Inclusive Innovation: Learnings from Leaders Using New Technologies at All Organizational Sizes

Body of Abstract: As crisis lines and mental health providers across the crisis continuum use new technologies to improve quality and enhance operations, they are doing so in ways that fit the particular context of each organization. This panel brings together leaders from crisis lines of three different settings to share their experiences identifying, launching, and operating new tools. Participants include a crisis center serving a rural community, a larger crisis center at the statewide level, and a national operation with over 1,000 staff. This session will highlight areas of commonality as well as areas of difference with exploration of multiple technology tools.

One particular area of focus is ensuring that an organization’s values are prioritized when technology tools are considered and implemented. For example, this section will include discussion on data security, including meeting an organization’s internal standards as well as the standards of external bodies such as accreditors. An organization’s internal policies may have specific requirements in areas such as limiting administrator access to particular functionalities, and new tools must conform to these policies. Additionally, organizations will need to comply with external requirements such as state-specific requirements for call recording. This is particularly important as the role of the state evolves in response to new research (for example, see Quinlan et al, “Supporting a public health approach to suicide prevention: Recommendations for state infrastructure).

A second area of focus is emphasizing the shared priority of inclusivity and the importance of using technologies that enhance an organization’s ability to support the diverse communities seeking support. Each panelist will provide a unique perspective on how their organization approaches this priority, as well as how their practices have evolved over time as the technology options for mental health organizations expanded. This discussion will also include pragmatic reflections because organizations will have different types of internal resources such as technology teams (ranging from limited capacity to full teams) and clinical experience (ranging from 1-2 individuals with clinical experience to dedicated research teams)

A third area of focus is how different organizations can foster collaboration internally to ensure that new tools have a high level of mission impact. For example, this portion will include a discussion about strategies for onboarding team members into new tools, which varies significantly for smaller, in-person teams compared with larger, remote operations. This segment of the conversation will also discuss mechanisms for gathering input over time because successfully using technologies over time is not accomplished only by a successful initial rollout. Importantly, this section will reference the Level III expectations from the AAS Accreditation Manual that requires “crisis worker feedback regarding technology is used to modify or make changes as necessary” (Component 5: Technology).

While this presentation will provide significant benefit to individuals who have been involved in crisis work for many years, it will also be accessible to individuals who are new to this space or have expertise in other areas of suicidology. Throughout the session – and during a dedicated time at the end – attendees will have substantial time to engage with panelists and with each other. This session is designed to incorporate audience questions and to spark reflection between audience members who are encouraged to share their own experiences.

Learning Objectives:

• Analyze the impact of various technological tools on crisis lines of different sizes, including digital communication and call management systems, to optimize crisis intervention services.
• Identify scalable technology solutions that align with different crisis line organizations' unique needs, capacities, and budget constraints.
• Evaluate how technology can reduce responder burnout, increase accessibility, and enhance crisis response quality, ultimately improving outcomes for both individuals in crisis and crisis responders.