Module 1 - Instructor Guide v-2.0

Opening Frame — Read aloud or paraphrase:

"The word 'facilitator' is doing serious work in this field. It's not a soft label or a catchall — it's a legally defined, ethically bounded professional role. Colorado's Natural Medicine Program has been deliberate about what this role is and, just as importantly, what it is not. By the end of today you'll be able to say exactly what you are as a facilitator — and you'll understand why that precision matters for your participants, for your practice, and for your legal standing."

Instructor note: Let this land. Pause after "legal standing." Many learners haven't thought of the facilitator role in legal terms yet — this is their first encounter with the regulatory reality of this work.

Pull up the CO NMTP language on the slide. Read it aloud. Then paraphrase it in plain language.

"Colorado defines a natural medicine facilitator as a trained professional who supports participants before, during, and after a psilocybin service session. That's it. Notice what's missing from that definition: diagnosing, treating, providing therapy, prescribing, interpreting experience, directing outcomes. None of that is in the facilitator role."

Write the three phases on the board — PREPARATION / ADMINISTRATION / INTEGRATION — and briefly name the facilitator's job in each:

• Preparation: Screening, informed consent, safety planning, psychoeducation, intention-setting. The facilitator helps the participant get ready — they don't decide whether the participant "should" do this.
• Administration: Holding space, monitoring the participant's physical and emotional state, responding to distress using within-scope techniques, documenting accurately. The facilitator is present and watchful — not directing the experience.
• Integration: Supporting meaning-making after the session, identifying referral needs, maintaining scope boundaries. This is where scope confusion is most common — more on that when we get to M12.

Ask the group: "Which of these three phases do you think is most likely to pull a facilitator outside their scope — and why?" Take 2–3 responses. Don't resolve yet — let the tension stay.

Bridge into the Timeline Exercise: "Let's see if you can apply this. The Timeline Exercise asks you to map specific facilitator tasks to the right phase — preparation, administration, or integration."

"Here's where it gets nuanced. There are five roles that learners — and the public — commonly confuse with facilitation. Understanding the difference isn't academic. When a participant misunderstands your role, they set unrealistic expectations. When you misunderstand your role, you cross lines you can't uncross."

Work through each role. Use the slide with the comparison chart:

• Therapist: A licensed clinical professional who diagnoses mental health conditions and provides treatment within an established therapeutic relationship. Facilitators do NOT diagnose, do NOT treat, and do NOT maintain an ongoing therapeutic relationship. This distinction is critical for facilitators who also hold clinical licenses — your therapy license does not transfer into the facilitation session. You are operating as a facilitator, under facilitator rules, even if you're also a licensed therapist.
  Instructor prompt: "Has anyone in this room felt the pull to 'therapize' during a facilitation context? What triggered it?" Short hands-up or verbal check.
• Coach: Non-clinical, future-focused, goal-oriented. Coaches give advice, set goals, track progress. Facilitators don't prescribe a direction for the participant's life or experience. The key difference: a coach helps you get somewhere; a facilitator holds space for wherever you go.
• Sitter: An informal, often volunteer role — someone who simply stays present with a person during an experience, typically without training or regulatory standing. A trained, CO-licensed facilitator has professional accountability, a defined scope, documentation obligations, and regulatory oversight. "Sitter" is not a synonym — it's a completely different category.
• Guide: The word "guide" implies directional leadership — taking someone somewhere. Non-directive facilitation is the opposite. The facilitator follows; the participant leads. If you describe yourself as a guide, you're unintentionally signaling that you'll direct the journey — which is not what you're trained or licensed to do.
• Shaman / Curandero: This is the most important distinction — and the most sensitive. Shamans and curanderos hold deep cultural, spiritual, and community roles embedded in specific indigenous traditions. These are not titles you acquire through a training program. To claim them without authentic cultural standing is a form of appropriation that disrespects the communities who have held these traditions for generations. As facilitators, we acknowledge and honor these lineages. We do not claim them.
  Instructor note: If learners have personal spiritual practices or indigenous heritage, hold this with care. You're not questioning anyone's spiritual identity — you're being clear about professional role. Keep the distinction anchored in professional responsibility, not personal worth.

Bridge into the Vignette Sort: "Now we test it. You know what a facilitator IS. You know the five roles a facilitator is NOT. The next 25 minutes asks: can you actually tell the difference under pressure?"

"I want to spend a few minutes on what may be the single most important concept in this entire training: non-directive facilitation. Because it's counterintuitive, and because virtually every person in this room has been trained — in life, if not professionally — to help by doing something."

Non-directive means: the facilitator does not interpret the participant's experience, does not suggest what it means, does not steer toward a particular emotional territory, and does not measure success by what "happened" in the session.

"Think about the last time someone helped you through something hard by just being present — not fixing, not explaining, not directing. How did that feel? That's what non-directive facilitation is reaching toward. It's actually one of the hardest professional skills to develop, because it requires you to suppress the instinct to help by acting."

Give the contrast example: A participant says mid-session, "I keep seeing my mother's face." A directive response might be: "That sounds like unresolved grief — stay with it." A non-directive response: "I'm here. You're safe. What do you need right now?"

Ask: "What's the difference between those two responses — not just in words, but in what they assume about the participant?" Take 2–3 responses.

[CO J.6] This lecture sequence directly satisfies the CO requirement to address the facilitator's role and limits of scope of practice.  [iETA+] The five-role comparison and explicit non-directive framing expand beyond the CO minimum to build professional identity clarity.

Opening Frame — Read aloud or paraphrase:

"In facilitation, imprecise language isn't just sloppy — it creates real harm. When a facilitator uses 'integration' to mean the same thing as 'therapy,' they confuse their role. When a participant doesn't understand what 'consent' means in this context, they can't actually give it. When a facilitator misidentifies countertransference as empathy, they make decisions based on their own unresolved material instead of the participant's actual needs. Every term we're covering today has been chosen because it directly affects safety, ethics, or equity in facilitation."

Instructor note: Keep a visible glossary on the board or slide throughout the lecture. Each term you introduce should stay visible — learners absorb these differently when they can see the full set building.

Teach each term using this consistent format: Definition → Real Example → What Goes Wrong Without It. Budget ~4 min per term.

Definition: The participant's internal state going into the session — their mindset, emotional state, intentions, expectations, fears, and current life circumstances. "Set" is not fixed; it's shaped by everything leading up to the session, including how the preparation process was conducted.

Real example: A participant who arrives for their session having just had a major argument with their spouse has a very different "set" than one who arrives after a quiet morning of journaling and intention-setting. Same medicine, same setting, potentially very different experience.

What goes wrong without it: Facilitators who don't actively assess and support set during preparation are working blind. They don't know what the participant is bringing into the room — and that shapes everything.

Quick check: "If someone told you their 'set' was good but you noticed they seemed anxious and distracted, what would you do?" Take 1–2 responses.

Definition: The physical and relational environment of the session — space, lighting, sound, temperature, objects present, and the emotional presence of the facilitator. Unlike set, the facilitator has direct control over setting.

Real example: A dimly lit room with soft ambient music and a blanket creates a very different setting than a bright fluorescent-lit clinical space. The facilitator's calm, grounded presence is also part of the setting — they are an environmental factor.

What goes wrong without it: Facilitators who underestimate setting underestimate their own influence on the session. A facilitator who is anxious, distracted, or unprepared is actively shaping the setting in a way that affects participant safety.

Definition: The participant's stated purpose or focus for the session. Not a guaranteed outcome — a direction of attention. Facilitators help participants articulate intention; they never impose one.

Real example: "I want to understand why I keep sabotaging my relationships" is an intention. "I want to feel better" is not — it's an outcome wish. Part of preparation work is helping participants move from vague outcome wishes to specific, honest intentions.

What goes wrong without it: Without intention-setting, participants enter the session without a compass. Facilitators who skip or rush this step often find themselves managing sessions that feel directionless — or participants who feel the session "didn't work."

Definition: Ongoing, informed, freely given agreement to participate — specifically in this context, to engage in a psilocybin service, to agree to the conditions of the session, and to the Touch Contract. Consent is NOT a one-time signature. It is a living conversation.

Real example: A participant signs the intake forms and consent documents — that's initial consent. But consent also needs to be re-checked when circumstances change: if the facilitator wants to introduce touch during administration, that requires in-the-moment consent. And crucially — Colorado requires facilitators to acknowledge that a participant's capacity to consent is altered once medicine has been ingested.

What goes wrong without it: Facilitators who treat consent as a paperwork task rather than a practice create the conditions for boundary violations — even with good intentions.

Point forward: "We are going to go deep on consent in M06 on Boundaries and Physical Touch, and again in M10 on Preparation. Today's job is to understand the baseline concept."

Definition: The post-session process of making meaning from the psilocybin experience and translating insights into actual life change. Integration is where the work of the session becomes lasting — or doesn't.

Real example: A participant who has a powerful session but receives no integration support may feel confused, emotionally raw, or may not be able to apply what arose. A facilitator who offers integration conversations — within scope — helps the participant process what happened and identify next steps.

What goes wrong without it: The most common scope creep in this field happens in integration — facilitators drifting into clinical therapy territory because the participant "needs more support." The line is: facilitators support meaning-making. They don't provide ongoing therapy. When someone needs more, you refer.

"These two terms are almost always confused on first encounter. I'm going to teach them together because they're a pair — and because understanding them is critical to your safety as a practitioner, not just your participant's."

Transference: When a participant unconsciously projects feelings, expectations, or reactions from past relationships onto the facilitator. The participant isn't responding to you — they're responding to who you remind them of. Example: A participant who had a critical parent may experience the facilitator's neutral tone as judgmental, even when it isn't.

Countertransference: The reverse — when the facilitator's own unresolved material is triggered by the participant. Example: A facilitator whose parent struggled with addiction may respond with unusual anxiety or over-protectiveness toward a participant discussing substance use.

Draw or describe the ping-pong model: Transference = participant feelings bouncing toward the facilitator. Countertransference = facilitator feelings bouncing back. Both are normal. Neither is excusable if unaddressed.

"The professional standard is: you cannot eliminate these dynamics, but you are responsible for recognizing them and not letting them drive your facilitation decisions. That's what supervision, self-reflection, and the DISC work in L6 are building toward."

Definition: A set of practical strategies designed to minimize potential harms associated with drug use without requiring abstinence or imposing moral judgment. In facilitation: this means optimizing set and setting, conducting thorough screening, safety planning, and maintaining a non-judgmental presence during the session.

Real example: Ensuring a participant has a safety plan and a designated driver for after the session is harm reduction. Knowing contraindications and screening for them is harm reduction. Creating a physically safe, comfortable environment is harm reduction.

What goes wrong without it: Facilitators who skip harm reduction practices in the name of "trusting the medicine" or "trusting the process" expose participants to preventable risks. This is both ethically indefensible and legally problematic.

[CO A.2, J.7] Building precise vocabulary directly supports CO requirements for accurate, unbiased communication about the field and the research. Every term in this lesson will be used when talking with participants — imprecision here creates real downstream risk.

Opening Frame: "You're going to be asked questions about this landscape — by participants, by their families, by skeptical colleagues. Your job is not to be an evangelist or a skeptic. Your job is to be an accurately informed, culturally humble professional who can give honest answers. That's what this lesson builds."

Cover the basics clearly and without overclaiming: psilocybin is a naturally occurring compound found in certain fungi (most commonly Psilocybe cubensis and related species). When ingested, it's converted by the body into psilocin, which acts primarily on serotonin receptors in the brain — particularly the 5-HT2A receptor. This temporarily disrupts default mode network activity (the part of the brain associated with self-referential thinking), which researchers believe is connected to the shifts in perspective many participants report.

Effects vary widely based on dose, set, and setting: altered perception, emotional amplification, dissolution of ordinary ego boundaries, mystical-type experiences, and sometimes difficult or challenging content. Duration is typically 4–6 hours for most preparations. This is factual orientation — not a promise of any particular experience.

Key point to emphasize: "There is no such thing as a typical psilocybin experience. Anyone who tells a participant what their session will be like is overclaiming."

Brief, honest orientation to adjacent compounds learners may encounter in conversation: MDMA (being studied for PTSD by MAPS, not currently in CO framework), Ketamine (legally available in clinical contexts, dissociative mechanism), Ibogaine (West African iboga root, used in addiction treatment, high medical risk profile), Ayahuasca (Amazonian brew, MAO inhibitor interactions, deep indigenous context). Important: These are not covered by Colorado's NMTP. Facilitators trained under CO are licensed for psilocybin services only. Understanding the broader landscape is professional literacy — not authorization to facilitate anything else.

"This section matters more than the pharmacology. Because the pharmacology tells you what the compound does. This section shapes how you hold the history of what you're participating in."

Psilocybin mushrooms have been used ceremonially for thousands of years by indigenous communities in Mesoamerica — most notably the Mazatec people of Oaxaca, Mexico, where María Sabina became a key figure in the 1950s when she shared her knowledge with Western researchers. The introduction to the Western world came largely through R. Gordon Wasson's 1957 Life Magazine article — an event that many indigenous scholars view as the beginning of a long history of extraction without consent or reciprocity.

The practical implications for facilitators: (1) Know this history and be able to speak to it honestly. (2) Do not claim indigenous titles, practices, or frameworks you have not been trained in by the community that holds them. (3) If participants ask about indigenous ceremonies, direct them to actual indigenous practitioners — not to you. (4) Consider how you can practice reciprocity: supporting indigenous-led advocacy, land protection efforts, or community initiatives.

"Cultural humility in this context is not a nice extra. It's an ethical obligation."

Current research is promising and early. Key institutions: Johns Hopkins Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research, MAPS (Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies), Imperial College London. Findings from major studies suggest potential benefit for treatment-resistant depression, end-of-life anxiety, addiction, and PTSD. Important caveats: small sample sizes, predominantly White and educated participant populations (limiting generalizability), no long-term follow-up data, methodological challenges around blinding.

CO/NV context: Colorado passed Proposition 122 in 2022 — the first state to create a regulated adult-use psilocybin services framework. Nevada's ATPP is a comparative framework emerging from a different model — medically supervised, more restrictive. Both reflect the broader trend of states leading where federal law hasn't moved.

[CO H.2] Historical and current use of plant medicines in indigenous and Western cultures. [CO A.2] Accurate, unbiased state-of-field information. [iETA+] Global policy landscape orientation seeded here.

Opening Frame: "One of the most dangerous things a facilitator can be is enthusiastic and uninformed. Participants are coming to you — often in vulnerable moments — for accurate guidance. If you overclaim what psilocybin can do, you set them up for failure. If you underclaim because you're trying to be cautious, you're being paternalistic. The skill we're building today is the one in between: honest, evidence-informed communication."

What the research actually shows: promising findings from clinical trials for treatment-resistant depression (Imperial College, Johns Hopkins), end-of-life anxiety and distress (NYU, Johns Hopkins), alcohol and tobacco use disorders (Johns Hopkins), and PTSD (early-stage). These are real findings — and they're important. But they come with real caveats that every facilitator needs to be able to name:

• Sample sizes are small. Most published trials have 20–30 participants. That's not enough to draw population-level conclusions.
• Populations are not diverse. Most research samples skew White, educated, and relatively mentally stable. The findings may not translate broadly across populations — which has direct implications for facilitators working with diverse participants.
• There is no long-term follow-up data. We know what happens in the weeks and months after treatment. We don't know what happens in years.
• Blinding is methodologically challenging. It's very hard to run a double-blind trial when the treatment has obvious subjective effects. This creates challenges for controlling placebo effects.
• Approval is not complete. Despite promising research, psilocybin is not FDA-approved as a treatment for any condition. In Colorado it is legal as a service — not as a medical treatment. That distinction matters for how you talk about it.

"When a participant asks you about research they've read, or when you're preparing to speak about the evidence, here are five things to check:"

• 1. Peer review: Was this published in a peer-reviewed journal? If it's a blog, a podcast, a press release, or a preprint (not yet reviewed), that's worth flagging — it hasn't been vetted by independent experts. Peer review isn't perfect, but it's a meaningful baseline standard.
• 2. Sample size: How many participants? Fewer than 30 = very preliminary. 100+ = stronger signal. Be specific when you describe this to participants: "A study of 24 people showed..." is very different from "studies show..."
• 3. Controls: Was there a comparison group? A placebo condition? Open-label studies (no control group) can't distinguish medicine effects from expectation effects.
• 4. Limitations section: Any honest research paper will have one. If an article doesn't discuss what the study couldn't tell us, that's a red flag. The limitations section is where researchers tell you what to be cautious about.
• 5. Funding source: Who paid for the study? Industry-funded research isn't automatically biased, but it warrants extra scrutiny. Note conflicts of interest when they're disclosed.

"Here's the practical skill: translating research into participant-appropriate language that is honest without being dismissive, hopeful without being misleading."

Write these sentence starters on the board — these are tools learners can actually use in sessions:

• "Research suggests that some people experience..."
• "In clinical studies, a portion of participants reported..."
• "The evidence is early but promising — what that means is..."
• "We don't yet have long-term data on... which means we should be honest about that uncertainty."
• "I want to be careful not to promise you an outcome, because every person's experience is different."

"Notice what these phrasings have in common: they communicate real information while being honest about uncertainty. That's the standard we're holding."

Return briefly to the warm-up statements: "Now — which ones would you change? How would you rewrite them?"

[CO A.2, B.7, J.7] This lesson directly satisfies three CO requirements: accurate/unbiased information presentation, truthful communications about efficacy, and discussion of research limitations. This is one of the highest-compliance-density lessons in the entire program.

Opening Frame: "Facilitation skill is not just about knowing what to do — it's about who you are in the room. The five attributes we're covering today are not personality traits you either have or don't. They are practices. They are developed, maintained, and sometimes lost under pressure. Every one of them is trainable — and every one of them directly affects your participant's safety."

Definition: Being fully available and calm in the room — not distracted by your own thoughts, not performing composure, but genuinely settled. Participants feel your groundedness or your anxiety; it's not invisible to them, especially in an altered state.

What it looks like: Steady eye contact, unhurried movements, physical stillness, regulated breath, attention fully on the participant — not on what you're going to say next.

What gets in the way: Facilitator anxiety, insufficient self-care before the session, personal life stress brought into the room, and — most commonly — the facilitator's own unaddressed material about the medicine or the participant's presenting issues.

"The single biggest threat to grounded presence is a facilitator who has not done their own work. That's why M13 on self-care is not optional — it's directly connected to participant safety."

Definition: Knowing precisely where your role ends — and holding that line with compassion and consistency. Not rigidity; not looseness. Clear, consistent, communicated limits.

What it looks like in practice: Declining to answer clinical questions outside your scope. Redirecting participants who attempt to shift the relationship into something personal. Following the touch contract even when a participant requests something outside it. Ending sessions when conditions require it.

What gets in the way: The desire to be helpful, the discomfort of disappointing people, and the common belief that bending a rule "just this once" for a good reason is fine. It usually isn't. Every boundary erosion makes the next one easier.

Connect to CO C section: "We're going to spend an entire module — Module 06 — on boundaries and physical touch. Today is the foundation: every participant's safety depends on your willingness to hold the line."

Definition: A lifelong commitment to learning, curiosity, and awareness of how your own background, privilege, and assumptions affect how you see and respond to participants. Not a destination. Not a box to check. A practice.

Important distinction: Cultural competence (knowing about specific cultures) vs. cultural humility (recognizing that you don't and can't fully know, and asking rather than assuming). We're building toward the latter.

What it looks like: Asking rather than assuming about cultural, spiritual, or identity-related aspects of a participant's experience. Not projecting your own healing framework onto others. Being aware of power dynamics — especially given that you, as the facilitator, hold significant authority in the session.

"If you think you've 'achieved' cultural humility, that's a sign you haven't. It's called humility for a reason."

Definition: Maintaining accurate, factual, within-scope written records of your work. Not your interpretations. Not clinical assessments. Not personal reflections embedded in client records. Facts, dates, observable behaviors, actions taken.

Why it matters: Your documentation is your professional record. In the event of a complaint, a regulatory review, or a participant harm event, your notes are what you have. Vague, late, or embellished records are a liability.

Common errors to avoid: Writing interpretations ("participant seemed to be processing childhood trauma") instead of observations ("participant cried for approximately 10 minutes, then reported feeling calmer"). Including personal opinions. Failing to document at all.

Definition: Treating reflective practice as non-negotiable. Being willing to examine your own errors, biases, and blind spots — not for self-punishment, but for improvement.

What it looks like: Seeking supervision, maintaining a reflective journal, asking for honest feedback from co-facilitators, being able to say "I don't know" and "I made a mistake."

"The facilitators who harm participants most are not the ones who make mistakes — everyone makes mistakes. It's the ones who can't acknowledge them. Growth orientation is protective for your participants."

[CO D.1] Intro to therapeutic presence — grounded presence and cultural attunement. [CO N.1–N.5] Facilitator self-care and professionalism seeded here; developed fully in M13.

Opening Frame : "We're ending Module 01 with what might seem like a small thing — a 15-minute self-assessment. It's not small. This is the first real data point you'll collect about yourself as a communicator-in-training. And because you're going to spend the next several months learning how to support other humans through some of the most vulnerable experiences of their lives, knowing how you tend to show up in communication is genuinely important."

What DISC Is — and Is Not :

DISC is a behavioral communication styles model that describes how people tend to behave and communicate across four dimensions: Dominance (direct, results-focused), Influence (enthusiastic, people-focused), Steadiness (patient, relationship-focused), Conscientiousness (analytical, quality-focused). Most people have a primary style and a secondary style — and style expression is context-dependent.

What DISC is NOT:

• NOT a clinical assessment or diagnosis. It does not measure intelligence, mental health, or psychological fitness for facilitation.
• NOT fixed. Communication styles shift with context, stress, and development.
• NOT a predictor of who you can or can't work with. Every style can facilitate effectively — and every style has characteristic blind spots in facilitation work.
• NOT something to be proud of or ashamed of. There is no "facilitator style." There are different paths to the same quality of presence.

"I want to be clear about one thing: I am not using DISC to put you in a box. I'm using it to give you a starting point for reflection — a mirror to look into. What you do with what you see is up to you."

Why It Matters in Facilitation :

Walk through how each style dimension can show up as a strength or blind spot in facilitation:

• High D (Dominance): Strength — decisive in a crisis, can hold firm on scope boundaries. Blind spot — can become directive, can make participants feel pressured, may fill silence too quickly.
• High I (Influence): Strength — warm, creates rapport easily, participants feel seen and welcomed. Blind spot — may over-talk, may struggle to hold firm limits, may be affected by participant approval-seeking.
• High S (Steadiness): Strength — patient, calm under pressure, excellent at holding space. Blind spot — may avoid necessary confrontation, may struggle to terminate sessions or make referrals that feel like rejection.
• High C (Conscientiousness): Strength — thorough, attentive to protocol, documentation-oriented. Blind spot — may over-analyze during sessions, may prioritize process over presence, may struggle with the ambiguity of the experience.

"Notice that every style has a gift and a risk in this work. The C who documents meticulously and the I who connects deeply are both valuable — and both need to watch their blind spots."

Administer the Assessment :

Distribute the DISC assessment link. Learners complete in class. Typical completion time is 10–12 minutes. Remind them: "Answer based on how you actually are — not how you think you should be as a facilitator. The gap between those two is actually really important information."

Results come back immediately. Give learners 2 min to read their results privately before moving to brief group reflection.

Brief Group Reflection :

Whole group: "Without sharing your specific profile unless you want to — what surprised you? What felt accurate? What are you curious about?" Take 4–5 brief responses. Normalize both validation and surprise. Remind the group that results are confidential — they share what they choose to share, and their profile is stored privately in their portfolio.

Assign async task: The 100–150 word reflection is the async component of this lesson. Walk through the prompt clearly so learners know exactly what they're writing.

Instructor Note — Confidentiality: DISC results are private between the learner and you. Do not ask learners to disclose profiles publicly. Do not use profile information to make assumptions about learner capacity. The portfolio reflection is where you engage with the content — in writing, individually, with your feedback.

[CO A.3, N.2] Self-awareness and professional development foundations. [iETA+] DISC is an iETA program expansion — it threads through PC2 and PC6 across all 18 modules.