Lucille Eber, Ed.D.,Statewide Director, Illinois PBIS Network

Partner, National PBIS TA Center

www.pbisillinois.org

Lucille.Eber@pbisillinois.org

www.pbis.org

Seventh Annual APEX

Summer Leadership Institute

Keynote Session

August 15, 2012

Using a Multi-tiered Framework to

Build Effective Partnerships among

Schools, Youth, Families, and

Communities

Special Education

General Education

Sea of Ineligibility

Need for Change?

Bridging the Gap

General +

Intensive

Resources

General Resources

Intensity of Problem

Am

ount

of

Res

ourc

es

Nee

ded

to S

olv

e P

roble

m

General +

Supplemental

Resources

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

Acknowledgements: Tier 2/3 Model Demo Development

• Kimberli Breen

• Michele Capio

• Ami Flamini

• Kelly Hyde

• Amy Lee

• Diane McDonald

• Sheri Leucking

• Jen Rose

• Jennifer Swain-Bradway

• IL Demo Districts/Coaches

How Secondary Schools

Are Different

• Size

• Expectations of staff

• Staff is departmentalized

• More groundwork is needed

• Teams can become layered

• Implementation comes more slowly

It Takes a System…

A System in the school to support a

continuum of supports and interventions.

District Level Structures are also critical.

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

INTERVENTIONS and

SUPPORT

More Students Access Tier 2/3 Interventions

When Tier 1/ Universal is in Place reported by Illinois schools implementing PBIS

7.94%

4.95%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

Partially Implementing

(n=26)

Fully Implementing

(n=125)

% s

tud

en

ts

FY09 IL School Profile Tool Students Accessing Tier 2/Tier 3 Interventions

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

© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2008

Problem

• Innovative practices do not fare well in old

organizational structures and systems

• Organizational and system changes are

essential to successful use of innovations

– Expect it

– Plan for it

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 Aug.,2009 Adapted from T. Scott, 2004

Tier 2/

Secondary

Tier 3/

Tertiary

3-Tiered System of Support

Necessary Conversations (Teams)

CICO

SAIG

Group w.

individual

feature

Complex

FBA/BI

P

Universal

Support

Problem

Solving Team

Tertiary

Systems

Team

Brief

FBA/

BIP

Brief

FBA/BI

P

Univers

al

Team

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

Failed Interventions

are not Neutral

• They leave a residual effect…

• Think about Tier 2 interventions in your

school(s) with regards to the following

critical features:

Critical Features of Secondary/Tier 2

Group Interventions

• Intervention is continuously available

• Rapid access to intervention (72 hr.)

• Very low effort by teachers

• Consistent with school-wide expectations

• All staff/faculty in school are involved/have access

• Flexible intervention based on descriptive functional

assessment

• Adequate resources (admin., team)

• Continuous monitoring for decision-making

Why Do Secondary/Tier 2 Group

Interventions Work?

• Improved structure • Prompts throughout the day for correct behavior

• System for linking student with at least one adult

• Student chooses to participate

• Increased feedback • Feedback occurs more often

• Feedback is tied to student behavior

• Inappropriate behavior is less likely to be

ignored or rewarded

Why do Secondary/Tier 2 Group

Interventions Work? (Continued)

• Increased frequency of acknowledgment/

reinforcement for appropriate behavior

• Adult and peer attention

• Linking school and home support

• Organized to morph into a self-management

system

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. Youth 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

3. Structure to build transference and generalizing from Social Skills

instructional groups and function-based behavior plans

Reduced Suspensions for

Students with IEPs Renewed focus on consistent Tier 1 and Tier 2

implementation shows promising results.

• A 39% decrease in OSS events for general education students, and a 59% decrease for students with IEPs.

• A 37% decrease in the number of OSS days for general education students and a 58% decrease for students with IEPs.

• Principal attributes success to maintaining fidelity at the Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels, holding regular team meetings, and increasing staff commitment.

Study on ODR Rates for IL

Students with IEPs (in process T. Tobin UP May 2012)

All Students with ODRs ODR Students with IEPs

Year 1

2009-2010

Average = 277 (SD = 210)

Total = 12,745

Average = 84 (SD = 169)

Total = 3,852

Year 2

2010-2011

Average = 228 (SD = 161)

Total = 10,503

Average = 75 (SD = 140)

Total = 3,454

The results indicate that the 46 schools decreased

the ODR rates for all students as well as

decreased ODRs for students with IEPs

Social Skills/Academic Instructional Groups:

Key Points Resulting from ‘Innovation’

• Selection into groups based on youths’ reaction to life circumstance not existence of life circumstances – ex. fighting with peers, not family divorce

• Goals for improvement common across youth in same group – (ex. use your words)

• Data used to measure if skills are being USED in natural settings (vs. in counseling sessions)

– transference of skills to classroom, café etc.)

• Stakeholders (teachers, family etc.) have input into success of intervention – (ex. Daily Progress Report)

Behavioral Pathway

Setting

Event

Days

with

Gym

Problem

Behavior

Negative

comments

about activity

and to peers

leading to

physical

contact

Consequence

Sent out of

P.E. class

Function

To

escape

setting

Brief Function-based Interventions

• Setting

Event

Strategies

•Add

check-in

before

gym

Teaching

Strategies

•Teach social skills

(getting along with

others, friendship,

problem solving,

sportsmanship)

•Teach how to

approach gym

teacher to ask for a

drink of water to

leave setting.

•Teach student how

to re-enter and

continue with

activity

Consequence

Strategies

Acknowledging

/rewarding

student when

uses new skills

(asking for a

drink of water

to leave, using

respectful

language with

peers, being a

good sport,

etc..)

Antecedent

Strategies

•Behavior Lessons

for all students about

using respectful

language with self

and others and how

to be a good sport

•. More frequent

activities with less

focus on competition

(parachute, 4-square,

etc...)

•Pre-correct

© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2008

Problem

• Students cannot benefit from

interventions they do not

experience

The System Features Needed to Support

he Effective Practices…

• A Team unique to each individual child &

family

– Blend the family/natural supports with the school

representatives who know the child best

• A defined Meeting Process

– Meet frequently and use data

– Develop, implement, review range of interventions

• Facilitator Role

– Bringing team together

– Blending perspectives; guiding consensus

– Systematic use of data (strengths and needs)

What is Wraparound?

• Wraparound is a process for

developing family-centered teams

and plans that are strength and

needs based

(not deficit based)

across multiple settings and life

domains.

Who is Tier 3-Wraparound for?

• Youth with multiple needs across home,

school, community

• Youth at-risk for change of placement

(youth not responding to current

systems/practices)

• The adults in youth’s life are not effectively

engaged in comprehensive planning (i.e.

adults not getting along very well)

Four Phases of Wraparound

Implementation I. Team Development

- Get people ready to be a team

- Complete strengths/needs chats (baseline data)

II. Initial Plan Development

- Hold initial planning meetings (integrate data)

- Develop a team “culture” (use data to establish voice)

III. Plan Implementation & Refinement

- Hold team meetings to review plans (ongoing data collection and use)

- Modify, adapt & adjust team plan (based on data)

IV. Plan Completion & Transition

- Define good enough (Data-based decision-making)

- “Unwrap”

Implementing Wraparound:

Key Elements Needed for Success

• Engaging students, families & teachers

• Team development & team ownership

• Ensuring student/family/teacher voice

Getting to real (big) needs

• Effective interventions

Serious use of strengths

Natural supports

Focus on needs vs. services

• Monitoring progress & sustaining

• System support buy-in

• individual students

• built upon strengths

• voice, priorities of youth and family

• based on unique youth and family needs

• culturally relevant teams and plans

• plans include natural supports

• traditional and non-traditional interventions

• multiple life domains

• unconditional

Features of Wraparound:

Wraparound Skill Sets

1. Identifying “big” needs (quality of life indicators)

• “Student needs to feel others respect him”

2. Establish voice/ownership

3. Reframe blame

4. Recognize/prevent teams’ becoming

immobilized by “setting events”

5. Getting to interventions that actually work

6. Integrate data-based decision-making into

complex process (home-school-

community)

Can wraparound teams use data-based

decision-making to prioritize needs,

design strategies, & monitor progress of

the child/family team?

Data-Based Decision-Making

and Wraparound

more efficient teams, meetings, and plans?

less reactive (emotion-based) actions?

more strategic actions?

more effective outcomes?

longer-term commitment to maintain success?

Alton Middle School ODR Reduction for Students in Tier 3 Supports

(n=17 students)

2.37

4

3.25

0.320.60.7

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Baseline Time 2 Time 3

Me

an

Nu

mb

er

of

Ep

isd

oe

s p

er

Stu

de

nt

ODR OSS N=200

FY 201I-Tier III Study

School Risk Behaviors: Aggregate Change

Alton CUSD 11 Decreases Reliance on Self Contained Special Education Placements

Alton Middle School, Alton CUSD 11, SPP Data Demonstrates Access to General Education

Settings for Students with IEPs

Replication District CUSD 300 Starts to Turn Curve of SPP Indicators in Desired Direction

Rehabilitation,

Empowerment, Natural

Supports, Education

and Work {RENEW} J. Malloy and colleagues at UNH

• Developed in 1996 as the model for a 3-year RSA-

funded employment model demonstration project for

youth with “SED”

• Focus is on community-based, self-determined services

and supports

• Promising results for youth who typically have very poor

post-school outcomes (Bullis & Cheney; Eber, Nelson & Miles,

1997; Cheney, Malloy & Hagner, 1998)

RENEW Overview RENEW (Rehabilitation, Empowerment, Natural

Supports, Education and Work) is an application

of wraparound

• Reflects key principles: person-centered,

community and strengths-based, natural

supports

• Focused on student, versus parent

engagement (e.g., student-centered teams,

student-developed interests)

RENEW Supports HS Youth

Transitioning Back from Alternative

School

• “Mark” an 18 year old junior with a Specific Learning Disability:

• Expelled in April 2011 for possession, use, and intent to sell an illegal substance.

• History of truancy and 16 past ODRs.

• Sent to an alternative school from Apr. 2011-Dec. 2011.

• In December began RENEW process, and in January transitioned back to his community high school.

• Supported by a Check-in Check-out intervention that included his probation officer.

• Connected with each teacher after class and

• Social worker at the beginning and end of each day.

RENEW Supports HS Youth

Transitioning Back from Alternative

School

• Mark’s RENEW plan includes

• Identifying credit needs to graduate on time

• Obtaining a driver’s license

• Developing organizational techniques

• Setting up a savings account

• Enrolling in summer school

• Working evenings and weekends at family business

• Mark passed all Q3 classes, only one ODR for being tardy, and no suspensions.

Ongoing Coaching is needed to establish

capacity (fidelity) for wraparound:

• Fluency with practices and data

• Competency-based coaching and TA

• Ongoing ‘practice refinement’

• Stay at the table…staythe course

Interconnected Systems

Framework paper (Barrett, Eber and Weist , revised 2009)

Developed through a collaboration of the National SMH and National PBIS Centers

www.pbis.org

Contributions from Colette Lueck, the IL Children’s Mental Health Partnership And Lisa Betz, The IL Department of Human Services, Division of Mental health

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 4th leading cause of death among

young adults

Old Approach New Approach

• Each school works out their

own plan with Mental Health

(MH) agency;

• A MH counselor is housed in

a school building 1 day a

week to “see” students;

• No data to decide on or

monitor interventions;

• “Hoping” that interventions

are working; but not sure.

• District has a plan for integrating

MH at all buildings (based on

community data as well as

school data);

• MH person participates in teams

at all 3 tiers;

• MH person leads group or

individual interventions based on

data;

• For example, MH person leads or

co-facilitates small groups,

FBA/BIPs or wrap teams for

students.

Structure for Developing an ISF:

Community Partners Roles in Teams

• A District/Community leadership that includes families,

develops, supports and monitors a plan that includes:

• Community partners participate in all three levels of

systems teaming: Universal, Secondary, and Tertiary

• Team of SFC partners review data and design

interventions that are evidence-based and can be

progress monitored

• MH providers form both school and community develop,

facilitate, coordinate and monitor all interventions

through one structure

Community Partners

Roles in Teams

• Participate in all three levels of systems

teaming: Universal, Secondary, and

Tertiary

• Facilitate or co-facilitate tertiary teams

around individual students

• Facilitate or co-facilitate small groups with

youth who have been identified in need of

additional supports

Examples of

Lessons Learned with High

Schools (and Middle schools)

Define At-Risk

Staff/Community

Simple Data

SAIG, Universal Behavior Lesson Plans & the Matrix

Definition of At-Risk

• Make sure at-risk is clearly defined

• Think about building and community data

points which might support the definition

If tier 2 isn’t working, always look to see if

you are putting students into lower level

interventions who are really in need of higher

level interventions.

STAFF

• Educate your staff re: the use of positive, corrective feedback – Don’t assume people know how to give feedback

– Have people practice giving feedback (in a staff meeting, during training)

– Give people the words to use when giving feedback

• Provide staff feedback & acknowledgements regarding their feedback

• Pay attention to staff resistance and address it as it occurs

• Identify community that could participate and support interventions.

Corrective Feedback

NOT Corrective

• You broke the rules again.

• You were late just like yesterday.

• You are in high school, I shouldn’t have to remind you to bring your book.

• Why do you always have to shout out?

CORRECTIVE

• You did not have your book today. Please remember to bring it tomorrow.

• You were late for class today. Please be in your seat before the bell rings.

• You shouted out while I was showing the problem on the board. Please raise your hand and I will call on you.

Connect this language to the matrix

Illinois College &

Jacksonville High School

Partnership

Illinois College Students earned course credit for hours logged

in the high school. They were able to gain hands-on and real

life experiences while assisting with secondary interventions at

JHS.

• Assisted with AM Check In and PM Check Out

• Collected and organized SWIS data for the Secondary

Systems

• Co-facilitated S/AIG Groups

• Assisted with communication between staff, students and

families regarding secondary interventions.

Data needs to be simple!

• Are the data points for entry simple?

*When collecting data it should be for ALL or SOME

kids. At the beginning of tier 2, you don’t need to

look up individual kid data.

• Are the data points in line with “at-risk”?

• Track Data and determine if 70% are

responding. If not, look at systems first.

• Is the DPR ready and is it Tied to universal?

Progress Monitoring:

Evaluating the Program: 2010-

2011

CICO

Daily

Progress

Report

SAIG Keep an eye out for the “we must have a curriculum syndrome”!

The cause of this syndrome could

be schools are NOT teaching

Universal lessons based upon their

data.

Since they aren’t teaching

behavior on a regular basis, they

don’t have lesson plans to use for

SAIG.

This equals the search for

curriculum and the avoidance of

teaching behavior universally.

Using universal behavior lesson

plans

• Going to help you keep Tier 2 connected to Tier one.

• Going to make you re-visit your matrix and remind you of the need for it to be fluid.

• Is your matrix addressing only problem behaviors or is it also addressing pro-social behaviors?

– Procedure vs. Skill

Procedure & Pro-social Skill blending them on the matrix makes all of this more “high school friendly”

Procedures

• Throw paper in the waste

can

• Use the right side of the

stairway

• Bring all materials to

class

• Keep Hands, Feet, and

Other Objects to yourself

Pro-Social Skills

• Contribute in class; raise

hand to volunteer answer

• Encourage others in gym

class; tell peer they did a

good job

• Sit next to a different peer

If using curriculum…

• Use data to identify students

• Consider accessing community

supports

• Look at process and outcome data

• Consider using behavior lesson plans in

addition to curriculum based groups.

Outcomes (SPARCS) School Data – Office Discipline Referrals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5

Nu

mb

er o

f O

DR

s

Students

ODR Comparison 14 Weeks Before Intervention and 14 Weeks on Intervention

ODR Total 14 Weeks Before Intervention

ODR Total 14 Weeks On Intervention

100%↑

23%↓ 25%↓

66%↓

45%↓

37%

Reduction

Overall

Outcomes (SPARCS) School Data – In-School and Out-of-School

Suspension

0

5

10

15

20

25

Total Number ISS Total Number OSS

To

tal

Nu

mb

er

Offenses

ISS and OSS 14 Weeks Before vs 14 Weeks During Intervention

for Group

Before

After

25% ↓

23%↓

Academic Seminar: Academic

and Social Supports for Middle

and High School Students at

Risk of Failure

Jessica Swain-Bradway, Ph.D.,

IL PBIS Network

Jessica.swainbradway@pbisillinois.org

Big Picture Students need to be engaged in work to succeed in school.

We must target secondary supports on reducing obstacle to success.

By increasing adult interaction

By communicating with home

By increasing predictability

By providing BOTH social and academic supports

We need to be efficient and effective. ASAP!

Academic Seminar • Secondary tier intervention for middle and high

school students at rick of school failure

• Combines critical components as identified by PBIS & school retention literature

• Targets immediate access skills v long term acquisition skills

• Focuses on escape maintained problem behavior • Building skills in organization

• Providing time, resources and assistance to complete work

• Providing increased acknowledgement for completing work

Academic Seminar > 45 minute class

5 minutes: Entry Task, Check-In

15 minutes skill building: foundational organizational skills

25 minutes supported homework completion: application of organizational skills to homework activities

> Daily class

> First period of the day

> Student participates in CICO cycle First period Academic Seminar class serves as

morning check-in period

Academic Seminar teacher coordinates CICO

Academic Seminar for Students who…

• Failing 1 or more content area class

• Engaging in escape maintained behaviors due to difficulty of work: – Incomplete homework, class work

• Could use additional supports organizing – Black hole back pack

– Missing work

– Don’t know due dates, class requirements

• Find at least one adult reinforcing

• Are not in “crisis”

• Freshman, Sophomores

Academic Seminar o Increases home school connection,

o Check IN Check Out card home component – for

some students

o Combines academic and social supports

o Academic Seminar curriculum

oSchool adjustment skills that allow access to academic

success

o Rapid response/continuously available o Class

o Ongoing data collection for decision making o Academic data: classroom grades, in-class activities o CICO data

Summary …

• Prevention-based systems, with capacity to scale-up and provide effective interventions for all youth (including those with or at-risk of EBD), can be effectively implemented in schools.

• Building a multi-tiered system of supports can increase

schools’ capacity to identify MH needs of a wider range of

students sooner, supporting families in a timely manner.

• Behavior support for students with emotional/behavioral

needs is not just a “Special Education” issue.

Summary (continued)

• Schools can’t do it alone…partnerships with families

and communities are needed to ensure success.

• It is possible for teachers and all school personnel to

feel competent and confident on how to prevent and

redirect and respond to behaviors of all youth

• Thank you for all YOU do!