| Course | MSW 521 Social Work Response to Mass Violence and Disasters |
|---|---|
| Week | 8 |
| Paper type | After action review |
| 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 8
After Action Review of the Fictional Tamarack County Behavioral Health Response to the Harbor View Explosion: A Sourced Timeline, Findings About Arrangements, What Went Right and One Change per Finding
Student Name
Chamberlain University
MSW 521: Social Work Response to Mass Violence and Disasters
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
After Action Review of the Fictional Tamarack County Behavioral Health Response to the Harbor View Explosion: A Sourced Timeline, Findings About Arrangements, What Went Right and One Change per Finding
Front Page
Event: Harbor View Apartments gas explosion, February 12, 2026. Review period: February 12 to March 31. Consulted: the department's activation log, the family assistance center sign-in sheets, radio transcripts from the emergency operations center and interviews with 14 staff and four families. Could not see: medical examiner records, the utility's investigation and the Red Cross shelter's internal logs. The review follows the after action format used in homeland security exercises (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2020).
Timeline
Table 1
Response Timeline
| Time | Action | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 12, 9:58 p.m. | Director notified by emergency manager | Activation log |
| Feb 12, 10:21 p.m. | Activation declared by on-call supervisor; director unreachable | Activation log; supervisor interview |
| Feb 12, 11:40 p.m. | First two staff arrive at shelter | Shelter sign-in sheet |
| Feb 13, 7:00 a.m. | Family assistance center site chosen | Operations center radio transcript |
| Feb 13, 8:05 a.m. | Center opens; three behavioral health staff present | Center sign-in sheet |
| Feb 13, 11:30 a.m. | Family hears of a death from a news broadcast in the family room | Family interview; staff interview |
| Feb 15, 4:00 p.m. | Last missing person accounted for | Operations center radio transcript |
| Feb 27 | Center closes; recovery center opens | Department log |
Note. Note. Each entry gives the record it came from; entries from interviews alone are marked.
Findings
1. Staff arrived at the shelter 1 hour 42 minutes after notice, against a 90-minute target, because the call list had four outdated numbers.
2. A family heard of a death from a television in the family room. The plan did not say that televisions would be off.
3. Briefings at fixed times were valued by families and kept rumors down.
4. No staff check-in happened until day 6.
What Went Right
The on-call supervisor declared activation when the director could not be reached, as the checklist provided. Families described the twice-daily briefings as the thing that helped most. Psychological first aid, rather than debriefing, was used throughout, consistent with guidance for the immediate aftermath (Hobfoll et al., 2007).
Recording what went right matters for the same reason as recording failures: the next activation will copy what this report praises. The supervisor's decision to declare without the director, for example, is now cited in training as the checklist working as written. One family described a staff member who sat with them for four hours without being asked, and the review notes that the staffing plan made that possible by keeping a fourth worker unassigned on each shift.
Changes
Table 2
Changes by Finding
| Finding | Change | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Call list verified quarterly by text reply | Duty officer | June 30 |
| 2 | Center setup list adds: all televisions off, no live news in family areas | Center supervisor | April 30 |
| 3 | Fixed briefing times written into the center plan | Director | April 30 |
| 4 | Staff check-in at end of each shift, logged | Director | Immediately |
Note. Note. Each finding has one change, one owner and a due date.
Who Gets the Report
The county emergency manager, the department's staff, the board of commissioners and, in a shortened form, families who took part in interviews.
References
Hobfoll, S. E., Watson, P., Bell, C. C., Bryant, R. A., Brymer, M. J., Friedman, M. J., Friedman, M., Gersons, B. P. R., de Jong, J. T. V. M., Layne, C. M., Maguen, S., Neria, Y., Norwood, A. E., Pynoos, R. S., Reissman, D., Ruzek, J. I., Shalev, A. Y., Solomon, Z., Steinberg, A. M., & Ursano, R. J. (2007). Five essential elements of immediate and mid-term mass trauma intervention: Empirical evidence. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes, 70(4), 283-315. https://doi.org/10.1521/psyc.2007.70.4.283
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2020). Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP). Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Reading the MSW 521 Week 8 instructions
The after action review should look like a report an agency would file, not an essay about lessons learned. The front page gives the event, the review period, who and what was consulted and what the review could not see. A timeline follows in table form, each entry with a time, an action and the source it came from, since an unsourced entry is a memory. Findings come next, short and numbered, written about arrangements rather than individuals. Record what went right, because the next response will copy what the report praises. Then give one change for each finding, with an owner and a due date. Close with who receives the report, including people affected where appropriate.
Inside the MSW 521 Week 8 example
The front page names the event, a review period to March 31, the logs, transcripts and interviews consulted and three records the review could not see, and cites U.S. Department of Homeland Security (2020) for the format. Table 1 gives eight timeline entries, from the director's notification at 9:58 p.m. to the center's closing, each with a source. Four findings follow: late arrival due to outdated numbers, a family learning of a death from a television, the value of fixed briefings and delayed staff check-ins. The section on what went right credits the supervisor's declaration, briefings and psychological first aid, citing Hobfoll et al. (2007), and a staffing choice. Table 2 assigns one change per finding with an owner and date, and a final section lists recipients.
Reading the MSW 521 Week 8 grading rubric
The review loses the most when findings arrive with no changes attached, so it reads as a judgment rather than an instrument for improvement. The next deduction is for a narrative timeline with no sources. Faculty credit findings about arrangements, such as call lists or room setup, rather than about individuals, and a section on what went right. Each change should have an owner and a date. The front page should say what the review could not see. Distribution matters, since a report nobody receives changes nothing. A recognized format, cited in APA, helps the document read as an agency record. Fictional events should be internally consistent with earlier assignments.
MSW 521 Week 8 help: mistakes that cost points
The review that loses most lists findings with no changes, so nothing would be different next time. Close behind is a smooth narrative timeline where nobody can tell what came from a log and what from memory. Findings that name individuals read as blame and make staff less candid next time. Some reviews skip what went right, which risks cutting what worked. In a review of a made-up hospital surge or school lockdown, the same structure applies: front page, sourced timeline, findings about arrangements, what went right and changes with owners. A review drafted for your event would be short enough for a commissioner to read before the next budget meeting.
Get a MSW-521 Week 8 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 8 instructions with anything your section provided as source material, a scenario log or an incident summary, and a custom after action review written to it comes back inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. If a template with fixed headings is required, the example is built inside that structure rather than beside it.
More MSW 521 papers and MSW samples
- MSW 521 Week 1: Disaster Threshold Post
- MSW 521 Week 2: Gas Explosion Phase Analysis
- MSW 521 Week 3: Activation Checklist
- MSW 521 Week 4: Family Assistance Center Plan
- MSW 521 Week 5: Displaced Household Needs Survey
- MSW 521 Week 6: Morning After Public Message
- MSW 521 Week 7: Long-Term Recovery Committee Plan
- MSW 524 Week 8: Exposure History Write-up
- MSW 520 Week 8: Camp Supervisor Role Practice Paper
- MSW 525 Week 8: Termination Session Plan
- MSW 517 Week 8: Practice Integration Paper
MSW 521 Week 8 questions, answered
Is this the same as a hot wash?
No. A hot wash happens in the days after and captures impressions while they are fresh. The review is the slower document that works from records and produces changes with dates against them. The example says so in its method section, and where a section supplies hot wash notes it treats them as one source among several rather than as findings already made.
How do I write findings without blaming anyone?
By making the arrangement the subject. Instead of a coordinator failing to call, the finding is that the standing to call was undefined and the plan named no alternate. That is both fairer and more useful, because a person can be replaced and the gap will still be sitting there. The example applies that test to every finding before it is kept.
Can I write this about a scenario rather than a real event?
Yes, and most sections prefer it. The example works from an invented incident at an invented agency, which lets it produce logs and interview notes as sources without misrepresenting anybody. Where the assignment names a real response, published inquiry documents replace the invented records and the structure of the review does not change.
Where can I find a free MSW 521 Week 8 sample paper?
The complete MSW 521 Week 8 after action review of a fictional county behavioral health response is posted below, with margin notes on sourcing and findings.
What change does the MSW 521 Week 8 sample make after a family heard of a death on television?
It adds to the center setup list that all televisions are off and no live news plays in family areas, owned by the center supervisor with an April 30 due date.