2021 HAC PAC Psych Reassessment Plans

The Psychological Assessment Process

Questions Holston AC Needs to Consider

Thanks for agreeing to serve on the Psychological Assessment Committee (PAC). This team has been recreated and empowered to examine the Holston Annual Conference psychological assessment processes. Recent changes at GBHEM has forced each annual conference to re-examine the ins and outs of their process.

This document is a collection of various documents and conversations and reports. The goal is to provide you with a basic knowledge of the topic so that the PAC can develop appropriate processes within Holston AC. There may not, necessarily, be a coherent theme to these items. I have tried to group them in some sort of order, but it may seem a little bit disjointed. Please overlook that imperfection and try and absorb the content of the various articles.

Rev. Terry Goodman Director of Clergy Services

Psychological Assessments-An Overview of the Process In November2020, GBHEM announced that it would no longer provide infrastructure for the administration of psychological assessments effective March 1, 2021.

Let me explain the basics of the current assessment process.

1.) Through UMCares, candidates sign up to take psychological tests.

2.) Mentors proctor candidates and submit tests to GBHEM where the results reside on GBHEM servers.

3.) Conference Ministerial Assessment Specialist (MAS) accesses the results and interprets them.

4.) MAS conducts a face to face interview of each candidate after reviewing results.

5.) MAS writes a report to the Board of Ordained Ministry on each candidate.

With their announcement, GBHEM has said, they would no longer (post February 28, 2021) support step 1 nor would they store the data (step 2) for MAS (after August 2021?) on their servers.

This puts Holston on notice that we must now, moving forward, find a method to replace those two crucial components. For this year, we have stressed to all candidates and mentors that the proctored exams must be completed by February 28th. Failure to do so will result in an extra charge to the candidate as well as a delay in their report.

We are in conversation with our MAS, Dr. Victor Barr, to see if his office will be able to also administer or could point us to some group that could administer the tests moving forward.

In addition, Holston must now evaluate which assessment tools that it desires to use. Apparently, there are a wide variety of tools that can be used and there is no set requirement. Each annual conference can choose and pick from among certain categories. (This was news to me. I had always thought we all did it the same!)

This means that our Psychological Assessment Team (PAC) will need to look at all things related to our psychological assessments and come up with a new plan in 2021 that will guide us in the years ahead.

This document will seek to lay out our options. Our PAC will need to look at all aspects of the assessment process and determine answers to at least the following questions: 1.

Conversations from GBHEM Basecamp What is the difference between the UMC version of the 16PF and the regular 16PF? The 16PF is the 16 Personality Factor, it is one of the assessments that is part of the GBHEM battery. It is an assessment for normal personality. The UMC specific version includes additional measures that are important for clergy and also include a section on leadership.

One of our wonderful members on the ACCCA wrote up this about the difference between the two versions of the 16PF: With the UMC we get the "UMC Basic Interpretive Report Plus." Towards the end of the interpretive report are a set of scales that do not appear on the standard 16 PF interpretive report. On the UMC there is a section called "Self Esteem and Adjustment." That section has scale scores that are reported in "below average, average, high average, and high" categories. There are scores for "self-esteem, emotional adjustment, and social adjustment."

Then there is another set of scales called "Social Skills." There are scored the same way with "below average, average, etc" There are scores for emotional expressivity, emotional sensitivity, emotional control, social expressivity, social sensitivity, and social control. There are also a scores for empathy, potential for leadership, potential for creative functioning, and rate of output for creative endeavors.

GBHEM Guidelines Items in this section come directly from the GBHEM BOM Handbook and reflect the guidance and directions of GBHEM for the annual conferences.

Psychological Assessment Tests Used by Other Annual Conferences Jennifer Browne, Director of Clergy Excellence Michigan AC In "normal" times, we add the PRF-E, a "pencil and paper" test that Dr. Michael Comer regards as superior to the 16-PF for discerning vocational "match" for clergy.

While we are administering everything online because of Covid, we've dropped it the PRF, as it's just too hard to administer remotely. We're waiting to collect a group of completed reports that have been written without the PRF in order to determine what kind of difference it makes and whether or not we want to add it back in once

Sarah McKinley, Florida Annual Conference We currently use the MMPI 2 but will be switching to the MMPI 3 for our January retreat. We also do the PAI which is comparable to the MMPI2 in that it looks for psychopathology but it is not quite as robust. Our MASs like to have two instruments checking for psychopathology as a cross check. We also modified the incomplete sentences somewhat deleting done and adding a few new ones. We require 3 references plus a self assessment in addition to the EM360 as we were not getting the kind of reference info we needed from the EM360. The candidate does not see the references so they tend to be a bit more direct. Then of course we use the PDI (somewhat adapted) and a clinical interview. The candidate does not receive a copy of the MASs report. The FLUMC is considered the client.

We are looking in to adding additional testing at provisional and full connection level.

Annalee Allen, Western North Carolina

Michelle Levan, North Georgia AC

WNCC uses the MMPI-2, NEO, TKI, references and clinical interview.

...this is from our MAS Dr. Anne Imhoff.

Jay Harris, South Georgia AC

            

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - IV Wide Range Achievement Test - 4 Bender Gestalt Visual-Motor Test Burns Depression Checklist - Revised Burns Anxiety Inventory - Revised Burns Anger Scale Burns Obsessions and Compulsions Burns Positive Feelings Bipolar Spectrum Diagnostic Scale Sentence Completion Test Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory - 2 VIA Survey of Character Strengths Interview with PhD psychologist, incl. family, medical, work history

Kathy Ezell, Rio Texas AC 1. Clinical Interview 2. MMPI -2 3. PAI 4. Strong Interest Inventory Profile (STRONG) 5. Riso-Hudson Enneagram Type Indicator (RHETI) I have questioned the use of the RHETI as is doesn't seem to be a clinical instrument (even though our candidates like getting their enneagram results). We have also added a 3 tier statement in the final report of: no concerns, some concerns, grave concerns (thanks Sara McKinley for this idea!)

I begin the evaluation with a very lengthy Life Questionnaire, which was developed over the years through Emory Clergy Care (which was closed in 2014). I also use the most recent MMPI (which is now the MMPI 2RF but which will soon change to MMPI3....as soon as I read the manual that came in the mail today.)

I use the 16PF to measure long standing personality traits.

I use an Incomplete Sentence Blank that we developed over the years of working with Emory Clergy Care. We started with the one that was initially developed for clergy, but had to update it after decades of use.

Finally, they fill in a TIMELINE before our meeting, that shows educational, occupational and personal events and when they happened.

Lisa Steele, Iowa AC In Iowa we use the we have a standard assessment and a multicultural assessment. Here are the two options.

Standard testing 1). Diagnostic Interview:

Multicultural assessment

2). MMPI-2

2). Raven's

3). 16PF Career Development Form

3). SCL-90-R

4). Incomplete Sentences Blank

5). WRAT (or some other academic screening for comprehension and/or language)

5). Feedback Session

1). Extensive Interview

4). Vancouver Acculturation

6). Feedback Session

Questions that we must answer in 2021 How long are psychological assessments valid? 

Some annual conferences set limits: 5 years seems to be about average



In Holston, we currently have no set time limits. So, we could be using assessments that are many more than 5 years out of date.

When will psychological assessments be administered? 

Currently Holston only administers them at the beginning of the candidacy process.



Some annual conferences administer them at candidacy, provisional, and full connection, especially if there is more than a prescribed number of years since the previous one.



In a similar vein, not all annual conferences administer the same tests at each stage when they use multistage interviews. If Holston chose to administer at different stages, would we administer the same battery of tests each time or would be choose different tests for different stages?

What tests we will use? 

Not being limited to any prescribed set of tests, but rather having the ability to choose tests from a couple of categories, what will be the tests that Holston uses as a part of its testing battery?

How will the tests be administered?

Where will the test results be stored? Will they be sent directly to the MAS? 

We will need to work with our MAS, Dr. Victor Barr on this part of the process.

What format will we use for the “references”? 

Currently, all candidates must complete the EM360 which includes a portion that solicits input (references) from certain specified individuals. These inputs have been used as the references for the MAS interview with the candidate.



I have learned that we do not have to use these as the reference portion of our required assessments. We can design our own or use another reference form. However, the caveat is that the EM 360 references must still be completed as a part of the EM 360 process, so we would be requiring candidates to seek two types of references, and that could get confusing to the candidates and to those from which they seek a reference.

What will we use as our Personal Data Inventory? 

As I understand it, GBHEM has a PDI that is available to all Annual conferences. However, it’s use is not mandated. The MAS, though, uses the data from the PDI to help with the assessment.

Therefore, we need to choose a PDI that will supply the information that the MAS needs to make a proper assessment.

EMAIL CONVERSATIONS with Dr. Victor Barr concerning elements of the Process In this section, I will share some conversations I have had with our MAS, Dr. Victor Barr. These should help you better understand some of the items that I have been talking with him about and some of his suggestions.

Dec 3, 2020 Victor, I was just on a ZOOM call with my counterparts in other annual conferences and representatives from General Board of Higher Education and Ministry (GBHEM) revealed changes in the psychological assessment process that will have an impact on Holston Annual Conference and the work that you do for the annual conference.

As I understand the current process (forgive me if I oversimplify)

1. A person is entered into UMCares and begins the various tracks, which include the Psychological assessment track.

2. A person attends Candidacy Summit and is assigned to a mentor 3. Mentor will work the person through the process which will include a proctored online session a. During this session, person will complete MMPI and other psychological assessment tools. b. The battery of tests is administered via GBHEM c. You are notified when the results are available d. You schedule an in person (ZOOM session in the day of COVID?) personal interview utilizing the results of the assessments and references that come from the EM 360 track of the UMCares module.

e. You then write and submit a report to my office.

If this is not correct, please correct me. In my mind this is the barebones of the process.

Today I was told that effective March 1, 2021, GBHEM will no longer administer any psychological assessments. It has become, in an era of cost cutting, to cost prohibitive for them to administer these tests for $35-45. I further learned that we have never been tied into the battery of tests that we currently are using. It is not mandated that these particular tests be used, but we use them because they are the ones GBHEM supports.

This new found knowledge has the following implications:

1.

2.

3.

4.

We will, as of March 1, 2021, need to have a new way to administer our psychological battery of tests.

Those that complete the GBHEM battery prior to that date will still be able to have their data reviewed by our MAS. We are not tied to the tests currently being administered‌we can choose different ones.

We are not required to use the EM360 references. We are not required to use references at all. We could use references in another format that would be sent directly to you.

This could impact our relationship with you.

Primarily, I need your input on the following questions:

1. Would you be willing to also administer the tests and see the process through from beginning to end. Test‌Interview..report? a. If you could not undertake the entire track, could you recommend a place to get the tests administered that would then share the results with you so that you could continue as you are currently doing?

b. Do you think that we are administering an appropriate battery of tests or would you suggest other tests? (Please see listing of the ones GBHEM strongly suggest we pick from. We are not however limited to just those tests. They have a document that further explains how an Annual conference should choose tests. SEE ATTACHMENTS for more information on these matters.)

c. Would you be willing to ZOOM in as a paid consultant to help the Board in its deliberations on these matters?

I appreciate the work that you have done on our behalf. I feel that we have overcome some obstacles and were just getting ready

to settle into a somewhat familiar pattern. Now I learn that things will not be progressing as we thought they would.

I appreciate your attention to this matter. As more information becomes available to me, I will share it with you.

A Fellow Servant of Christ Rev. Terry Goodman

Dr. Barr’s Response January 7, 2021 I am working out some details on an alternative way to do this. Christmas got in the way/. My kids came into town and it was great. The hardest part of thi seems to be the portions where they have to rely on others' involvement which is the EM360. I can order and provide the testing material if we can use their clergy sponsors to proctor the tests. I am looking at the PAI instead of the MMPI III as it makes more sense to me with a population that does not have an extensive experience with mental illness. I will probably also suggest we pair it with the NEO or the 16PF and retain the incomplete sentences element.

———I have not followed up with Dr. Barr on this matter. I wanted to get this group up and running. There might be the necessity of calling him in for a meeting with the PAC and soliciting his feedback. He suggests different tests and we would need to determine if those were the tests that would be most effective for Holston.