In an informal survey based on the Professional Quality of Life Scale (V5), most Teaching-Family Model practitioners who responded indicated above average compassion satisfaction and below average compassion fatigue.
All professionals working in health and human services experience both positive and negative emotional aspects of being a caregiver. “Professional Quality of Life” lies in the balance.
What are compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue?
The positive emotional aspects are what the standardized Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL) calls compassion satisfaction.
“Compassion satisfaction is about the pleasure you derive from being able to do your work well,” reads the ProQOL manual, “You may feel like it is a pleasure to help others through your work. You may feel positively about your colleagues or your ability to contribute to the work setting or even the greater good of society.”
The negative aspects are what the ProQOL calls compassion fatigue, which is split into two parts—burnout and secondary traumatic stress.
“The first part concerns things such as exhaustion, frustration, anger and depression typical of burnout,” reads the ProQOL manual. “Secondary traumatic stress is a negative feeling driven by fear and work-related trauma.”
When scale scores are interpreted in combination, high compassion satisfaction and moderate to low compassion fatigue—how the majority of Teaching-Family Model practitioners scored in our survey—is the “most positive result,” reads the ProQOL manual.
“This result represents a person who receives positive reinforcement from their work,” reads the ProQOL manual. “They carry no significant concerns about being ‘bogged down’ or inability to be efficacious in their work—either as an individual or within their organization.”
Scores on the ProQOL are considered high, low, or moderate based on where they fall within a normal distribution of respondents who work in health and human services. 25 percent of respondents score in the high range, and 25 percent score in the low range of each scale—50 percent score between those two ranges (moderate), like a bell curve.
In our data, 50 percent of respondents scored in the high range of compassion satisfaction, and 50 percent scored in the moderate range above the average score.
55 percent of respondents scored in the low range of burnout, and 80 percent of respondents scored in the low range of secondary traumatic stress.
For Teaching-Family Model practitioners, scores shifted the distribution positively to more moderate and favorable outcomes, where the average scores were high (or low) compared to global averages.
Why do Model practitioners exhibit more favorable scores?
We believe that this shift results from use of the Teaching-Family Model for several reasons:
- The Teaching-Family Model really works. Practitioners using the Model would likely not have concerns about “inability to be efficacious in their work,” because the Model is evidence-based and effective. Practitioners are empowered to plan and deliver treatment interventions with their clients on an individual level, and the Model’s systems also ensure that the organization is structured appropriately to make that possible.
- Teaching-Family Model systems provide practitioners with the support they need to overcome or build resilience to burnout and secondary traumatic stress. The Model provides consultation and supervision to practitioners in a supportive capacity to ensure that they continue to feel effective.
The Teaching-Family Model is an evidence- and strengths-based, trauma-informed and family-style full system of care, from treatment procedures to integrated support systems. Curious about the Teaching-Family Model or the Teaching-Family Association? Learn more by signing up for our email list.