District-wide Screening for At-risk Students: Strategies for Success Tim Lewis & Barbara Mitchell University of Missouri Jen Rose Illinois PBIS Network

What Do We Know? Approximately 1 in every 4 to 5 youth in the U.S. meets criteria for a mental disorder with severe impairment across their lifetime (Merikangas et al., 2010). Among those affected only 30% actually receive services (U.S. Public Health Service, 2000)

What Do We Know? The most common conditions include – Anxiety (31.9%) – Behavior disorders (19.1%) – Mood disorders (14.3%) – Substance use disorders (11.4%) Approximately 40% of individuals meet criteria for multiple disorders. (Merikangas et al., 2010)

What Do We Know? The median age of onset occurs during school- age years – 6 years for anxiety – 11 years for behavior – 13 years for mood – 15 years for substance use disorders. (Merikangas et al., 2010)

Academic success is linked with social & behavioral skills Early identification with intervention can decrease the likelihood of academic failure – Prevent onset Preventive supports reduce the need for more intensive supports later. – Minimize impact of risk What Do We Know?

Teacher nomination Existing school data Universal screening instrument Allows for early intervention? Identifies internalizing & externalizing? Identification Process

Screening Simply indicates there might be an issue Not intended to be: – Prescriptive – Evaluative Will require additional data triangulation to provide appropriate supports

Advantages – Fast, efficient, and respectful – Include all children and youth of interest – If we make an error, the error tends to identify students who are not at-risk – Informs schools about the student population – Find groups of students with common needs – Facilitates resource mapping of services (University of Oregon Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior) Systematic Screening

Not common because… – Schools tend to be a reactive rather than proactive with respect to behavior – Impression that kids will “grow out of it” – Concern about profiling/stigmatizing – Fear of costs and potential to identify large number of EBD students Systematic Screening

Not Common Because – Easier to screen vision & hearing because response falls in the realm of the parents – Political realities of managing parent reactions to behavior screenings; confidentiality – Systems skill set Do we know how to respond to behavior with the same confidence that we respond to academic concerns? Systematic Screening

Screening Instruments at a Glance – Name of Instrument – Description / Use – Age of Students – Method – Time to Administer – Cost – Ordering Information Systematic Screening

pbismissouri.org

Tier 1/Universal School-Wide Assessment School-Wide Prevention Systems SIMEO Tools: HSC-T, SD-T, EI-T Check-in Check-out (CICO) Group Intervention with Individualized Feature (e.g., CICO with ind. features and Mentoring) Brief Functional Behavior Assessment/ Behavior Intervention Planning (FBA/BIP) Complex or Multiple-domain FBA/BIP Person Centered Planning: Wraparound/RENEW Family Focus ODRs,Credits, 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 (SAIG) Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports: A Multi-Tiered System of Support Model (MTSS) Illinois PBIS Network, Revised Aug Adapted from T. Scott, 2004 Tier 2/ Secondary Tier 3/ Tertiary Intervention Assessment Individual Student Information System (ISIS)

Illinois PBIS Network: Screening Instruments Used During Demonstration Project ScreenerSummary of Features Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 1990) Well-validated (Endorsed in 1990 by the Program Effectiveness Panel of the U.S. Department of Education; Cited in over 25 peer-reviewed journal publications) Efficient (Screening process can be completed within approximately 1 hour) Most effective instrument for identifying internalizers (Lane et al., 2009) Inexpensive (Manual= $ ; includes reproducible screening forms) BASC-2/BESS (Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007) Measures behaviors associated with internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors and academic competence Incorporates three validity measures to rule out response bias Normed utilizing large (N= 12,350 children & youth), nationally-representative sample Web-based screening capacity available via AIMSweb

Illinois PBIS Network Multiple Gating Procedure (Adapted from Walker & Severson, 1992) Teachers Rank Order then Select Top 3 Students on Each Dimension (Externalizing & Internalizing) Teachers Rate Top 3 Students in Each Dimension (Externalizing & Internalizing) using either SSBD, BASC-2/BESS, or other evidence-based instrument Gate 1 Gate 2 Pass Gate 1 Pass Gate 2 Tier 2 Intervention

Illinois PBIS Network: Process Summary  Timeline of events  Developed materials to support screening process Parent information letter (English & Spanish versions) Overview and administration power points Universal screening implementation timeline Teacher ranking and timeline documents Scoring tool for excel Parent permission letter for tier 2 intervention (English & Spanish versions)  Documents are available at under ‘Curriculum’ tabwww.pbisillinois.org  Identified and trained in-district universal screening coordinators  Led overview meetings with instructional staff  Co-facilitated screenings  Coached tier 2 teams in review of results and implementation of simple tier 2 intervention (e.g., CICO)

Illinois PBIS Network: Parent Information Letter

Illinois PBIS Network: Screening Implementation Timeline

Illinois PBIS Network: Teacher Ranking and Timeline Document

Illinois PBIS Network: Results Summary  During the last year of the grant, 2010‐11 61 Illinois schools screened approximately 28,000 students representing a diverse demographic profile:  White, 32% Black/African American, 20% Hispanic/Latino, 38%

Illinois PBIS Network

Illinois PBIS Network: Current Status  Two years following the conclusion of the grant, the practice of universal screening is showing evidence of sustainability  In the school year, sixty schools across seven geographically-dispersed districts provided documentation of implementing universal screening for behavior  Expanded selection of universal screening instruments to include the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in 14 schools

Illinois PBIS Network: Universal screening readiness checklist  Build a foundation  Secure district and building-level administrative support for universal screening  Establish universal screening committee consisting of district and building-level administrators, student support personnel, teachers, family and community representatives and assign roles  Clarify goals  Identify purpose of universal screening (e.g., mental health, social skills assessment)  Determine desired outcomes

Illinois PBIS Network: Universal screening readiness checklist  Identify resources and logistics  Identify resources for supporting students identified via screening (in-school and community-based)  Create a timeline for executing screening process including frequency of screening (e.g., once, or multiple times per year?)  Develop budget for materials, staff, etc.  Create administration materials (e.g., power point to share process with staff, parents and community members, consent forms, teacher checklists)  Schedule dates for screening(s) and meetings to share school-wide results

Illinois PBIS Network: Universal screening readiness checklist  Select an evidence-based screening instrument  Use The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, or resources from other professional organization resources (e.g., National Association for School Psychologists; NASP ), as guidelines for selecting an appropriate screener

Illinois PBIS Network: Universal screening readiness checklist  Data  Develop data collection and progress monitoring system  Determine systematic process for using results to inform interventions  Plan for sharing screening and progress monitoring results with staff and families