Chapter 10 — Preparation · iETA Field Manual

iETA

Field Manual for Natural Medicine Facilitation

Student Textbook · Inner EDGE Travel Agency

V2.0 · Phase 3
Draft Edition

Chapter 10 Phase 3 · Clinical & Practical Applications

Preparation

The shift from assessment to co-creation — building intention, designing conditions, and constructing the safety infrastructure the participant will rely on when the facilitator can no longer be reached.

3 Lessons + OSCE 10 Hours Total 7 hrs Sync · 3 hrs Async PC3 · PC5

By the End of This Chapter You Will Be Able To

Apply the iETA language codex consistently — recognizing and replacing clinical, predictive, and directive language in all preparation conversations.
Facilitate a participant-led intention-setting conversation through the five-phase guide — preserving the participant's own words and not correcting their outcomes toward your expectations.
Work through all six preparation coordinates with a participant as a co-design process, not a facilitator-determined checklist.
Distinguish informed consent as a continuing conversation from informed consent as a one-time form — and conduct the consent conversation at session day.
Co-create a participant-directed safety plan with threshold language in the participant's own words — and brief the support person specifically and in plain language.

§1 Language & Intention Setting

§2 Six Coordinates of Preparation

§3 Safety Plan & Support Person Briefing

§§ Glossary · Knowledge Check

Chapter Introduction

"M08 and M09 were about what you could see in a participant. M10 is about what you can build with them."

The participant has been cleared. The eligibility question is answered. The work now is relational and collaborative: helping the participant develop a clean intention, design conditions that will support their experience, and build safety infrastructure they actually own. Everything in this chapter is participant-led. The facilitator structures; the participant fills.

Two things to hold across all three sections. First: language matters more here than anywhere else in the program. The preparation conversation is the longest and most intimate contact the facilitator has with the participant before the session. Words that imply clinical authority the facilitator doesn't have, or that promise outcomes no one can guarantee, shape the participant's expectations for everything that follows. The language codex in Section 1 is not stylistic preference — it is a scope boundary.

Second: the preparation plan, safety plan, and support person briefing are not documents the facilitator creates for the participant. They are documents the facilitator and participant create together. A participant who received a completed safety plan to sign will not reach for it at 3am three days post-session. A participant who built it will.

Section 1 · Lesson 1

Language & Intention Setting

The iETA language codex · five-phase intention-setting guide · expectation without guarantee

2.5 hrs sync · 0.5 hrs async · 3.0 hrs total

Language that positions the facilitator as the authority over an experience the participant is about to have undercuts the entire empowerment architecture of this program — before the session begins.

The Language Codex — Three Underlying Principles

The iETA language framework is generated by three principles that apply to words not yet on the list. (1) If a word implies clinical authority you don't have — find one that doesn't. "Dose" and "dosage" are prescribing terms. "High dose" is clinical classification. Use "natural medicine amount" and "a more intensive experience." (2) If a word removes participant agency — find one that restores it. "I'll guide your journey" positions the facilitator as driver. "I'll hold the space while you move through this" positions the participant as navigator. (3) If a word promises an outcome — add a hedge or remove the predictive framing entirely. "This will help you heal" is both a clinical claim and a promise. "Some people report..." is honest. The language codex is a practice, not a checklist. These principles generate the right word in any situation.

Portfolio Reference iETA Preparation Language — Avoid / Use Instead / Why It Matters

Avoid	Use Instead	Why It Matters
Amount & Intensity — Highest-Risk Category
Dose / dosage Hard stop	"Amount" or "natural medicine amount"	Prescribing language. A scope boundary, not a stylistic preference.
High dose / low dose	"A more intensive experience" / "an introductory experience"	Removes clinical classification framing. Describes the participant's experience rather than implying the facilitator is dosing them.
Heroic dose Do not use	Avoid entirely	"Heroic" glamorizes intensity and contradicts the program's pacing philosophy.
Microdose Keep	Microdosing / microdose service	An established and distinct service pathway — not simply "a small amount."
Outcome Language — What the Experience Will Be Like
"This will help you heal / treat / cure" Hard stop	"Some people report..." / "Research suggests potential benefit for..."	Outcome promises are clinical claims and legal liability. The facilitator cannot guarantee outcomes.
"You will feel..." / "This will make you..."	"Many people experience..." / "Some people find that..."	Individual responses vary significantly. Predictive language sets expectations that may not be met.
"The medicine will do the work"	"The experience tends to amplify what you bring to it"	Removes participant agency. iETA positions the participant as active co-creator, not passive recipient.
Agency Language — Who Is in Charge of What
"I'll take you through this" / "I'll guide your journey"	"I'll hold the space while you move through this"	The facilitator supports and holds — they do not direct or lead. Language that positions the facilitator as driver contradicts participant empowerment.
"You should / you need to / you must"	"Many people find it helpful to..." / "Something to consider..."	Directive language removes participant choice. Preparation is a co-design process — every decision belongs to the participant.
"Trust the medicine" / "Surrender to the experience"	"Following what arises tends to be more productive than resisting it — though you're always free to change direction"	Surrender language asks participants to give up agency. The TIC Choice principle (M04) applies with full force in preparation.

Intention Setting — What It Is and What It Isn't

An intention is not a goal. A goal is outcome-focused ("I want to feel less anxious"). An intention is direction-focused — it orients the participant toward what they are moving toward without predetermining what they will find. "I want to understand my relationship with fear" is an intention. "I want to cure my fear" is a goal that makes a promise the session cannot keep.

A facilitator who corrects a participant's outcome-loaded intention ("that's not really how this works — let me help you reframe it") has taken ownership of something that belongs to the participant. The facilitator's role is to explore, not to correct. If a participant says "I want to be healed tonight," the invitation is not to reframe the word "healed" — it is to ask what healing looks like to them, what would feel different, what they are hoping to find when they get there. The exploration refines the intention without imposing the facilitator's framework on the participant's meaning.

Portfolio Artifact Intention-Setting Guide — Five-Phase Structure

Phase 1 Open the Space

Establish that this is a participant-led conversation — not a facilitator assessment. Create the conditions for honest exploration rather than a correct answer.

"There's no right intention and no wrong one. We're just going to explore what's true for you right now and see what emerges."

Phase 2 Explore What's Present

Open-ended, non-directive questioning. Follow the participant's language, not your own framework. The participant is discovering, not answering a question you already know the answer to.

"What's alive for you right now — what's been occupying your thoughts or feelings as you've been preparing for this?" / "What are you most curious about going in?"

Phase 3 Deepen and Clarify

Reflect the participant's own words back. Ask what specific words mean to them. Help them move from surface to substance — from "I want clarity" to "clarity about what specifically."

"When you said '[their words]' — what does that mean for you specifically?" / "What would feel different if you had [what they named]?"

Phase 4 Name the Intention

Help the participant distill what has emerged into one sentence — a direction, not a destination. Offer a structure if needed: "I am here to [explore / open to / meet / release]..."

"If you were going to name this intention in one sentence — not a goal, but a direction — what would it be?" / "Does that feel true? Is there a word that doesn't quite fit?"

Phase 5 Anchor and Record

Document the intention in the participant's exact words — not your paraphrase. Reflect it back. Confirm they would recognize it as their own. Intentions are living — they may be revised up to the session day pre-brief.

"Let me write that down exactly as you said it. [Write it.] Does that feel right when you hear it back?" / "This is a living thing — we can revisit it."

Language Audit — Portfolio Task

Look at your M09 intake materials. Find at least two questions or statements that contain language table violations — predictive, clinical, or directive language. Write them here, then write your revised version using the three underlying principles. This is a portfolio artifact.

Self-Check — Section 1

I can identify the three underlying principles of the language codex — and apply them to words not yet on the table.
I know the difference between an intention and a goal — and I know what to do when a participant brings an outcome-loaded intention.
I can conduct all five phases of the intention-setting guide without correcting the participant's language toward my own expectations.
I have completed my language audit and have revised versions of at least two of my own questions.

Moving Forward

The intention is set. Section 2 works through the remaining five preparation coordinates — the practical architecture of when, where, with whom, with what amount, and how — each as a co-designed decision, not a facilitator-determined condition.

Section 2 · Lesson 2

Six Coordinates of Preparation

Why · With Whom · When · Where · What Amount · How · informed consent as a continuing conversation

2.0 hrs sync · 1.0 hrs async · 3.0 hrs total

Why This Matters

Set and setting — the two most significant non-pharmacological determinants of a psilocybin experience — are not variables the facilitator determines. They are variables the facilitator and participant co-design. The six-coordinate framework is the iETA expansion of set and setting into a systematic conversation structure. Each coordinate is a decision that belongs to the participant. The facilitator brings knowledge of what tends to support versus complicate the experience; the participant makes the choices.

01 · WHY Intention Established in Lesson 1

The participant's intention — in their exact words — is carried forward from the Section 1 conversation. It is documented in the preparation plan, may be revisited in subsequent preparation sessions, and is read back in the pre-session briefing on session day. It is not revised by the facilitator; it is held by both.

02 · WITH WHOM Companionship & Support Support & Companionship

Two dimensions: the facilitator-participant relationship (the quality of trust and role clarity built across preparation sessions), and the support person identified in M08C. The support person is not just a name on a plan — they need to be identified, briefed, and have a clear role. In group contexts, this also includes the co-facilitator structure and participant-to-facilitator ratios.

03 · WHEN Timing Includes eligibility reconfirmation

Timing is not a scheduling detail — it is part of the terrain. The participant's current emotional bandwidth, stress load, surrounding obligations, and recovery time available afterward all shape the experience. A session scheduled between a difficult family event and a high-stakes work deadline is not optimally timed — and the facilitator has both the right and the responsibility to name that. This coordinate also includes the eligibility reconfirmation: a brief check that nothing significant has changed since screening. If something significant has emerged, M09 protocols may need to be revisited.

04 · WHERE Environment & Set/Setting Physical & relational environment, temperature, comfort elements), the relational environment (who is present, the quality of contact), and the logistical context. The nervous system registers environment before conscious thought arrives — privacy, predictability, physical safety, and manageable sensory input help the body stay regulated as perception shifts. The facilitator brings knowledge of what conditions tend to support the experience; the participant co-designs based on their specific needs, preferences, and sensitivities. A participant who is sound-sensitive needs different environmental design than one who finds silence uncomfortable.

05 · WHAT AMOUNT Natural Medicine Amount Highest language-risk coordinate

Amount influences not just intensity, but duration, vulnerability, and the level of support required. This is a preparation conversation — not a prescription. The facilitator informs; the service center's protocols govern what is available; the participant understands the arc before deciding. A participant who says "I want to go as high as possible" is telling the facilitator something important about their expectations — that deserves genuine exploration, not accommodation. Deeper work comes from alignment with readiness, not from intensity escalation. Language precision is critical here: "dose" and "dosage" are prescribing terms. "High dose" is clinical classification. Use "natural medicine amount" and "a more intensive experience."

06 · HOW Method, Preparation & Logistics Method, onset arc & logistics, pacing, and the overall arc. A participant who understands that onset typically begins 30–60 minutes after consumption, that the experience may intensify over 1–2 hours, that the peak typically occurs within 2–4 hours, and that the full arc may last 4–6 hours — is far better positioned to stay oriented than one encountering this progression for the first time. Practical logistics confirmed here: transportation to and from (no driving for 8+ hours post-ingestion), what to bring, arrival time, substance windows reconfirmed from M08A.

Informed Consent as a Continuing Conversation

Consent was introduced in M02 and applied in M09. In M10 the key principle is that informed consent is not a single event — it is an ongoing conversation. A participant who signed a form at intake months ago and has since experienced significant life changes may need the consent conversation revisited. The consent conversation on preparation day covers: what the service involves, what the facilitator will and will not do, the participant's right to stop at any point, the known range of experience including the possibility of difficulty, and the participant's unconditional right to change their mind. The form documents the conversation — it does not replace it.

On session day, before anything else, the facilitator asks for a genuine affirmation: "Are you coming into this with a full yes?" A participant who says "yes, I think so" or "I hope so" has not given a full yes. The facilitator can gently name that: "I want to make sure this feels genuinely clear for you — take a moment if you need it." A session that begins with an ambivalent participant is not a session with full consent.

⚠Common Pitfall — Deciding the Coordinates for the Participant

The most common preparation error is a facilitator who works through the six coordinates by deciding what's best and then presenting to the participant for approval. "I'll set up the room this way." "I think you should schedule for a Saturday." These are facilitator-determined coordinates — not co-created ones. The participant brings their knowledge of what their body needs, what their schedule allows, and what their nervous system finds safe. The facilitator brings knowledge of what tends to support the experience. Neither of these alone is preparation. Both together — through genuine conversation — is.

Preparation Plan — Portfolio Artifact

Portfolio Artifact Preparation Plan — Six Coordinates

01 · Why — Intention (Participant's Exact Words)

Record verbatim. Do not paraphrase. Date the intention; note any revisions with dates.

02 · With Whom — Support Person & Briefing Status

Name and relationship · Support person briefed ☐ · Support person has copy of safety plan ☐

03 · When — Session Date, Timing Factors, Eligibility Reconfirmation

Session date confirmed · Timing considerations addressed · Eligibility reconfirmation completed ☐

04 · Where — Environment Notes (Co-Designed)

Room layout, sound, lighting, comfort elements, any sensitivities to address.

05 · What Amount — Natural Medicine Amount

Amount discussed and understood · Service center protocol confirms availability ☐ · No outcome promises made ☐

06 · How — Method, Onset Arc, Session-Day Logistics

Onset arc explained · Transportation confirmed · Substance windows reconfirmed · Arrival time and what to bring ☐

Self-Check — Section 2

I can name all six preparation coordinates and the specific content of each — not just the labels.
I understand why "05 · What Amount" has the highest language risk — and what specific words trigger scope violations in that conversation.
I understand informed consent as a continuing conversation — and I know the difference between the form documenting the conversation and the form replacing it.
My preparation plan draft was co-created with a participant profile — every field reflects participant decisions, not facilitator decisions.

Moving Forward

The preparation plan is complete. Section 3 builds the safety infrastructure the participant will rely on when the session is over and the facilitator is not in the room — the participant-directed safety plan, the support person briefing, and the pre-journey checklist that closes the preparation arc.

Section 3 · Lesson 3

Safety Plan & Support Person Briefing

Participant-directed safety planning · threshold language · support person briefing · pre-journey checklist

3.0 hrs sync · 1.0 hrs async · 4.0 hrs total

Why This Matters

The safety plan's value is primarily in what it provides after the session — not during. The participant who calls at 3am three days post-session, feeling raw, not in crisis but not knowing who to reach — that is the person the safety plan was actually built for. A plan the participant built will be used. A plan the facilitator completed for them often won't.

Participant-Directed Safety Planning

Colorado NMTP J.13 is deliberate: "participant-directed." The safety plan reflects the participant's own choices about who to contact, what their threshold language sounds like for each level, and what they need at each tier. The facilitator introduces the framework and explains the purpose of each element — then follows the participant's lead in populating it. The threshold language, specifically, must be in the participant's own words — because generic threshold descriptions are less useful than specific ones. "For me, concern level is when I can't get out of bed two days in a row and I'm starting to avoid calls" is more useful than "significant distress that interferes with functioning."

The Support Person Briefing

The support person — named in M08C and confirmed in M09 — needs to be briefed before the session. The briefing covers: what the service is at a high level; what to expect from the participant in the 48–72 hours following; what the participant's threshold language means specifically; how to reach the facilitator; and when to call emergency services. The support person does not need clinical training. They need specific, plain-language information about what they are supporting and what to do at each threshold. One focused question for every support person briefing: what is the one thing this particular support person most needs to know — that they probably don't know yet?

Communication Protocols

The facilitator and participant need explicit agreements about between-session and post-session communication: which channels are available, what the response window is, what warrants reaching out versus waiting for the next scheduled session, and when to reach someone else instead. These agreements — established during preparation — prevent the post-session ambiguity that drives either unnecessary contact or insufficient support when it matters most.

Portfolio Artifact Safety Plan — Co-Created with Participant

The participant writes their threshold language — in their own words — while the facilitator provides the framework. The distinction matters: a plan in the facilitator's words will not be used. A plan in the participant's words will.

Monitor — Check In with Support Person

Managing independently but checking in. Examples: feeling unsettled, emotionally tender, some sleep disruption.

In my own words, monitor for me looks like:

Concern — Contact Facilitator

Persistent distress not resolving. Examples: unable to function in daily life after 48 hours; feeling detached from reality.

In my own words, concern for me looks like:

Emergency — 911 or Emergency Services

Thoughts of self-harm, inability to communicate, chest pain, breathing difficulty, seizure.

Support person has nearest ER / urgent care confirmed: ☐

Support Person — Name, Relationship, Contact

Facilitator Contact — Channel, Response Window, After-Hours Protocol

Support person briefed ☐ · Support person has copy of this plan ☐ · Participant signature below

Vocabulary in Context

Participant-Directed Safety Plan

A safety plan built with the participant — in which the participant writes their own threshold language, names their own support person, and owns the decisions. Not a document created by the facilitator and signed by the participant.

"Let's work through each level together. For 'monitor' — what would that actually look like for you, in your own situation? What specific thing would tell you it's time to call your support person?"

Six Coordinates of Preparation

The iETA expansion of set and setting into six co-designed preparation elements: Why (intention), With Whom, When, Where, What Amount, and How. Each is a decision that belongs to the participant, informed by the facilitator's knowledge.

"For 'Where' — based on what you know about yourself, what environmental conditions help you feel most safe and at ease? Let's design from there."

Eligibility Reconfirmation

A brief check during the timing coordinate — confirming that nothing significant has changed since M09 screening: medications, health status, significant life events. Not a full re-screening; a check-in.

"Before we finalize timing — has anything significant changed for you since we last met? Any changes to medications, or anything in your life that feels important for me to know?"

Natural Medicine Amount

The scope-compliant replacement for "dose" and "dosage" — clinical and prescribing terms outside facilitator scope. Describes the participant's experience rather than implying the facilitator is dosing them.

"I want to share what we know about how different amounts tend to affect the arc and quality of the experience — so you can make an informed choice, with service center protocols in mind."

Pre-Journey Briefing Checklist — Session Day

Pre-Journey Briefing Checklist · Session Day

Six coordinates reviewed — participant confirms each is still as planned

Intention reflected back in participant's exact words — confirmed still feels right

Honest expectation-setting: general experience arc (onset, intensification, peak, return) explained — variability acknowledged, no outcome promises

Inner guidance reminder: whatever arises, the participant's own knowing is the compass. The facilitator holds the space — the participant navigates.

Safety plan reviewed with participant and support person together — all three threshold levels and emergency contact confirmed

Logistics confirmed: transportation, what participant brought, substance windows, communication protocol reconfirmed

Final consent affirmation sought: "Are you coming into this with a full yes?" — Wait for a genuine answer. A "yes, I think so" is not a full yes.

Participant and facilitator signatures on consent affirmation

Chapter 10 — Am I Ready?

I can identify language table violations in my own preparation materials and revise them using the three underlying principles.
I can facilitate the intention-setting guide through all five phases — exploring, not correcting, the participant's outcome-loaded language.
I can work through all six preparation coordinates as a co-design process — with the participant making decisions, not me presenting them for approval.
My safety plan was built with the participant — the threshold language is in their words, not mine.
I can conduct a support person briefing that gives a specific, plain-language overview — not a clinical training session, not vague reassurance.
I understand why "a full yes" on session day is not the same as a signature at intake — and I know how to seek genuine affirmation.

Not yet practiced the intention-setting conversation aloud? The OSCE assesses the full preparation briefing including intention reflection and consent affirmation. Reading the guide and delivering it are different skills.

Chapter 10 — Key Takeaways

M08 and M09 were about what you could see in a participant. M10 is about what you can build with them. The shift from assessment to co-creation changes everything about how the facilitator shows up.
The language codex is generated by three principles: don't imply clinical authority you don't have; don't remove participant agency; don't promise outcomes you can't guarantee. Apply these to words not yet on the table.
"Dose" and "dosage" are hard stops — prescribing language outside facilitator scope. "Natural medicine amount" is the replacement. This is not stylistic preference.
An intention is a direction, not a destination. When a participant brings an outcome-loaded intention, explore it — don't correct it. The exploration refines the intention without imposing the facilitator's framework on the participant's meaning.
The six coordinates of preparation are co-designed, not facilitator-determined. The facilitator brings knowledge of what tends to support the experience; the participant makes the decisions.
Informed consent is a continuing conversation, not a one-time event. The consent form documents the conversation — it does not replace it. A "full yes" on session day is not the same as a signature at intake.
The safety plan's value is what it provides when the facilitator is not in the room. A plan built by the facilitator will not be used at 3am three days post-session. A plan the participant built will.
The threshold language in the safety plan must be in the participant's own words. Generic descriptions are less useful than specific ones: "for me, monitor level is when I haven't been able to sleep two nights in a row" is the target.
The support person doesn't need clinical training. They need specific, plain-language information about what they're supporting and what to do at each threshold. The briefing is practical, not clinical.

Chapter Glossary

Key terms from Chapter 10 — defined for reference and study.

Co-Creation (Preparation)

The principle that all preparation decisions — coordinates, safety plan thresholds, support person identification — are made with the participant, not for them. The facilitator brings structure and knowledge; the participant makes the choices.

Eligibility Reconfirmation

A brief check during the timing coordinate confirming nothing significant has changed since M09 screening. Not a full re-screening — a check-in about medications, health status, and significant life events.

Informed Consent (Continuing)

The principle that informed consent is not a one-time event but an ongoing conversation — including a genuine "full yes" affirmation sought on session day, distinct from the signature obtained at intake.

Intention

A direction, not a destination — a participant-led statement of what they are moving toward, developed through the five-phase intention-setting guide and recorded in the participant's exact words.

Natural Medicine Amount

The scope-compliant replacement for "dose" and "dosage" — clinical and prescribing terms outside facilitator scope. A hard-stop language table item.

Participant-Directed Safety Plan

A safety plan built with the participant — in which threshold language is in the participant's own words. A plan built by the facilitator and signed by the participant is not participant-directed.

Six Coordinates of Preparation

The iETA expansion of set and setting into six co-designed preparation elements: (1) Why/Intention, (2) With Whom, (3) When, (4) Where, (5) What Amount, (6) How. Each is a co-design conversation, not a facilitator decision.

Support Person

A trusted, identified person who knows the participant is doing this work and can be contacted after the session. Briefed by the facilitator in plain language about what to expect, threshold levels, and when to seek emergency services.

Knowledge Check

Attempt each question before checking the Answer Key at the back of the textbook.

Q1Multiple ChoiceIntention Setting · PC5 · L1

Which facilitator phrase best supports participant-led intention-setting?

"You should seek a breakthrough experience tonight."
"What is most important for you to explore or move toward during this session?"
"I'll decide what your intention should be to keep you safe."
"Intentions aren't really necessary — let's skip this step."