1. From IDEA to Implementation: Getting Effective Practices into the Classroom The Illinois PBIS Network Lucille Eber Ed.D. lewrapil@aol.com State Director, IL PBIS Network 2008 OSEP Project Director’s Conference

2.  State, Regional and Local Structures  Consistent statewide training and TA  Ensure readiness & commitment before training  Data disseminated and used  newsletters  website  presentations  trainings  reports  Continuous Regeneration Sustainability of PBIS in IL:

3. Implementation Model Local Structures  School-based teams  District planning teams  Coaches (internal & external) Regional Structures  Coordinators and Coaches  Delivery of Training and Technical Assistance Statewide Structure  Development of Training & Technical Assistance  Evaluation & Dissemination  National Center Support

4. State-level Structure Implementation Staff (25 FTE) Technical Assistance Directors Technical Assistance Coordinators Administrative Support (9 FTE) Training/Communications Evaluation and Data Management IT support

5. SYSTEMS PRACTICES DATA Supporting Staff Behavior Supporting Decision Making Supporting Student Behavior OUTCOMES Social Competence & Academic Achievement

6. 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 Tier 2/Secondary Interventions 5-15% Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small group interventions Some individualizing 5-15%Tier 2/Secondary Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small group interventions Some individualizing Tier 1/Universal Interventions 80-90% All students Preventive, proactive 80-90%Tier 1/Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive School-Wide Systems for Student Success: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model Academic Systems Behavioral Systems 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

7. Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model Tier 1/Universal School-Wide Assessment School-Wide Prevention Systems Tier 2/Secondary Tier 3/ Tertiary Intervention Assessment Illinois PBIS Network, Revised May 15, 2008 Adapted from T. Scott, 2004 SIMEO Tools: HSC-T, RD-T, EI-T Small Group Interventions (CICO, SSI, etc) Group Interventions with Individualized Focus (CnC, etc) Simple Individual Interventions (Simple FBA/BIP, Schedule/ Curriculum Changes, etc) Multiple-Domain 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.

8. IL PBIS Schools and Districts PBIS Schools Trained & Implementing

9. Illinois PBIS Schools Mean Percentage of Students with Major ODRs 2006-07, 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).

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

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

12. The difference between the two types of schools was significant (t=3.72, df=159, p<0.001). Illinois 2005-06 Proportion of Students who Meet or Exceed Third Grade ISAT Reading Standard

13. 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 2005-06 Proportion of Schools that Met AYP

14. Small Group & Individual Interventions Rated "High" or "Very High" in Fully & Partially Implementing PBIS Schools 2006-07 Illinois PBIS Schools

15. Summary of FY 2008 Office Referrals: Mean Number of Office Discipline Referrals per SIMEO Student N=44

16. Summary of FY 2008 Office Referrals: Mean Number of Office Discipline Referrals per SIMEO Student for Students with Same Data Points N=19

17. Building Local Capacity: Coaches Coaches are school personnel who have: Fluency with systems & practices Capacity to delivery high level technical assistance Capacity to sustain teams in efforts to implement systems & practices

18. Redefine Roles of District-level Staff to Coach Sustainability & Accountability Hands-on technical assistance Guide problem solving Local training Team start-up & sustainability Public relations/communications Support local leadership Local coordination of resources Provide prompts & reinforcers

19. PBIS External Coach Expansion from FY05 to FY08

20. Coach Role/Goals Provide information and technical assistance: –best practices –current research –funding sources Know and anticipate local needs and resources Keep teams focused/functioning

21. Volume Quality Consistency Dosage/practice Layering Content from Tier to Tier Systems, Data, Practices at all 3 Tiers Ongoing Staff Development Components to Consider:

22. A Multi-level Training Plan Awareness/Readiness Universal/Tier 1 Secondary/Tier 2 Tertiary/Tier 3 Coaches Series Audience Specific (H.S, Alt. schools, etc) District Leadership Team Trainings Administrator Academies

23. 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 3.8.08

26. Content for integrated coaches training across related initiatives (state-level) Systems, Data and Practices Leadership Data based Decision Making Universal Screening Progress Monitoring Standards Aligned Curriculum Evidenced Based Practice 3-Tiered Model of Interventions Differentiation for Academics and Behavior Team Based Implementation Sustainability

27. EX200 Objectives Develop fluency with fidelity tools to guild district planning Develop fluency with data-based decision-making for meeting the educational needs of all students Practice strategies to coach district PBIS Leadership Teams Example from Advanced Coaches Training Course

28. Objective 2 Develop fluency with data-based decision making to meet the educational needs of all students District Data Audit This data is currently available in schools; locating, aggregating, and analyzing it for trends is the challenge that proves most rewarding when completed.

29. Illinois PBIS Individual School Data Audit Purpose: To guide schools and districts in the collection, analysis, comparison and decision making for school improvement Compares and Correlates Multiple Data Sets Demographics Special Ed Data Academic Achievement Discipline Data Start with one year and add additional years to see trends Serves as a compilation sheet for information that is available to districts

30. Demographic and Academic Data Enrollment Data: Fall Housing Report, SWIS, IIRC Retention, Drop out, Graduation, Suspension/Expulsion, ODR’s – building and district records Academic Data: ISAT Reports, Interactive School Report Card (iirc.niu.edu)

31. Special Education Data: What is percentage of total enrollment by ethnicity? What percentage of each ethnic group has an IEP? What is their EE continuum? (% of time outside of General Education) Does the data indicate an increase or decrease in students referred/placed in Special Education? Does the data indicate an increase or decrease in least restrictive environment? Beyond ethnicity – replace ethnicity with gender, English Language Learners (ELL), free and reduced lunch

32. How to Find Special Education Data Students referred: Building Records, possibly District Records Students with IEP’s and EE data with option of multiple reports: IEPOINT Data Base ( District Special Education Director or Coop Director identifies who has access and who uses the final data products ) Special Ed Profile District Trend Data http://webprod1.isbe.net/LEAProfile

33. Challenge: Finding and Organizing Data on Placements and EE Use of Out-of-home-School Tool (OHSC-T): –Different people have the data; Sp. Ed. and Gen. Ed. data separate in most districts; –Who has data on students in ‘short term’ safe school placements? –Coding and other ways that ‘hide’ data makes the task hard; For example, students in certain placements didn’t “show up” in data review –Students in 100% Sp. Ed but in home school didn’t come up in data

34. Out of home tool: Data trends AA students overrepresented in EBD and in restrictive settings AA students underrepresented in Autism Many kids in restrictive/placement have moved buildings a lot Large #s of youth “not qualifying” for IEP but in ‘safe school’ Students with other “label” may have behavior problems (ex. Students with LD in separate setting) Placement of students in100% Special Education in home school viewed as “better” EE data (but it is not….)

35. District “X”: Out of Home School Most out of home placements are BD eligibility Most are for high school and middle with high school being greatest All out of home school placements at elementary came from one elementary school with two being from the MI program. The numbers of students going out of district has dropped dramatically. The numbers of students successfully transitioning back to their home school (from district off-site BD) has dramatically increased. Larger #’s of students 60% > in general ed instruction (see IEPoint Data and FACTS data)

36. Next Steps Continue to analyze data around elementary out of home school placements and build capacity in buildings to succeed with students in general education settings. Further review special education placement data: –Review trends of students in general education 60%. Or more to determine effectiveness of students returning from out of district?

37. Activity B: District Data Audit Review the Data Audit for the District and the 2 Individual Schools. Process the data with the guide questions and suggest strategies for this district to improve the EE data.

38. Leadership Team Funding VisibilityPolitical Support TrainingCoaching Evaluation Active Coordination Local School Teams/Demonstrations Taking it to Scale

39. District Summit Outcomes Participants will be able to: identify the need for, membership of, function and mission of the district leadership team. identify and analyze relevant data to determine academic and behavioral needs of students within the district. integrate district initiatives to work more efficiently and avoid duplication of services.

40. District Summit Outcomes Participants will be able to: self-assess the status of district-wide PBIS support. develop a plan for long-term sustainability of the PBIS process in district schools.

41.  45%  34%

42. 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

43. 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 Use of web-based data system Wraparound

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

45. “Mary Ellen” Home, School, Community Tool

46. Example of SIMEO-06 Individual Student Data System Using the Data to get to Strengths and Needs at Wrap meetings

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

48. 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

49. 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

50. System Data to Consider 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

51. 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

52. System Action Planning in Progress: A Tertiary Demo District Students with history of retention – Students who are retained 2 or more times have a 90% chance of dropping out – Tertiary level plans should address if students should be put in grades with peers who are their chronological age (similar to supports implemented for students with IEP’s. – Plans should be comprehensive and address skill deficits students may have – Concerns were also discussed regarding how to plan for these situations when it is in the best interest of the student to be in a higher grade, but credits are missing at a Middle School or High School Level. District team needs to action plan around these issues

53. Resources at www.pbisillinois.org “Commitments for Success” (click on “Getting Started ”) “IL PBIS Network FY09 Phases of Implementation (PoI) Rubric (click on “Recognition Process,” then “Criteria”) Detailed Course Descriptions (click on “training”)