TPC Journal-Vol 10- Issue 2-FULL ISSUE

The Professional Counselor | Volume 10, Issue 2 257 agency have done that you might have found helpful?” and (d) “Thinking back on your first client suicide, what would you have liked the agency to have done less of, or differently?” Agency Policies We asked participants to choose from a list of possible agency policies for responding to client suicide that their agency had in place at the time of the suicide. We also asked participants if they perceived these policies to be helpful in their coping with the event. Policy options included extra supervision, mandated counseling, mandated debriefing, mandated time off, additional paperwork, an option to select “other” along with a text box to explain, and an option for “no policy.” Participants were encouraged to select all options that applied. Data Analysis A cross-sectional research design was utilized for this study. Upon completion of data collection, numerical data was transferred to SPSS (Version 23) to conduct statistical analyses. To assess responses to the open-ended questions, we followed Brown’s (2009) method to individually code participants’ responses into categorical themes and clusters. We then compared codes and negotiated results to come to a consensus on categories (Creswell & Poth, 2018). We assessed frequencies and descriptive statistics of these themes to determine the most prevalent participant responses. We examined statistical assumptions (e.g., independence of cases, normality, and homoscedasticity; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007) for each measure, including the Kolmogorov-Smirnov measure for normality. Data were analyzed with frequencies and descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlations, one- way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and a simple linear regression (SLR), independent samples t -test, and chi-square goodness-of-fit and tests of independence. Results Our first research question examined the impact of supervision and organizational supports as moderators of the impact of client suicide on counselor survivors. More specifically, we wanted to determine whether or not the supervisory relationship (S-SRQ; Cliffe et al., 2016) and counselors’ perceptions of organizational support (SPOS; Eisenberger et al., 1986) predicted the impact of client suicide on the counselor survivor at the time of the event (IES-Rp; Weiss & Marmar, 1997) and at the present (IES-Rc; Weiss & Marmar, 1997). The findings of this research question are reported below. Participants who reported being under supervision when they experienced a client suicide ( n = 118) completed the S-SRQ ( M = 96.9, SD = 25) as a measure of their supervisory relationship, and the IES-Rp ( M = 45.1; SD = 15.9) and IES-Rc ( M = 26.6; SD = 8.4). An SLR was calculated to predict the impact of events at the time of the event based on the counselor survivor’s supervisory relationship at the time of the event. A significant regression equation was found ( F [1,116] = 6.9, p = .01) with an R 2 of .06. Participants’ impact of events at the time of the event decreased .15 for each point increase in supervisory relationships . This indicates that a strong supervisory relationship at the time of a client suicide may help mitigate counselor survivors’ symptoms. An SLR was also calculated to examine the impact of events at the present with their supervisory relationship at the time of the event. However, the findings were not significant ( F [1,116] = 57.53, p = .37), suggesting that any differences found between supervisory relationship and the current impact of events may be attributed to chance. All respondents ( N = 228) completed the SPOS ( M = 23.9, SD = 3.5), the IES-Rp ( M = 43.7, SD = 16.1), and the IES-Rc ( M = 26.8, SD = 9.4). Bivariate correlations revealed a lack of significance between SPOS and either impact of events scale ( p = .6 for each). We also conducted an ANOVA to examine the