; 402-472-5472.

References

Berg, I. K. (1994). Family-based services: A solution-focused approach. New York: W. W. Norton.

Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Deal, A. G. (Eds.).(1994). Supporting and strengthening families: Methods, strategies, and practice (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Epstein, M. H. & Sharma, J.M. (1998). Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: A Strength-Based Approach to Assessment. Austin, TX. PRO-ED.

Johnson, M. K. & Freidman, R.M. (1991). Strength-based assessment. Program Update, 7 (1), 10-11.

Nelson, C. M., & Pearson, C. A. (1991). Integrating services for children and youth with emotional and behavioral disorders. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children

Saleebey, D. (1992). The strengths perspective in social work practice. New York: Longman.