| Course | MSW 521 Social Work Response to Mass Violence and Disasters |
|---|---|
| Week | 2 |
| Paper type | Disaster phase analysis |
| Length | About 600 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | Master of Social Work (MSW) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MSW 521 Week 2
Disaster Phase Analysis of a Fictional Apartment Gas Explosion in Corliss, Tamarack County: Dated Crossings From Impact to Heroic, Honeymoon and Disillusionment, Two Decisions on the Calendar and What the Model Misses
Student Name
Chamberlain University
MSW 521: Social Work Response to Mass Violence and Disasters
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Disaster Phase Analysis of a Fictional Apartment Gas Explosion in Corliss, Tamarack County: Dated Crossings From Impact to Heroic, Honeymoon and Disillusionment, Two Decisions on the Calendar and What the Model Misses
The Incident
The incident is fictional. On Thursday, February 12, 2026, at 9:40 p.m., a natural gas explosion and fire destroyed the four-story Harbor View Apartments in Corliss, a river city of 38,000 in Tamarack County, and burned two neighboring houses. Nine people died, 31 were hospitalized and 140 residents were displaced. The cause was placed under investigation by the gas utility and the state pipeline safety office.
The Model Used
The analysis uses the phases described in disaster mental health training: pre-disaster, impact, heroic, honeymoon, disillusionment and reconstruction (DeWolfe, 2000). Under each heading below is what was true of Corliss at that point, with the date the town crossed into it.
Impact: February 12, 9:40 p.m.
The explosion, the fire and the first hour of rescue. Firefighters pulled residents from the east stairwell. Neighbors carried people from the two burning houses.
Heroic: February 12, 10:30 p.m., to February 15
Rescue, then search. The Red Cross opened a shelter at a church by midnight. The county opened a family assistance center the next morning. Volunteers outnumbered tasks. The heroic phase ended when the last of the missing was accounted for on February 15.
Honeymoon: February 15 to April 14
The town gathered around the residents. A vigil on February 19 drew 3,000 people. A community fund raised $1.2 million by mid-March. Local landlords offered units at reduced rent. Residents described feeling held.
The honeymoon had a cost that the model mentions only in passing. Volunteers and donations arrived faster than anyone could sort them, and the county spent a week storing donated furniture that no displaced household yet had room for.
Disillusionment: From April 14
The crossing is dated by a decision, not a mood. On April 14 the fund's board published its distribution rules: payments for funeral costs and replacement of essentials, but not lost security deposits or the gap between old and new rents. Within two weeks, residents filled the county board's public comment period, attendance at the weekly residents' meeting fell from 60 to 15 and three families left the county. Disillusionment in the model can last months or years (DeWolfe, 2000); here, it began on a date.
Two Decisions, Dated
February 13, 7:00 a.m.: the county chose the fairgrounds exhibition hall over the high school gym for the family assistance center, because the hall had one controllable entrance. April 14: the fund board's rules, which set the turn into disillusionment.
What the Model Does Not Catch
The model treats the community as moving through phases together. Corliss did not. Homeowners in the two burned houses had insurance and moved toward reconstruction by June; renters, most of whom had no renter's insurance, stayed in disillusionment. Families of the nine who died followed a different course again, measured in funerals and court dates rather than in rebuilding. Survivors facing ongoing losses after a disaster tend to do worse than those whose resources recover (Norris et al., 2002), and the model's single line hides who those survivors are.
Reconstruction
Not yet reached for the renters at the time of this analysis.
References
DeWolfe, D. J. (2000). Training manual for mental health and human service workers in major disasters (2nd ed.). Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
Norris, F. H., Friedman, M. J., Watson, P. J., Byrne, C. M., Diaz, E., & Kaniasty, K. (2002). 60,000 disaster victims speak: Part I. An empirical review of the empirical literature, 1981-2001. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes, 65(3), 207-239. https://doi.org/10.1521/psyc.65.3.207.20173
What the MSW 521 Week 2 assignment asks for
The phase analysis applies the assigned disaster phase model to an incident you build, which should be fictional, plausible and plain rather than dramatic. Use the model's phase names as headings, and under each say what was true of your town at that point, not what the model says should be true. Date the crossing from one phase to the next. Treat disillusionment as events you can count, such as decisions, meeting attendance or departures, rather than as public mood. Include at least two dated decisions that shaped the course of events. End with what the model does not catch, especially groups that moved through phases at different speeds. Keep the incident thin enough that the analysis carries the paper.
Inside the MSW 521 Week 2 example
The incident section describes a fictional gas explosion on February 12, 2026, with nine deaths, 31 hospitalized and 140 displaced. The model section names DeWolfe (2000) and the six phases. Impact is dated to 9:40 p.m.; the heroic phase runs to February 15, when the last missing person is found; the honeymoon covers a vigil, a $1.2 million fund and a cost in unsorted donations. Disillusionment is dated to April 14, when the fund's rules excluded security deposits, and measured by public comments, falling meeting attendance and three families leaving. Two decisions are dated: the family center site and the fund rules. The final section shows renters, homeowners and bereaved families diverging, citing Norris et al. (2002).
MSW 521 Week 2 rubric: what full points look like
The biggest deduction is for labeling without dating: three headings, three summaries of the model and no sentence on when the town crossed between them. Papers that run the phases as a story with a happy ending lose as well. Faculty look for a disillusionment section written as countable events rather than mood, and for decisions placed on the calendar. Credit goes to a section on what the model misses, especially uneven movement across groups. The incident should stay plausible and secondary to the analysis. APA citation of the model's source is expected, and any figures in a fictional incident should be internally consistent across sections.
MSW 521 Week 2 help from the desk
The paper that loses most labels phases with headings and fills them with the model's own descriptions. Another frequent problem is a disillusionment section that says the community felt let down, with no event behind it. Some papers build a dramatic incident that swallows the analysis, or end in reconstruction as though recovery were inevitable. For a river flood or plant fire of your own invention, the same steps apply: dated crossings, decisions on the calendar, countable disillusionment and groups the model misses. An analysis drafted for your incident would name the day each phase began and the evidence that it had.
Get a MSW-521 Week 2 example written to your instructions
Send your Week 2 instructions with the event your section assigned, or with none if the choice is yours, and a custom phase analysis comes back inside 24 to 48 hours, the first one free. Where a genuine disaster is named, the example works from published timelines and inquiry documents only, and no individual person's experience is reconstructed for it.
More MSW 521 papers and MSW samples
- MSW 521 Week 1: Disaster Threshold Post
- MSW 521 Week 3: Activation Checklist
- MSW 521 Week 4: Family Assistance Center Plan
- MSW 521 Week 5: Post-impact Needs Survey
- MSW 521 Week 6: Public Message Draft
- MSW 521 Week 7: Long Term Recovery Plan
- MSW 521 Week 8: After Action Review
- MSW 524 Week 2: Trauma Typology Brief
- MSW 520 Week 2: UNHCR Bangladesh Agency Profile
- MSW 525 Week 2: Treatment Model Comparison
- MSW 517 Week 2: Practice Frame Inventory
MSW 521 Week 2 questions, answered
Which phase model should the paper use?
Whichever one your section assigns, and the example is written so the labels can be swapped without rebuilding the argument, since the dating work is what carries the points. If no model is named, the safe route is the one in the assigned reading, cited once at the top. What loses points is mixing two models and letting the phase names drift between sections.
How long should the event description be?
About a page in the example, and that is deliberate. Enough for a reader to picture the footprint, the hours it took and which institutions were inside it, then nothing further. Every extra paragraph of incident is a paragraph not spent on the phases, and the rubric weights the phases. A short event section also keeps an invented scenario from wandering into detail it cannot support.
Can I add a phase the model does not include, like the anniversary?
In many sections yes, if it is labeled as an addition rather than smuggled in. The example flags it as a proposed extension, gives the reason a year mark behaves differently from the months around it, and keeps it short. Instructors tend to reward the move when the writer is honest that the model does not contain it.
Where can I find a free MSW 521 Week 2 sample paper?
The full MSW 521 Week 2 disaster phase analysis of a fictional apartment gas explosion is published below, annotated where each phase begins.
How does the MSW 521 Week 2 sample date disillusionment?
By the day a community fund published rules excluding lost deposits and rent gaps, followed by countable effects such as public comments, falling attendance and families leaving.