May 2008 Ensuring Success for Students with or at-risk of Emotional/Behavioral and other Disabilities through School-wide PBIS: The IL PBIS Tertiary Demonstration Process Lucille Eber IL PBIS Network

Does building a school-wide system of PBIS increase schools abilities to effectively educate students with more complex needs? What systems, data and practice structures are needed to ensure that positive behavior support being applied in needed dosage for ALL students? Key Questions

80-90% Tertiary Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based High Intensity Tertiary Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures Secondary Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small Group Interventions Some Individualizing Secondary Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small Group Interventions Some Individualizing Universal Interventions All students Preventive, proactive Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive 1-5% 5-10% Academic Systems Behavioral Systems School-Wide Systems for Student Success A Response to Intervention Model

Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model Universal School-Wide Assessment School-Wide Prevention Systems Secondary Tertiary SWIS & other School-wide data BEP & group Intervention data SIMEO tools: HSC-T, RD-T Small group interventions (CICO, SSI, etc) Intervention Assessment Revised March 2008 IL-PBIS Adapted from T. Scott, 2004 Functional assessment tools/ Observations/scatter plots etc. Group interventions with individualized focus (CnC, etc) Simple individual interventions (Simple FBA/BIP, schedule/curriculum changes, etc) Multiple-domain FBA/BIP Wraparound

Core Features of a Response to Intervention (RtI) Approach Investment in prevention Universal Screening Early intervention for students not at benchmark Multi-tiered, prevention-based intervention approach Progress monitoring Use of problem-solving process at all 3-tiers Active use of data for decision-making at all 3-tiers Research-based practices expected at all 3-tiers Individualized interventions commensurate with assessed level of need

Continuum of Support for Secondary-Tertiary Level Systems 1.Group interventions (BEP, social or academic skills groups, tutor/homework clubs, etc) 2.Group Intervention with a unique feature for an individual student, (BEP individualized into a Check & Connect; mentoring/tutoring, etc.) 3.Simple Individualized Function Based Behavior Support Plan for a student focused on one specific behavior (simple FBA/BIP-one behavior; curriculum adjustment; schedule or other environmental adjustments, etc) 4.Complex Function-based Behavior Support Plan across settings (i.e.: FBA/BIP home and school and/or community) 5.Wraparound : More complex and comprehensive plan that address multiple life domain issues across home, school and community (i.e. basic needs, MH treatment, as well as behavior/academic interventions) multiple behaviors

Illinois PBIS Schools Mean Percentage of Students with Major ODRs , Statewide The differences between fully and partially implementing schools were statistically significant in all three levels of ODRs (0-1 ODR, Mann- Whitney U=3035.0, p=0.004; 2-5 ODR, Mann-Whitney U=3050.0, p=0.005; 6+ODR, Mann- Whitney U=3062.0, p=0.005).

Illinois PBIS Schools Illinois PBIS Schools Completing School Profile Forms & Implementing Secondary/Tertiary Interventions across Five Years

Comparison of Partial & Fully Implementing Schools on Suspensions/Expulsions FY07 per 100 Students Illinois PBIS Schools

Comparing School Safety Survey Partial vs. Full Implementation Illinois PBIS Schools

The difference between the two types of schools was significant (t=3.72, df=159, p<0.001). Illinois Proportion of Students who Meet or Exceed Third Grade ISAT Reading Standard

Illinois PBIS Schools Findings suggest that fully implementing PBIS schools met AYP at a significantly higher percentage than partially implementing schools (χ2=19.17, df=1, p<.001). Illinois Proportion of Schools that Met AYP

Small Group & Individual Interventions Rated "High" or "Very High" in Fully & Partially Implementing PBIS Schools Illinois PBIS Schools

Small Group Interventions Rated as "Very High & "High in Fully & Partially Implementing PBIS Schools Illinois PBIS Schools

Individual Interventions Rated Very High & High in Fully & Partially Implementing PBIS Schools Illinois PBIS Schools

Building Tertiary Capacity in Schools Establish full-continuum of PBIS in schools Identify/train team facilitators (FBA/BIP, wraparound) Train other school personnel about wraparound Ongoing practice refinement & skill development Review data: outcomes of teams and plans IL PBIS Network

A Focus on Tertiary Impacts Implementation at All Levels Building-based teams met frequently to action plan and significant gains were made during year one. The Illinois PBIS Phases of Implementation Tool is being used by schools to self-assess their systems, data and practices and guide their implementation. As schools invest in developing tertiary structures, they also took steps to improve their universal and secondary systems. End of Year One-June 07

Tertiary Demo School Reduces ODRs & Increases Simple Secondary Interventions *CICO = Check in, Check Out IL Tertiary Demo

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

Requirements for IL Tertiary Demos District Commitment Designated Buildings/District Staff External Tertiary Coach/Coordinator Continuum of Skill Sets (training, guided learning, practice, coaching, consultation) Commitment to use of Data System –Going beyond ODRs (i.e. SSBD) –Self assessment/fidelity –SIMEO-Student Outcomes

District-wide Secondary/Tertiary Implementation Process District meeting quarterly –District outcomes –Capacity/sustainability –Other schools/staff Building meeting monthly –Check on all levels –Cross-planning with all levels –Effectiveness of practices (CICO/BIP/Wrap, etc) Secondary/Tertiary Coaching Capacity Wraparound Facilitators

System Data to Consider EE Data (formerly known as LRE) –Building and District Level –By disability group Other places kids are parked –Alternative settings –Rooms w/in the building kids are sent Sub-aggregate groups –Sp. Ed. –Ethnicity – DCFS

Ongoing Self–Assessment of Secondary/Tertiary Implementation Building Level: IL Phases of Implementation (PoI) Tool IL Secondary/Tertiary Intervention Tracking Tool Sp. Ed Referral Data Suspensions/Expulsions/Placements (ongoing) Aggregate Individual Student Data (IL SIMEO data) LRE Data trends Subgroup data (academic, discipline, Sp. Ed. Referral, LRE, etc) District Level: Referral to Sp.Ed. Data LRE Data (aggregate and by building) IL Out-of-Home-School-Tracking Tool (multiple sorts) Aggregate SIMEO data Aggregate PoI Data

Educational Environment Data (EE) A key item in IL State Performance Plan for feds More districts to be flagged for monitoring Tertiary demo activities focus on IL SPP data points

Changes in Least Restrictive Environment Dewey Elementary School

First step is accessing the data Next is discussing with range of stakeholders and determining accuracy or how to make it accurate Possible tools/procedures to make a difference EE Data (continued)

Similar to how we got started with ODR data clean up data (e.g. ODR form) review data trends and ask questions; Getting Started with Data-Based Decision-Making with EE Data

Getting Started (continued) decide what it means by those who live the data; decide what data points to focus on design actions that seem likely to effect change; monitor/revise action plan

Results of Implementation of Wraparound within SW-PBS in IL Three year pilot Enhance SOC wraparound approach –data-based decision-making as part of wraparound intervention Development of strength-needs data tools Web-based system Wraparound

SIMEO Database (Systematic Information Management of Education Outcomes) Technical Features: Database Development online data collection and graphing database system for individual student receiving intensive level planning and supports

IL PBIS Tertiary Demos-07 Tertiary Interventions Linked to Immediate & Sustainable ODR Decreases

Immediate & Sustainable Change Noted in Placement Risk High Risk Low/No Risk (n = 19) Wraparound-07

Avg # of episodes Wraparound-07 School Risk Behaviors Substantially Decline for Student Engaged in Wrap

IL Wraparound Data-07 Positive Classroom Behavior & Academic Achievement Linked Always Never

Shift in Responsibility for Individual Student Data Management at Tertiary Demo Sites IL PBIS Tertiary Demos

Why Do We Need to Go Beyond Use of ODRs? Use of alternative discipline responses; often w/o documentation Over use of Special Education placement w/o adequate dosage of interventions

Why Do We Need to Go Beyond Use of ODRs? ( continued ) High rate of unidentified MH problems Youth get identified only after crisis which makes it harder and more costly to intervene.

The Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) (Walker and Severson, 1992) Developed as a school-wide (Universal) screening tool for children in grades 1-6 –Similar to annual vision/hearing screenings

Background Identifies behaviors that may impede academic and social functioning Leads to earlier intervention May reduce need for formalized, lengthy requests for assistance by using data to identify youth

Implementation Between early September-first of November, completed screenings in 6 districts and 18 schools Initial results indicate that approximately 5%-10% of students enrolled in grades 1- 6 were identified by the SSBD

A Middle school case example: –Approximately 320 students enrolled in sixth grade were screened using the SSBD –38 six graders or 11% passed gate two Implementation

Currently, school-based secondary teams are using SSBD data to implement low-intensity interventions (e.g., check-in/check- out) Implementation

Mary Ellen Home, School, Community Tool

Jacob Reasons for Wrap Referral Baseline –Poor school attendance –Tardiness –Refusal to participate in 2 nd grade classroom activities. Did work independently in office/partial school days. –Previous hospitalization (Bipolar Disorder) –Retention – currently repeating 2 nd grade year –Failing Grades –Family Support Needs

Jacob Home/School/Community Tool Getting to Strengths & Needs at Baseline

Tertiary Tier: Systems Systems 1. Team based problem solving District, all 3 tiers 2. Data-based decision making system SWIS data (CICO) Web-based Individual student data system (IL-SIMEO) 3. Sustainability focus redefining roles, district-level data review, etc. 4. Systematic Screening Beyond ODRs IL PBIS Network

Tertiary Tier: Data Data 1.Data used for engagement and action planning with team 2.Data tools are strengths/needs based 3.Multiple perspectives and settings captured in data 4.Show small increments of change at team meetings IL PBIS Network

Tertiary Tier: Practices Practices 1.Youth having access to all levels of SWPBS 2.Engagement and team development are critical elements 3.Facilitation if team/plan is essential skill set 4.Wrap process creates ownership/context for interventions 5.FBA/BIP is essential skill set 6.Assess/monitor progress and fidelity with families IL PBIS Network

Individualized Teams at the Tertiary Level Are unique to the individual child & family –Blend the familys supports with the school representatives who know the child best Meeting Process –Meet frequently; use data –Regularly develop & review interventions Facilitator Role –Role of bringing team together –Role of blending perspectives

Whats New in Wraparound? Skill set specificity Focus on intervention design/effectiveness Integration with school-wide PBS Phases to guide implementation/supervision Data-based decision-making Integrity/fidelity assessment (WIT) Tools to guide teams: –Home School Community –Education Information Tool

Examples of Needs Statements: 1.The student needs to feel adults and peers respect him. 2.The student needs to feel happy about being at school. 3.The parent needs to know her son is getting a fair shake at school. 4.The student needs to be reassured that he can complete the work.

Effective Behavior Interventions: Function – based Proactive Have adequate dosage of: Instruction Practice Support Encouragement Monitoring

The person who is supposed to implement the strategy needs to be actively involved in designing it; or it probably wont work ! Ownership & Voice: A Key to Intervention Design Interventions….

Points to Keep in Mind When Action Planning with a Team… Scientifically sound strategies can fail if they dont fit with values and skills of those who are supposed to implement them.

Why We Need MH Partnerships One in 5 youth have a MH condition About 70% of those get no treatment School is defacto MH provider JJ system is next level of system default 1-2% identified by schools as EBD Those identified have poor outcomes Suicide is 4 th leading cause of death among young adults

Resources: IL PBIS Network Eber, L., Hyde, K., Rose, J., Breen, K., Mc Donald, D. and Lewandowski, H. (in press). Completing the Continuum of School-wide Positive Behavior Support: Wraparound as a Tertiary Level Intervention. In Sailor, W., Dunlap, G., Sugai, and Horner, R. (Eds.), Handbook of Positive Behavior Support. Freeman, R., Eber, L., Anderson C, Irvin L, Bounds M, Dunlap G, and Horner R. (2006). Building Inclusive School Cultures Using School-wide PBS: Designing Effective Individual Support Systems for Students with Significant Disabilities. The Association for Severe Handicaps (TASH) Journal, 3 (10), 4-17.