1. Creating a Comprehensive Data-based Coordinated System to Promote Social Emotional Development Lou Ann Tanner-Jones, Ph.D., NCSP Boone County Schools Mental Health Coalition University of Missouri Missouri Prevention Center Sept 2016 MO-CASE Annual Conference

2. Boone County Schools Mental Health Coalition Timeline
November 2012
September
2013
January 2015
Spring 2015
Fall- Spring
Sales Tax
1/4 cent sales tax in Boone County was approved.
Tax was initially estimated to raise approximately $5-6 million per year to support mental health in Boone County.
Coalition Formed
Boone County superintendents and the University of Missouri formed the Coalition to provide coordinated mental health services in all Boone County schools.
Grant Awarded
The Coalition received a grant from the Children’s Services Board of Boone County to support and implement evidence-based mental health programs with school-age youth.
Programs Piloted
Coalition work and professional development for staff were piloted to begin to support mental health needs in schools.
Full Project Begins
Screening Data Gathered
Regional Coordinators work with problem solving team to use data
Preventive, Selective, and Intensive Interventions Employed
PD based on data
In response to what we know could happen if we don’t intervene, the BC school districts came together to create a Coalition. This timeline gives an overview of what has happened in our county.
Spring Coalition work was piloted to begin to identify mental health needs. (Southern Boone, Centralia, Harrisburg). Work is in process this summer with a full staff of Regional Coordinators. We are preparing to start to work with problem solving teams as the school year gets underway.
Emphasize funding Children’s Services Fund as funding source

3. Coalition Collaboration
Boone County Students & Families
Coalition Board
Teachers & School Staff
Regional Coordinators
Coalition Director
*MU
School Problem- Solving Teams
Social Service Agencies
This diagram shows the type of collaboration we anticipate.
A unique aspect of this collaboration is that we, in addition to the MU Faculty, can act as a sounding board and help facilitate relationships with outside agencies that might want to provide their services in schools.
Other county agencies also received funds to provide services in schools.
Agencies will submit proposals to the Coalition for services they wish to provide in county schools instead of directly contacting school counselors/principals, etc. We have a process to consider all aspects of proposals and will offer a unified and reasoned response to proposals.
For example, at our last Board meeting, two agencies brought proposals for school-based programs to us. As a Coalition, we discussed the proposals in terms of the students to be impacted, the administrative oversight needed, the data collected, etc and made a determination as to whether or not we would invite those agencies into our county’s schools to provide their services.
This vetting process has been well received by the schools and appears to be a useful service to our partners.
MU Missouri Prevention Center, School of Social Work & Department of Educational, School and Counseling Psychology
Wendy M. Reinke, Ph.D., Keith C. Herman, Ph.D. and Aaron Thompson, Ph.D.

4. County-Wide Assessment System
Teacher Ratings of Students K-12
Risk Focused on Four Areas
Attentional Issues and Academic Competence
Peer Relations and Social Skills
Internalizing Behaviors
Self-Regulation and Externalizing Behavior
Each Risk Indicator within each Area strongly related to Mental Health

5. Coalition Teacher Checklist
Teacher Checklists were completed in all Boone County Schools and one private school building.
Data provided for over 23,000 students.

6. Coalition Teacher Checklist
Used for over 23,000 kids last year (1-3 times)
Web-based, user-friendly
Easy to administer
Takes about 10 minutes per class
Yields important information to identify students who struggle
Asks questions about behaviors teachers already notice:
“Does not think before acting”
”Is easily irritated”

7. Coalition Student Checklist—full implementation this year
Used in a few schools in the county last year
Issues and concerns addressed
Security is very important
Non-threatening Items ask students about their feelings
“I have friends to sit with at lunch”
“I get mad easily”
NO diagnosis or eligibility determination is made from the results
Conducted 3x year

8. What Data Will This Give Us?
Gain an understanding of mental health needs at a variety of levels
Provide direction for use of evidence-based interventions at each of these levels
County
District/
Community
Building
Classroom
Student

9. STUDENTS SERVED

10. Attention and Academic Competence
Risk Area

11. Students At Risk High Risk versus Some Risk
Local Norming was used: These data compare students within the same school to one another (rather than across all schools).
High Risk (Red)= Student risk within the area is in need of attention and is significantly higher than peers in the same school.
Some Risk (Yellow)= Student is demonstrating enough risk for concern as compared to peers in the same school.

12. Red indicates the percentage of students in this grade who have significantly higher risk in this area than their peers.
Yellow indicates the percentage of students in this grade who have some risk in this area as compared to peers.

13. Peer Relations and Social Skills
Risk Area

14. Red indicates the percentage of students in this grade who have significantly higher risk in this area than their peers.
Yellow indicates the percentage of students in this grade who have some risk in this area as compared to peers.

15. Internalizing Behavior
Risk Area

16. Red indicates the percentage of students in this grade who have significantly higher risk in this area than their peers.
Yellow indicates the percentage of students in this grade who have some risk in this area as compared to peers.

17. Self-regulation & Externalizing behavior
Risk Area

18. Red indicates the percentage of students in this grade who have significantly higher risk in this area than their peers.
Yellow indicates the percentage of students in this grade who have some risk in this area as compared to peers.

19. Using these Data in Schools

20. School and Grade Level Report

21. Individual Report
Our researchers and administration will receive reports which will help with decision making. This is a draft of the report at this time– as you can see, the green indicates No Risk, yellow, Some Risk and Red, Needs Attention. Work is currently being done to make reports user friendly and useful to schools.

22. Intervention Focus Based on Data
Attention and Academic Competence interventions focus on increasing executive functioning, on-task behavior, planning, and organizational skills in youth.
Peer Relations and Social Skills interventions focus on increasing relationship, communication, and problem solving skills in youth.
Internalizing Problems interventions focus on using cognitive behavioral strategies for decreasing anxiety and/ or depressive symptoms in youth as well as improving self-esteem.
Self-regulation and Externalizing interventions focus on impulse control, goal setting, problem solving, emotion recognition, and anger control strategies to decrease disruptive, impulsive, and aggressive behaviors in youth.

23. Number Students Served
Intervention Level
Focus of Intervention
Student Age Level
Number Students Served
Universal
Attention and Academic Competence
Elementary
280
Middle 63
High
166
Selective 69 24 1
Indicated 6
Peer Relations and Social Skills
136 44 15 8 2
Internalizing Problems 19 4 9 23 10
Self-Regulation & Externalizing Problems
572
133 89 33 42
Total Youth Served Since August, 2015
1850
TOTAL # of students served 1850 as of March 2016, update #

24. Examples of Evidence Based Interventions

25. Entire Grade of Middle School Students
Students were struggling with Attention and Academic Competence
Selective Intervention: Homework, Organization, Planning Skills

26. Classroom Teacher in Need of Support
Classroom with high levels of disruptive behavior
Consultation with teacher
Universal Intervention: Good Behavior Game

27. Student with Aggressive Behavior
*Kindergarten student with aggressive behavior toward peers and teacher
*Indicated Intervention: Daily Behavior Rating Card

28. Professional Development for School Personnel

29. Professional Development
Professional Development Focus
Number of School Personnel Trained
Attention & Academic Competence - Executive Functioning, Planning and Supporting Organization for students
179
Self-regulation and Externalizing Problems – Managing Disruptive Behavior, Classroom Management, and Behavior Support Planning
103
Identifying and Supporting Mental Health Needs in Youth
376
YMHFA – these training were conducted between Jan 2015-June 2015.
292
Motivational Interviewing – Engaging families and youth 90
Total Trained Since August, 2015
1040

30. Using Data to Determine PD

31. Gathering Data on PD

32. University Partnership
School Psychology Graduate Students
School of Social Work Graduate Students
Special Education Graduate Students
Counseling Psychology Graduate Student
MU Faculty-delivered Professional Development sessions
Win-Win: over 3500 person hours from practicum students in our schools!

33. Implications for Research, Policy and Practice
Uncovering Barriers associated with the development and implementation of a large county-wide ecological assessment system
Systems Consultation: Understanding the Relationship between school climate, culture, and the development of student support systems
Monitoring of fidelity in Problem-Solving teams
Implementing Evidence-based social-emotional curricula, particularly at the secondary level
Creation of a user-friendly, web-based universal screening and reporting system
Addressing Barriers associated with Care Linkage

34. Where to Find More About Us
Visit us at
Follow

35. We gratefully acknowledge the funding and support from the Boone County Children’s Services Fund