New York City PBIS Technical Assistance Center Update: Adaptation, Alignment, and Integration National PBIS Leadership Forum Satish Moorthy, NYC PBIS Chicago: October, 2011

NYC PBIS Big Ideas for Today Learn about our Progress and Expansion Learn about our Integrative Implementation Demonstrations Systems alignment: A Global Perspective on Implementation (Federal, State, City)

The Big Picture in the Big Apple 9 years of PBIS in New York City >200 schools trained (12.5% of NYC public schools) Training at all 3 Tiers of PBIS Success in Implementation of PBIS is dependent on INTEGRATION with District and School-based Policies and Initiatives. Focus for 2011: Capacity building in Districts/Networks

Big 5 PBIS “Commitments” for Student Achievement (at school, city, state levels) Commitment to Coordinated (Cross-Functional) Teams Commitment to Capacity-Building Commitment to Sustainability Commitment to Policy Alignment and Coherence (INTEGRATION) Commitment to Ongoing Progress Monitoring (FIDELITY)

School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Build a continuum of supports that begins with the whole school and extends to intensive, wraparound support for individual students and their families.

School-Wide Systems for Student Success: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model Academic Systems Behavioral Systems Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions 1-5% Individual students Assessment-based High intensity 1-5% Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions Individual students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures 5-15% Tier 2/Secondary Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small group interventions Some individualizing Tier 2/Secondary Interventions 5-15% Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small group interventions Some individualizing 80-90% Tier 1/Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive Expense of interventions increases as we move up the triangle. Tier 1/Universal Interventions 80-90% All students Preventive, proactive Illinois PBIS Network, Revised May 15, 2008. Adapted from “What is school-wide PBS?” OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Accessed at http://pbis.org/schoolwide.htm

Schools adopting SWPBIS by year School-wide PBIS

Schools adopting SWPBIS (Feb, 2011) 11 states with over 500 schools 3 states with over 1000 schools NYC at 200 schools (19th overall) Illinois Florida Maryland Texas New York NYC

PBIS Schools by Type and Year: New York City Schools Trained: Cumulative by year   02-03 Yr 1 03-04 Yr 2 04-05 Yr 3 05-06 Yr 4 06-07 Yr 5 07-08 Yr 6 08-09 Yr 7 09-10 Yr 8 10-11 Yr 9 ES 2 7 27 35 39 45 62 75 106 K-8 9 11 18 21 K-12 4 MS/JRH 1 16 25 34 46 47 53 77 MS/HS 3 6 5 HS 10 14 24 41 Alternative 29 NYC Total 17 70 84 94 126 154 211 289 NYS 440 National: 6,700 schools in 38 states Check Colorado California

New York City-PBIS Schools Regional Expansion / Sustainability Number Schools Trained and Active Cumulative Yr 1: 2002-2003 Yr 2: 2003-2004 Yr 3: 2004-2005 Yr 4: 2005-2006 Yr 5: 2006-2007 Yr 6: 2007-2008 Yr 7: 2008-2009 Yr 8: 2009-2010 Yr 7: 2010-2011 UPDATE 08-09

NYC PBIS Schools by Borough Manhattan:  28    Bronx:  105 Brooklyn:  81 Queens: 58 Staten Island: 17

What is School-wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports? School-wide PBIS is: A systems framework for establishing the social culture and behavioral supports needed for a school to be an effective learning environment for ALL STUDENTS.

Urban Challenges for PBIS Poverty and Health Disproportional Rates of Suspensions of SWD by Race/Ethnicity How do we move from reactive approaches to the “problem”, to preventative (e.g., culturally responsive) How can we prevent? How do we include diverse communities, within school and in our neighborhoods?

The Urban Context NYC Population: 8,214,426 (Census Est. 2006) (42.5% of total NY State population) Urban Population Density (2006): NYC: 26,402 per sq. mile Chicago: 12,750 per sq. mile Los Angeles: 7,877 per sq. mile

The Context: New York City 9.5% Unemployment Rate 2009 (from 4.5% in May ‘08) (nyc.gov) 35.9% of residents foreign born (2000 Census) 47.6% language other than English spoken at home (2000 Census) Estimated 170 languages spoken

NYC by Ethnicity (2000 Census) Population: 8,214,426 (Census Est. 2006) 35.1% White 27.0% Hispanic/ Latino 24.5% African American 9.8% Asian

Under 18: % Poverty and % Uninsured –NYC U.S. <18 Poverty Rate 18.5% U.S. <18 Uninsured Rate 11.9%

NYC Public Schools: Quick Facts Key Facts: 1.1 million students 1,600+ schools 335 new schools since 2002 80,000 teachers $21 billion annual budget Source: schools.nyc.gov

NYC Schools Ethnic Demographics 1.1 million students 39.4% Hispanic 32.8% African-American 14.3% White 13.6% Asian/ Pacific Islander 4% Native American

Student Demographics Students Receiving DOE Special Education Services (includes all public, non-public, pre-school & school age): 161,820 English Language Learners: 146,132 Students Eligible for Free/Reduced Lunch: 784,963 (76.3%)

Scaling Up Challenges Competing Demands on Educators, Administrators, Districts Improving Low-Performing Schools Providing Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) in the Least Restrictive Environment, Safe and Supportive Schools, Supporting Systems of Care for At-Risk Students Disproportionality in SpEd and Suspensions (African American Students)

Four Areas for NYC PBIS Integration 1) Response to Intervention and Universal Design for Learning (FAPE and Common Core) IDEA 2) Systems of Care and Wraparound Social Services – Safe and Drug Free Schools 3) Culturally Responsive Positive Behavioral Support Systems – Civil Rights Act 4) Bully Prevention and Safe Schools – ESEA, Safe and Drug Free Schools

Integrative PBIS Domain #1 1) Response to Intervention and Universal Design for Learning (FAPE and Common Core, FBA-BIP and MDR)

Comparison of State Level LRE Data IDEA Part B Comparison of State Level LRE Data (Fall 2004) Number, percentage and difference from national baseline of students Ages 6 through 21 receiving special education outside the regular class more than 60 percent of the school day State Performance Plan Indicator 5: Least Restrictive Environment – School Age NY State is ranked 49th in the country for educating students in inclusive settings. State Level LRE Data So, why a reform? Here are the reasons we are making the changes: look at the next few charts. Ask participants what is LRE. New York State is ranked 49th in the country for educating students with inclusive settings last only to Virgin Islands, Guam and Hawaii. 49. New York 126,983 27 9 50. Virgin Islands 454 23 11 51. Guam 671 29 11 52. Hawaii 6583 32 14

Comparison of State Level LRE Data % Students in MRE Settings IDEA Part B Comparison of State Level LRE Data (DAC- IDEA Data, 2008) Percent of students, ages 6 through 21, receiving special education services outside the regular class setting more than 60 percent of the school day. State % Students in MRE Settings Vermont Puerto Rico 5.84 North Dakota 8.33 Alabama 9.41 South Dakota 10.5 West Virginia Oklahoma 11.36 Nebraska 11.37 Wyoming 11.44 Idaho 11.76 Kansas 12.02 Iowa 12.66 Kentucky 12.88 Texas 13.66 Oregon 13.7 Montana 13.79 Colorado 13.81 Connecticut 14.1 Wisconsin 14.33 Minnesota 14.55 Nevada 15 Pennsylvania 15.39 Mississippi 15.47 Tennessee 15.6 Alaska 15.63 Missouri 15.68 Washington 15.73 Maine 16.25 Arkansas 16.8 North Carolina 18.04 Arizona 18.26 Indiana 18.93 Georgia 19.04 Louisiana 19.11 Utah 19.21 Ohio 19.63 Virginia 20.91 Michigan 21.3 New Mexico 21.53 Rhode Island 21.97 Florida 22.06 Massachusetts 22.62 South Carolina 22.84 Delaware 23.3 Maryland 23.99 Illinois 25.5 California 27.78 Hawaii 28.93 New Jersey 29.19 New Hampshire 30.26 New York 32.46 District of Columbia 51.96 This definition includes students with disabilities in public schools, separate alternative schools, residential facilities. parentally placed in private schools, correctional facilities, and home or hospital environments. State Performance Plan Indicator 5: Least Restrictive Environment – School Age NY State is ranked 51st in the country for educating students in inclusive settings. This data includes Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia State Level LRE Data So, why a reform? Here are the reasons we are making the changes: look at the next few charts. Ask participants what is LRE. New York State is ranked 49th in the country for educating students with inclusive settings last only to Virgin Islands, Guam and Hawaii. 48. Hawaii 28.93 49. New Jersey 29.19 50. New Hampshire 30.26 51. New York 32.46 52. District of Columbia 51.96

Universal Design Developed into… Ramps and curb cuts Origins in Architecture Developed into… Ramps and curb cuts Automatic door-opening devices Accessible toilets Fire alarm systems with lights Closed-captioning Texting One way to think about these changes... Retrofitted Developed buildings that are universally accessible so that everyone can use it. Origination: Closed Captioned for the deaf… learning different languages. Most often used in Sports Bars Recordings for the Blind… and Dyslexic. Books on Tapes Voice activated technology… Dragon Naturally Speaking The first system has its origin in architecture. Read slide title (look at the stairs – Ask are they accessible for everyone.) Click –look at next picture What do you see? Is this accessible for everyone? How does it look? Do you want to use it? Why or Why not? (Think about it not being attractive – add on) Click – look at the Louvre – you may want to click to the next slide –  Is this accessible by everyone? Do you want to use it? This is an example of UD – plan with the end in mind. It’s accessible for everyone and is seamless. As opposed to the ramp, this is added or retrofitted. The idea behind UD is planning with the end in mind. What else can you think of that utilizes universal design? Division of Students with Disabilities and English Language Learners (DSWDELL)

NYC Special Education Reform 2010-12 Four Components •Academics & Instructional Supports: e.g., ELA, Math, Social Studies, Science, Arts, •Social, Emotional and Behavioral Development: e.g., Classroom Management Strategies, School-Wide Systems, Individual Interventions •School Operations: e.g., Scheduling, Staffing, Budget & Funding, Data Systems, Compliance •Long Term Planning: e.g., Transition Planning, Graduation Planning, Articulation Planning

Timeline for PBIS and Special Ed Reform Phase 1 Response to Intervention Pilot for 25 schools. 10 School Support Networks and 250 schools participating in Phase 1 (2010-2012). All 60 School Support Networks and 1700 schools will be participating in 2012-13.

Integrative PBIS Domain #2 2) Systems of Care – New York Promise Zones

Integrating PBIS Promise Zones for Urban Education Systems of Care Pilot funded by NY State Office of Mental Health Endorsed by State Commissioners of all child-serving agencies Key features: An External Change Partner The School Support Team and Social Worker A Community Services Support Network

“Could someone help me with these? I’m late for math class.” Emphasize that kids come to school with a lot of baggage that will impact learning

PBIS and Systems of Care School-wide PBIS as a foundation (5 high-needs schools in the Bronx) Community Mental Health Partner (State funded) Capacity-building for Tier 3 team (Pupil Personnel Team) Connecting to community-based agencies and supports for at-risk youth and families

2011 Promise Zone and PBIS 5 PBIS schools in the Bronx are the pilot All have student poverty level of 75% or higher School-based wraparound teams serve as local technical assistance Process measures: referrals to services, completion, team functioning, staff development Outcome measures: suspensions, referrals to special education, attendance, academic achievement

2 Common School Team Needs 1) school staff’s ability to understand and identify severe mental health issues in their students, and 2) school teams ability to connect and interface with a wide range of existing agencies and services including child welfare, foster care, mental health outpatient , domestic violence support, housing assistance, and services for formerly incarcerated parents.

Systems of Care Evaluation Process and/or Implementation Evaluation Replicability of model for collaborative planning and service delivery Student Outcome Evaluation Increased Positive Engagement in the Instructional Process

Evaluation Timelines January- June 2011 September 2011 - June 2012 BASELINE for both Process and Outcomes September 2011 - June 2012 Ongoing Data Collection

Integrative PBIS Domain #3 3) Safe and Supportive Schools - Bully Prevention

Safe and Supportive Schools Integration SW-PBIS is now Recommended Discipline Policy in NYC!!!

Reducing School Violence and Suspensions 2007-2009 Of 14 NYC PBIS schools cited as Persistently Dangerous by the State: 11 showed increases in attendance 12 showed decreases in violent incidents 9 showed significant decreases in total suspensions 12 were removed from the Persistently Dangerous List Of 16 cited in 2008 by the State for Disproportional Rates of Suspensions of Students with Disabilities (SPP #4) that have been in NYS PBIS for more than a year: 14 (or 88%) saw either significant reductions in suspensions (9) or no increase (5)

PBIS/ School Safety Implementation Training Youth Development Staff (in charge of Safety and Suspensions) in PBIS Half-Day Modules: Basic Principles of ABA/ Behavior Competing Behavior Pathway School-wide PBIS Youth Development Staff attend PBIS along with school-based teams

Integrative PBIS Domain #4 4) Culturally Responsive PBIS Systems Addressing Disproportionality in Suspensions (SPP 4B)

Addressing Disproportionality Focus: Disproportional Rates of Long-Term Suspensions (>10 days) of Black or African-American Students with Disabilities, where Black and African American Students are more than 2 times as likely to be suspended than other students with IEPs Action: PBIS has been identified as a recommended approach to address disproportionality

Digging Deeper Deeper analysis shows 91 schools with the highest disproportionality Where risk of suspension of Black or African American student with disabilities is more the 2 times as likely as that of all other students with disabilities 2.0 Relative Risk threshold is set by the State (shows over 330 schools)

PBIS/ Culturally Responsive Integration 2010-12 Collaboration with New York University TAC for Disproportionality 2 Levels of Intervention (Culturally Responsive Schools) School-Based (8 schools in pilot) Leadership training and capacity building

11 PBIS Schools with the highest rates of Disproportionality in Rates of Long-term Suspensions by Race/Ethnicity SPPI 4B Comparison of 2009-10 to 2010-11 Suspensions Reduction 81.8% Increase 18.2% Initial Referrals Reduction 45.5% No change 18.2% Increase 36.4% Attendance Increase 90.9% Reduction 9.1% N=11

Comparison within 91 NYC Schools with the highest levels of Disproportionality in Suspensions of Students with Disabilities Suspensions Percent of PBIS Schools Percent of Non-PBIS Schools Initial Referrals N=80 N=11

Systems Alignment: A Global Perspective on PBIS Implementation

NYC PBIS Technical Assistance Center PBIS Implementation Logic Visibility Funding Alignment Political Support Policy NYC PBIS Technical Assistance Center Active Coordination with Children First Networks Behavioral Expertise Training Capacity Building for a Coordinated services model from a more expensive direct services model. Coaching Evaluation Local School Teams/Demonstrations

NYSED NYCDOE PBIS TAC National PBIS TAC Statewide PBIS TAC RSE-TASC PBIS DSWDELL D75 PBIS TAC PBIS Schools

Systems Change Federal Departments NY State Education NYC DOE Schools Implementation Teams Federal Departments NY State Education NYC DOE ALIGNMENT Schools Teachers/ Staff Effective Practices FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION

NYSED NYCDOE PBIS TAC National PBIS TAC Statewide PBIS TAC RSE-TASC PBIS DSWDELL D75 PBIS TAC PBIS Schools

NYC PBIS Coordination NYC PBIS provides: (1) research-based professional development for school-based teams (all 3 tiers including FBA-BIP), (2) technical support and implementation assistance, and (3) training on data collection and progress monitoring of PBIS practices. (4) internal and External Coach Networking

NYC DOE PBIS CFNs CFNs CFNs CFNs CFNs CFNs District 75 Cluster Cluster Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools Schools

NYC PBIS External TA Coach Funding Trends 2009-2012 Central Funding: Tax Levy, IDEA, Race to the Top Local Funding: Tax Levy, IDEA, Race to the Top

Positive Behavior Support Social Competence & Academic Achievement OUTCOMES Supporting Decision Making Supporting Staff Behavior DATA SYSTEMS PRACTICES Supporting Student Behavior

Implementation with Fidelity Means Stronger Student Outcomes!!! PBIS Outcome Data 2007-08 School Year 40% 84% 60% 66% 37% 70% 14% 62% 36% 44% 31% 0% 10% 20% 30% 50% 80% 90% Reduction in No. of Students in Self contained Classes Fully Implementing Partially Implementing 30% 37 16 Met Universal Standards Reduction in BOTH Principal and Superintendent Suspensions Reduction in no. of ELLs With IEPs Reduction of Students in Self-Contained Classes Improvement in Attendance Met Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) N= 53

Finding External Partnerships that Support School Improvement State and City agencies (Health, Mental Health, Parent Centers, Juvenile Justice, Child Welfare, Career Development, Substance Abuse Prevention) Department of Education Divisions/ Offices (DSWDELL, DAPS, School and Youth Development, School Health/Mental Health) Institutions of Higher Education (University Research Centers, Institutes, NYU and Columbia) Community organizations (Mental Health) Look at District, Network, School data-- look at priorities -- who do you need?

Scaling Up and Drilling Down 2009-14 NYC PBIS TAC Five–Year Action Plan - Coordinated Citywide Management System - Increased Training and Coaching Capacity - Streamlined Implementation Evaluation - Alignment of Outcome Indicators with Federal, State, and City Guidelines - Diversified Funding for PBIS Activities (RTTT, IDEA) - Visibility through Demonstrations (Pilots) - Political Support and Collaborative Advocacy with related institutions, agencies