Executive Summary

Needs Assessment Project:

Exploring Barriers and Opportunities for College Students with Psychiatric Disabilities

Disability Services, University of Minnesota

  1. Project Overview

The Needs Assessment Project: Exploring Barriers and Opportunities for College Students with Psychiatric Disabilities was sponsored by the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education/U.S. Department of Education in October 2001 for a period of 18 months. The purpose of the project was to gather comprehensive data on the needs of college students with psychiatric disabilities, to identify the real and perceived barriers facing these students on college campuses, and to identify strategies for removing these barriers. The highlights of the project’s accomplishments are:

  • Conducted 39 focus groups at 13 colleges and universities across the country.
  • Gathered data from 282 stakeholders: college students with psychiatric disabilities, faculty, administrators, disability service providers, and campus and community mental health providers.
  • Convened three advisory committee meetings. The committee was comprised of 11 local and national stakeholders and experts in the field of psychiatric disabilities.
  • Completed Research Subjects Protection Programs applications and renewals for seven colleges and universities.
  • Disseminated project findings through, the University of Minnesota’s Disability Services Web site, articles and conference presentations.
  • Developed a campus assessment tool.

B. Purpose

The impact of untreated psychiatric disabilities on college campuses is staggering. Disability services staff, faculty, and student affairs professionals spend hours of staff time working with students in an attempt to address multiple, complex problems. These problems are often addressed in isolation with little or no communication between academic departments and service offices. This limited coordination may lead students to experience academic failure, social isolation, loss of insurance benefits, withdrawal, and even expulsion. As a result, the University of Minnesota’s Disability Services implemented this Needs Assessment Project.

C. Backgrounds and Origins

The University of Minnesota has a long-standing commitment to and expertise in disability services. Students with disabilities benefit from the extensive support provided by the University of Minnesota’s Disability Services. Each of the eight student services staff specializes in a particular disability area, and more than 800 students per year are served. The department also provides document conversion (e.g. Braille, tape) sign language interpreters, alternative test proctoring, as well as accommodations for university employees with disabilities.

D. Project Description

The project included four major program elements: focus group interviews, a campus assessment tool, project dissemination and an advisory committee.

Focus Group Interviewswere conducted at the University of Minnesota, the University of Georgia, San Diego State University, Brown University, Cornell University, the University of Hawaii-Manoa, San Francisco State University, the University of California-Berkeley, the University of Arizona, Seattle Central Community College, Minneapolis Community and Technical College, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. Three key stakeholder groups were recruited on each campus to participate in the project. Focus Group 1 was comprised of faculty, deans, directors, and department heads. Focus Group 2 included community and campus mental health providers, and disability service providers who serve students with psychiatric disabilities. Focus Group 3 included college students with psychiatric disabilities.

A Campus Assessment Tool was developed by project staff, using the themes identified in the focus groups to assist college campuses with completing a targeted needs assessment on their campuses. This tool was developed to provide a university with a comprehensive summary of how the institution is structured to respond to and provide equal access for students with psychiatric disabilities.

Project Dissemination - Project findings were disseminated via the University of Minnesota Disability Services Web site, at the Association for Higher Education and Disability (AHEAD) 2003 national conference, and at the Minnesota AHEAD 2003 spring conference. The project was also featured in the University of Minnesota’s Brief and M Magazine, in the Disability Compliance for Higher Education, and will be published as a research to practice brief by the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (NCSET) (in press).

An Advisory Committeecomprised of local and national stakeholders and experts in the field of psychiatric disabilities provided a forum for collaboration, and allowed project staff to draw from a variety of experts. Advisory committee members contributed to the development of the focus group interview protocol and provided feedback on the Campus Assessment Tool.

E. Evaluation/Project Results

The qualitative data from 39 focus groups was analyzed for key themes related to two primary areas:

  • Barriers to full participation in higher education for students with psychiatric disabilities.
  • Strategies that focus group participants reported are in place or should be in place to address the removal of these barriers.

Five primary barriers were identified during the analysis. The most common barrier identified by all three stakeholder groups was stereotypes and stigma. Two broad categories of stigma were identified from the transcripts: stigma from others and stigma that is self-imposed. In other words, students with psychiatric disabilities and those who work with them recognized both external (from others) and internal (from self) stigma as the most pervasive barrier for students with psychiatric disabilities. This result was found for all 13 campuses.

Second, in addition to the pervasiveness of stigma, the complex nature of psychiatricdisabilities was identified as a barrier. Many participants described the simultaneous interaction of managing student status and a psychiatric disability as a barrier to full participation in postsecondary education. In addition, on several campuses the interaction between students’ ethnicity (or cultural heritage) and their disability status was identified as a factor further contributing to the complex nature of managing a psychiatric disability.

Third, limited student resources and insurance coverage was identified as a barrier. Focus groups on most campuses addressed concerns about the financial well being of students with psychiatric disabilities. Faculty members and providers often voiced concerns about students working too much to make ends meet, and students spoke about the stress of limited financial resources.

Fourth, limited access to information and services was also identified as a barrier. Many students expressed frustration with the lack of information about psychiatric disabilities and the limited access to services that would allow them to effectively manage their disabilities. Many students also mentioned that they were not aware of campus resources, were not clear whether they qualified for services, and found that using services often involved complex, bureaucratic procedures.

Finally, a number of organizational and institutional barriers were also identified. In particular, a lack of service coordination and communication between service providers was found for offices that provide services for students on campus. This contributed to services that were often offered in isolation with little or no systematic communication between service offices. In addition, although all campuses recognized an increased need for services, funds to support these services are limited. A professor’s teaching style and approach were also identified as barriers when students did not experience a welcoming and accessible classroom environment. On the other hand, faculty concerns about safety and classroom management sometimes contributed to miscommunication between faculty and students with psychiatric disabilities. The final institutional barrier to be identified was campus identity and climate. Each campus involved in this project possessed a unique identity that contributed to campus climate. Although many aspects of these identities were positive, barriers developed when identities resulted in a campus climate that does not support accommodation to institutional policy and procedures.

Four primary strategies were identified as current or potentially effective strategies for addressing and removing barriers. One of these strategies involved implementing Universal Instructional Design for the purpose of altering classroom and teaching practices to improve learning experiences for all students. The focus of this strategy is on removing barriers for students with psychiatric disabilities by improving classroom climate, instruction, and accessibility for all students. Another strategy identified was creating sub-communities oncollege campuses. The focus of this strategy is on creating opportunities for students with psychiatric disabilities to connect with others. In particular, social connections and connections based on disability were found to be important in reducing barriers for students.

Another strategy identified was improving clarity, coordination, and communication among key stakeholders. Implementing this strategy involves clarifying roles among faculty, students, and providers. It also involves improving inter-organizational communication and coordination of services among the multiple service providers. The goal of this strategy is to reduce the complexity and confusion experienced by students who must contend with complex, fragmented systems of service delivery. A final strategy identified was ensuring access to resources, strategies, and training for key stakeholders. A focus of this strategy is to increase the awareness of each stakeholder group in understanding the role students with psychiatric disabilities play as members of the university community. This is accomplished through increased opportunities for each stakeholder group to access information and resources and to make personal connections.

F. Summary and Conclusions

Through the cooperation and collaboration of 13 schools, the project was successful in bringing together the key stakeholders (faculty, staff, and students), and identifying the primary barriers on college campuses for students with psychiatric disabilities. The barriers appear to be universal; stakeholders tend to address the challenges of students’ mental illnesses, individual by individual, in an isolated manner, without communicating with or creating consensus throughout the institution. Stigma, real and perceived, from others and from self, creates barriers for students in seeking the support and assistance that is available to them. Organizational and institutional barriers create obstacles for students with psychiatric disabilities; and as a result, these students often do not have an equal opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and abilities. Stakeholders repeatedly pointed to a need for educational institutions to strengthen, integrate and align their institutional capacity to respond to the needs of students with psychiatric disabilities through institutional change.

Key strategies for removing barriers were identified, as was a need for national leadership for implementing and disseminating these strategies. Clarification, coordination, and communication among key stakeholders were identified as essential for barrier removal. Increasing the awareness on campus that a mental illness may be a disability condition can dispel myths; decrease stigma and foster effective referrals. Reducing the isolation of students with psychiatric disabilities can enhance the diversity of the campus and allow the students to benefit from the student development opportunities available on their campuses. In addition, all stakeholders, especially students with psychiatric disabilities and mental health and disability service providers, encouraged the promotion and inclusion of Universal Instructional Design (UID) in delivering campus curriculum.

Clearly, there are barriers on college campuses for students with psychiatric disabilities; however, there are also potential strategies for removingthese barriers. With a targeted needs assessment, campuses can identify ways to realign their services and develop action plans to reduce and remove identified barriers, creating greater access to postsecondary education for students with psychiatric disabilities.

1