National PBIS Leadership Forum Hyatt Regency O’Hare Rosemont Illinois Preparing Administrators for Leading Tier 2/3 Systems, Data, and Practices Session D6 | October 19, 2012 | 9:15 – 10:30am Lucille Eber, Illinois PBIS Network Marc Lambert, Alton School District

Content to be shared Today 1)A Training Approach for Administrators on Advanced Tiers a)Teaming Model and Tools b) Examples of Content/Messages c) Readiness factors 2) A district Administrator’s Experience

Rationale……

It Takes a System … …that builds system capacity for advanced tiers

5 Tier 1/Universal School-Wide Assessment School-Wide Prevention Systems SIMEO Tools: HSC-T, RD-T, EI-T Check-in/ Check-out Individualized Check- In/Check-Out, Groups & Mentoring (ex. CnC) Brief Functional Behavioral Assessment/ Behavior Intervention Planning (FBA/BIP) Complex FBA/BIP Wraparound ODRs, Attendance, Tardies, Grades, DIBELS, etc. Daily Progress Report (DPR) (Behavior and Academic Goals) Competing Behavior Pathway, Functional Assessment Interview, Scatter Plots, etc. Social/Academic Instructional Groups Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model Illinois PBIS Network, Revised August 2009 Adapted from T. Scott, 2004 Tier 2/ Secondary Tier 3/ Tertiary Intervention Assessment

Supporting Staff Behavior Supporting Decision Making Supporting Student Behavior Positive Behavior Support SYSTEMS PRACTICES DATA OUTCOMESSocial Competence & Academic Achievement ٭ Adapted from “What is a systems Approach in school-wide PBS?”OSEP Technical Assistance on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Accessed at

Tier 2/3… Changing Existing Systems Harder than starting from scratch Schools think they are “already doing it”… – Need to “deconstruct” some existing teaming approaches and practices – Data not being used except to justify placements

Some “Big Picture” Challenges Low intensity, low fidelity interventions for behavior/emotional needs Habitual use of restrictive settings (and poor outcomes) for youth with disabilities High rate of undiagnosed MH problems (stigma, lack of knowledge, etc) Changing the routines of ineffective practices (systems) that are “familiar” to systems

Examples of Ineffective Secondary/Tertiary Structures Referrals to Sp. Ed. seen as the “intervention” FBA seen as required “paperwork” vs. a needed part of designing an intervention Interventions the system is familiar with vs. ones likely to produce an effect – (ex: student sent for insight based counseling at point of misbehavior)

Question Have you worked with schools/districts where they felt they were already doing tier 2/3? If so, how was their ‘effectiveness’?

AA1241e: PBIS Systems of Support – Focusing on Secondary and Tertiary Tiers of Support Administrator’s Academy Series Training  Ver. 1.0, Rev  This is a presentation of the IL PBIS Network. All rights reserved.

AA1241e Objectives Participants will: Understand PBIS as a continuum of behavior support Make connections between Response to Intervention, IDEA, the Social and Emotional Learning Standards, and PBIS Utilize data to determine secondary foci for group and individual intervention Learn to apply a functional perspective to behavior and academic challenges for group and individual intervention Refine school/district action planning around current systems and practices related to the continuum of RtI Interpret primary and secondary data to determine student/family in need of tertiary support Understand need for comprehensive plans of support through the wraparound process

Tools for Building District and Building Action Plans for Secondary/Tertiary Implementation Phases of Implementation (POI) Secondary/Tertiary Tracking Tool Systems Response Tool Out-of-Home-School Tool Guiding Questions Document Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT)

Question Have you experienced any “system habits” in schools/districts that seem to interfere with installation of Tier 2/3?

Primary Prevention: School-/Classroom- Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings Secondary Prevention: Specialized Group Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior Tertiary Prevention: Specialized Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior ~80% of Students ~15% ~5% SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT

More Students Access Tier 2/3 Interventions When Tier 1/ Universal is in Place FY09 School Profile Tool Students Accessing Tier 2/Tier 3 Interventions

Examples of Data and Tools…

Quick Assessment of Student Access to Intervention Total enrollment of your school? Number of students accessing CICO? Number of students on complex function- based or wraparound plans? Percent of total population of the school?

Tools Used to Build District and Building Level Action Plans for Secondary/Tertiary Implementation Phases of Implementation (PoI) Benchmarks for Advanced Tiers (formerly known as Checklist for Individual Student Systems-CISS) Secondary/Tertiary Tracking Tool Systems Response Tool Out-of-Home-School Tool Guiding Questions Tool

Progress Monitoring Secondary/Tertiary Interventions Teams need to track and monitor interventions by category: 1. How many students are receiving each intervention? 2. How many students are responding to each intervention? 3. What data is used to monitor each intervention type? Tier 2/Tier 3 (Secondary/Tertiary) Tracking Tool

Do You Need to Change Teaming Structure in your School(s)? Quick Assessment: 1.How many kids have been talked about at ‘______” meeting this year? 2.How many got an intervention that you have data to indicate they got an intervention that is working? Have you ever been at a meeting where you talked about 1 kid for an hour and at the end you were no closer to having effective strategies than when you started?

3-Tiered System of Support Necessary Conversations (Teams) CICO SAIG Group w. individual feature Complex FBA/BIP Problem Solving Team Tertiary Systems Team Brief FBA/ BIP Brief FBA/BIP WRAP Secondary Systems Team Plans SW & Class-wide supports Uses Process data; determines overall intervention effectiveness Standing team; uses FBA/BIP process for one youth at a time Uses Process data; determines overall intervention effectiveness Sept. 1, 2009 Universal Team Universal Support

Examples of ‘Messages’…

Administrators Role: Dealing with the tough issues Adult response to problem behavior. – Adults need to model being respectful in their communications with students around behavior. – non-examples that need correcting? School personnel should not get to choose NOT to give students evidenced based interventions.

Big Ideas for Administrators about Tier 2/Tier 3 PBIS legislation, SEL standards, RtI The link between academic and social success ALL students get access to PBS; ALL students should receive constant positive feedback Are students who need Tiers 2/3 accessing Tier 1?

Administrators Need to… Have knowledge of behavior support for Tier 2/3 to guide/lead any “corrections” needed. Know why a behavior plan may not be working and need to know how to “troubleshoot” a plan. Ensure that systems are in place and interventions are offered routinely and rapidly at all 3 tiers to allow ALL kids to be successful

Some “Lessons Learned” from Tertiary Demos Need for more constant monitoring of ALL students – It is not OK to NOT do interventions commensurate with student needs (i.e. FBA/BIP and wraparound) – Ongoing team meetings facilitated for each student at Tier 3 with data used at each meeting Need for more aggressive review of EE (LRE) data and all “placement” data: – Interventions vs. Identification/placement

Failed interventions are not neutral They leave a residual effect…

Check-in-Check-out (CICO) Merely an extension of Tier 1 Some get high frequency scheduled positive contact with adults Youth solicit the positive contact/feedback Low effort for teacher if built on Tier 1 Need to have 7-12% accessing if it is to come to be a routine in your school(s) If you only have 1-2% on CICO, those are likely to be kids who need more….

Why do you want 7-12% on CICO? 1.Kids who here-to-for would have gotten nothing (‘til they ‘got worse”) now get a positive boost of support (sea of ineligibility) 2.All teachers will expect that every day they will have kids cross their threshold who need higher rate of positive contact 3.Quicker/easier to support kids who need Tier 3 4.Structure to build transference and generalizing from Social Skills instructional groups and function-based behavior plans

John Greer Elementary School Suspensions and Students Succeeding on CICO

Student “Need” or System “Need”? There is a high use of restrictive settings for students with EBD; and the outcomes for these students are not good. There is no self-contained classroom nor one-to-one aide for students with EBD in life/society after high school; just jail. Students removed from general education due to emotional/behavioral factors, are more likely to go to jail than to have good “life” outcomes. References: Bradley, Henderson, Monfore (2004) Bullock and McArthur (1994), Rutherford and Nelson (2005), Rutherford, Nelson and Woford (1985), Grosenick, George, George, Lewis (1991), Greenbaum, Dedrick, Freidman, Kutash, Brown, Lardieri (1996), Mathur (2007), Quinn (2004) Moore, Soloman, “Mentally IL Offenders Stretch the Limits of Juvenile Justice”, New York Times, August 10, 2009 page 1

Student Successfully Transitions out of Special Education Placement Kendall’s Daily Point Data for Behavioral Goals

Did Kendall “Need” a Restrictive Placement? Or Effective Interventions?

Common Mistakes Seen in Behavior Intervention Plans Becoming ‘immobilized’ by setting events beyond the control of the school, ex. student does not take medication at home, what is the setting event at school? What is something the school can identify and impact? Skipping the replacement behavior : Must have a alternative or replacement behavior that student is taught, practiced, reinforced Not enough teaching strategies and opportunities Putting all the “eggs in one ‘consequence’ basket”, ex. If you’re good all week, you can have a soda on Friday

Other Common Mistakes… The problem behavior is not operationally defined: observable, countable, measurable: must be able to see, count, and measure behavior. Aggressive versus hits other peers during unstructured time on a daily basis There is more than one function: non example, obtain peer attention and avoid doing work There need to be at least one strategy in at least 3 areas (Antecedent, Behavior, and Consequence)

Readiness for Advanced Tiers

Stages of Implementation Exploration Installation Initial Implementation Full Implementation Innovation Sustainability Implementation occurs in stages: Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, – 4 Years

Commitments Needed at Tertiary Level District Commitment to review data, ongoing planning, support tertiary development at district and building levels Designated Buildings/District Staff positioned to facilitate tertiary teams for individual students (3-5%) External Tertiary Coach/Coordinator positioned Continuum of Skill Sets (training, guided learning, practice, coaching, consultation) Commitment to use of Data at System and Practice Levels: – Going beyond ODRs (i.e. SSBD) – Self assessment/fidelity (i.e. CISS, PoI) – System monitoring (SR-T, Tier2/3 Tracking Tool, etc) – SIMEO-Student Outcomes (complex FBA/BIP and wraparound)

Tertiary Level System Components Installation Stage 1.District Planning Team to address the system challenges and address the data trends to be changed. 2.Building level tertiary systems planning team to monitor progress of tertiary plans and address challenges at building level. 3.Tertiary Coaching (District level). 4.Facilitators identified and “positioned” to facilitate Tier 3 teams and plans for 1-5% of students. 5.Comprehensive training and technical assistance plan. 6.Data system/tools to be integrated into tertiary practices.

Initial Implementation Stage: District Leadership Team meets at least quarterly District Tertiary Coach (.5 fte for start-up) 3 or more buildings with at least monthly Secondary Systems & Tertiary Systems Team mtgs. 3 or more buildings with 1-3 kids with 2 or more data points

Full Implementation Stage: District Leadership Team mtg. with a Tertiary focus at least quarterly District Tertiary Coaching (1.0 fte allocated) 6 or more buildings with at least monthly Secondary Systems, Tertiary Systems & Problem Solving Team mtgs. 6 or more buildings with 3 or more kids with 2 or more data points

Innovation Stage: District Leadership Team mtg. w. a Tertiary focus at least quarterly w. community & family representation District Tertiary Coach (1 fte ) 9 or more buildings with at least monthly Secondary Systems, Tertiary Systems & Problem Solving Team mtgs. 9 or more buildings with 1-3 % of kids with 2 or more data points Modified district policies/procedures Specific strategies for blending related initiatives

Sustainability Stage: Representative District Leadership Team mtg. with integrated Tertiary focus regularly District Tertiary Coach/es 1 fte or more 80% of buildings with at least monthly Secondary Systems, Tertiary Systems & Problem Solving Team mtgs. 80% of buildings with 1-3 % of kids with 1-2% with plans and data Modified district policies/procedures Specific strategies for blending related initiatives

Ensuring Capacity at All 3 Tiers Begin assessment and development of secondary and tertiary tiers at start-up of universal – Assess resources and current practices (specialized services) – Review current outcomes of students with higher level needs – Position personnel to guide changes in practice – Begin planning and training with select personnel All 3 tiers addressed at all district meetings and at every training

Other Content.. Universal Screening Mental health Integration Examples of Tier 3 plans that are scaled up form tiers ½ Changing role of Clinical/Special Education Personnel Impact on Students with Disabilities

Alton School District: Changes in Roles of Special Education Staff and Procedures Social Workers – From individual counseling to doing coordinating simple secondary interventions such as CICO and SAIG’s – From no data to using excel spreadsheet to monitor all students in Tier 2/3 interventions and using the tracking tool – Using data to know who needs/gets interventions – From transporting youth for testing to leading/participating in Tier 2/3 systems teams

Alton School District Changes in Roles of Special Education Staff and Procedures, continued School Psychologists – From being in a building where children came for testing to being in the building where children are – From centralized referral conferences where people came to “plead their case” with no data for special education testing to being a part of systems planning and problem solving teams in buildings – From special education coordinators being the link to students placed out of their home school to the school psychologist being the link

Alton School District Changes in Roles of Special Education Staff and Procedures, continued Special Education Director – From leading district centered referral conferences to reviewing Educational Environment data for the district – From knowing about PBIS to the district assigned administrator leading the charge with all things PBIS

Alton: Challenges for support staff to do more Evidence Based Practices Letting go of what we are doing and doing something different Crisis management to doing interventions that are EBP Time Personnel Attitudes **Belief in doing something different will have a better outcome

Changes at the District and Building using the TIER 2/3 Teaming Model District – Joint Academic and Behavior RTI District Leadership Team Meeting – Monthly meeting for whole team Asst. Supt, Rep. principals from all grade levels, Special Ed. Director and coordinators, Tier 1 and Tier 2/3 external coaches, tech. coordinator, RTI coordinator, Curriculum coordinator, Tech. coaches, SSHS grant coordinator, – Monthly meeting for problem solving team of the larger group – Workgroups for the DLT Coaching, Pre K-12 alignment, Educational Environment, Data Based Problem Solving and Data Solutions, Assessment and Evaluation, Family and Community Engagement

Changes at the District and Building using the TIER 2/3 Teaming Model, cont. Building – Secondary and Tertiary systems discussions at all 11 buildings – Problem solving team meetings (not just a referral to special ed. Meeting) – Administrators strongly encouraged to participate in both levels of meetings – Accountability through Tracking Tool and Systems Response tools – Also thought Systems meeting with District tier 1 and 2/3 coach and each building 4 times each year (bringing Tier 1, 2, and 3 leaders and administrator together to review triangle, SRT, TT data) and action plan on areas of need