Based on the F-DAR note heuristic (Focus, Data, Action, Response), SC2.0 re-imagines this with a more solution focused mindset. Specifically, instead of beginning with a focus, the session advances quickly to goal setting. As such, we refer to it as G-DAR. I expect that we will soon see variations of this with check-boxes. Simpler versions are needed for 10 minute and/or 30 minute sessions.

G (Goal): The mutually agreed -upon problem translated into a goal. In the session with “Tom” (see completed sample note below), the problem was quickly identified (address issues raised by HR) but it took some time with data collection before this could be transformed into a specific goal (i.e., applying previously used coping skills).

D (Data): This  contains subjective (what client says and things that are not measurable) & objective data (what you assess/findings that are measurable). This establishes the supporting evidence for the intervention. You are conveying “this is what the client is saying and what I’m seeing”. With SC2.0, the focus here relates to the central goal for the session – identifying existing coping skills applicable to the issues raised by HR.

A (Action): This is the “verb” area. This section reports on the SC2.0 strategy or action taken in response to the data part of the note. This includes the prior successes identified and opportunities for drawing on strengths and capacities to produce therapeutic advancement. It should reflect the therapeutic goal of empowering clients to assume as much autonomy and self-efficacy as possible through the lowest appropriate step intervention. Emphasized in the note for Tom relates to his discovery of the importance of social connection in coping with his recent stressful move to the Province from England.

R (Response): How the client responded to the intervention. This is key to continuous progress monitoring. Using monitoring tools like the OQ45, ORS/SRS or BHM20 is helpful here. As psychologist John Norcross suggests, it is important to attend to three kinds of response to treatment: 1) “how are you doing?” 2) “how is the treatment going?” 3) “how well are we engaging with each other / how engaged are you with the wellness plan and/or any e-mental health programs?” Documented below for Tom was evidence for the empowering, self-efficacious nature of his experience: smiling broadly and proudly stating with a little sass, “I felt like I did all the work.” This recognition of work already done and done autonomously corresponds with the action phase of readiness.

Finally, the template has a scale to encourage fidelity to the stepped care principle of balancing the lowest intensity with highest self-efficacy. Given that Tom indicated satisfaction with a single session and commitment to a clear and specific action (along with awareness of the option to return as needed) the SC2.0 fidelity measure was assigned a high score of 6.5.

Completed note for Dr. Heather Hair’s single session with “Tom”