Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports and Youth

Involvement in the Juvenile Justice System

Los Angeles Unified School District Local District 7 Best Practices Symposium November,

2011

C. Michael Nelson, Ed. D.University of Kentucky (emeritus)

National TA Center on PBIS

Advanced Organizer• Background—Status of SWPBIS

implementation• Characteristics & Needs of Incarcerated Youth• Responding to these needs through PBIS

– Preventing entry into the system– Improving outcomes for youth in the system

• Implementing PBIS in Secure Care Settings• Exemplar • Resources

Number of Schools Implementing SWPBIS since 2000 (Aug. 2011)

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 2010 20110

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

15,955

Alab

ama

Alas

ka

Ariz

ona

Arka

nsas

Calif

orni

a

Colo

rado

*

Conn

ectic

ut

Del

awar

e

Flor

ida*

Geo

rgia

Haw

aii

Idah

o

Illin

ois

Indi

ana

Iow

a*

Kans

as*

Kent

ucky

Loui

sian

a*

Mai

ne

Mar

ylan

d*

Mas

sach

usett

s

Mic

higa

n

Min

neso

ta

Mis

siss

ippi

Mis

sour

i*

Mon

tana

*

Neb

rask

a

Nev

ada

New

Ham

pshi

re

New

Jers

ey*

New

Mex

ico

New

Yor

k

Nor

th C

arol

ina*

Nor

th D

akot

a*

Ohi

o

Okl

ahom

a

Ore

gon*

Penn

sylv

ania

Rhod

e Is

land

Sout

h Ca

rolin

a*

Sout

h D

akot

a

Tenn

esse

e

Texa

s

Uta

h*

Verm

ont

Virg

inia

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e

Was

hing

ton

DC

Wes

t Vir

gini

a

Wis

cons

in

Wyo

min

g

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Schools Implementing SWPBIS by StateAugust, 2011

Proportion of School Implementing SWPBIS by State

August, 2011Al

abam

a

Alas

ka

Ariz

ona

Arka

nsas

Calif

orni

a

Colo

rado

*

Conn

ectic

ut

Del

awar

e

Flor

ida*

Geo

rgia

Haw

aii

Idah

o

Illin

ois

Indi

ana

Iow

a*

Kans

as*

Kent

ucky

Loui

sian

a*

Mai

ne

Mar

ylan

d*

Mas

sach

usett

s

Mic

higa

n

Min

neso

ta

Mis

siss

ippi

Mis

sour

i*

Mon

tana

*

Neb

rask

a

Nev

ada

New

Ham

pshi

re

New

Jers

ey*

New

Mex

ico

New

Yor

k

Nor

th C

arol

ina*

Nor

th D

akot

a*

Ohi

o

Okl

ahom

a

Ore

gon*

Penn

sylv

ania

Rhod

e Is

land

Sout

h Ca

rolin

a*

Sout

h D

akot

a

Tenn

esse

e

Texa

s

Uta

h*

Verm

ont

Virg

inia

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e

Was

hing

ton

DC

Wes

t Vir

gini

a

Wis

cons

in

Wyo

min

g

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Who are we Incarcerating?Youth in Juvenile Corrections

• 2/3-3/4 of incarcerated youth have thesecharacteristics that relate to behavior:

– Special education classification– Mental disorders– Drug and alcohol abuse– History of abuse, neglect, and witnessing

violence

J. Gagnon, 2008

Questions• Why do these troubled and disabled youth

end up in the juvenile justice system?• When do their problems first emerge?• What role do social institutions (family

services, early childhood programs, schools, juvenile delinquency programs) play in either addressing or exacerbating these problems?

Risk Factors - Delinquency

Life Domains• Individual• Family • School • Community• Peer Relations

School• Weak academics • Low school

involvement• Truancy• Suspension• Expulsion• Dropout

Preventing Entry through SWPBIS

• Quality educational interventions may constitute the most effective and economical protective factors against delinquency (Center on Crime, Communities, & Culture, 1997)

• Therefore, keeping youth engaged in school is a logical prevention.

• Improving school climate and youth behavior works toward that goal.

PBIS and School Engagement• Reductions in:

– discipline referral rates by 50% to 60% (Horner, Sugai, & Todd, 2001)

– Office discipline referrals (Lane & Menzies, 2003)– fighting (McCurdy, Mannella, & Eldridge, 2003);– in-school suspension (Scott, 2001; FL PBS Project, 2009);– classroom disruption (Lohrmann & Talerico, 2004;

Newcomer & Lewis, 2004);– negative student-adult interactions (Clarke, Worcester,

Dunlap, Murray, & Bradely-Klug, 2002)• Increases in:

– academic engaged time (Putnam, Horner, & Algozzine, 2007

– academic achievement (Luiselli, Putnam, Handler, & Feinberg, 2005; Horner et al., 2009)

– perceived school safety (Horner et al., 2009)

PBIS and School –to-Prison Pipeline Reform

• PBIS is promoted by advocacy groups, specifically to address school-to-prison pipeline reform– Southern Poverty Law Center– Appleseed– American Civil Liberties Union– Public Counsel Law Center

KY Safe Schools Data Project (Kentucky Center for Instructional Discipline)

2007-08 2008-09 2009-100

2

4

6

8

10

12

10.52 10.6

9.499.22

8.36

6.9

KY AveragePBIS Districts

Suspensions per 100 Students

Why PBS in Secure Facilities?

• Effective and efficient alternative to harsh, inconsistent, and ineffective disciplinary methods in many juvenile justice facilities– punishment mentality, – inconsistency among staff

• Decisions about discipline not linked to data on youth behavior

How Juvenile Justice “Works”

• Incarceration PLUS punishment• Successful completion of “treatment” plans

require high levels of literacy skills• Release is contingent upon progress through

the treatment plan– Youth with educational disabilities, poor literacy

skills make significantly slower progress– Average literacy levels of incarcerated youth range

from 5th-9th grade• Education is an add-on

The Co$t of Incarceration Penn State or The

State Pen

It’s your money!

Recidivism for Youth with Disabilities• Recidivism: re-arrest, re-incarceration

• All incarcerated youth: > 50% (Lipsey, 2009; Snyder & Sickmund, 2006)

• 69% of youth with disabilities were reincarcerated within 1 year of release (Johnston, 2003)

• Youth with disabilities were 2.8 times more likely to return to corrections 6 months post-release and 1.8 times more likely to return at 1 year (Bullis et al., 2002)

• 34.4% of youth in juvenile detention and state corrections systems were identified as disabled (Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Leone, P. E., Osher, D., & Poirier, 2005).

Best Practices in Juvenile Delinquency Treatment

1. Assess risks & needs: – Use research-based tools to determine likelihood of re-offense and to

identify factors amenable to treatment and risk reduction. 2. Enhance Intrinsic Motivation:

– Apply specific communication techniques to identify an offender’s own reasons for change and to engage offenders as partners in their treatment.

3. Target Interventions: – Structure treatment, supervision and responses to offender behavior

based on their risk level, needs and personal characteristics. 4. Skill train With Directed practice:

– Use cognitive behavioral treatment methods to disrupt criminal thinking and provide offenders with the opportunity to practice and apply pro-social behaviors.

(US Department of Justice, 2011)

Best Practices in Juvenile Delinquency Treatment5. Increase positive reinforcement:

– Emphasize, affirm and reward compliant behavior to promote pro-social behavior change. While offenders are still sanctioned for non-compliant behavior, a greater focus is placed on recognizing and rewarding the positive.

6. Engage Ongoing Support in Natural Communities: – Connect offenders to pro-social family, friends and activities in the community

7. Measure relevant processes/practices: – Collect data on the effectiveness of your work to answer the questions:

• Are we doing evidence-based work? • Are we doing it well? • Is it leading to desired outcomes?

8. Provide Measurement Feedback: – Use data to provide feedback to systems, organizations, teams and individuals

with the goal of improving practice.

(US Department of Justice, 2011)

PBIS Best Practices

1. Early Identification– Risk / needs assessment at primary and secondary levels

2. Reinforcement system– Teach, acknowledge positive behaviors – Implement continuum of consequences

3. Continuum of supports – Supports based on level of need, student characteristics

(function of problem behavior) 4. Explicit instruction & practice in social expectations

PBIS Best Practices

5. Reinforcement system6. Climate of preventative / positive, parent involvement

– Facility-wide expectations to establish positive climate, – Involve all stakeholders

7. Data based decision-making – Are we doing what we said we’d do?– Is it making a difference?

8. Data sharing – Share data with stakeholders on valued outcomes

Best Practices Overlap

USDJ1. Assess risks & needs 2. Enhance Intrinsic Motivation3. Target Interventions4. Skill train With Directed practice5. Increase positive reinforcement6. Engage Ongoing Support in

Natural Communities 7. Measure relevant

processes/practices8. Provide Measurement Feedback

PBIS1. Early Identification2. Reinforcement system3. Continuum of supports 4. Explicit instruction & practice

in social expectations5. Reinforcement system6. Climate of preventative /

positive, parent involvement 7. Data based decision-making 8. Data sharing

PBIS Implementation in Alternative Settings

• Limited experimental studies implementing PBIS in AE, residential, or JJ settings– Unknown application in residential settings– TX legislated state-wide implementation in all secure

care facilities– AL, ID, MA, VT considering PBS for JJ– CA, IA, IL, OR, WA—PBS in at least one JJ facility– KY beginning pilot in one facility

• (National Center on the Education of Children who are Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk, 2007)

PBIS Approach• Strengths:

– Clarifies expectations – Provides structure for youth and staff members– Data based decision making increases accountability and

protects youth• Weaknesses:

– Often mistaken for it’s parts and not as the whole model– May be viewed as competing with other models or

programs– The proactive / preventative nature may be perceived as

incongruent with Juvenile Justice practices (e.g., corrections)

Considerations for Secure Settings

• 24-hour day• Multiple programs in a facility• Multidisciplinary staff; diverse levels of training• Primary focus is security• Education personnel not in charge of discipline• Decisions re: youth behavior aren’t data-driven

25

OUTCOMES

SYSTEMSSupportingStaff Behavior & Implementation Fidelity

DATASupportingDecisionMakingPRACTICES

Evidence-based, preventive. Supporting Youth Behavior

Supporting Social Competence &Academic Achievement

Systems Issues• Disconnect between:

– Educational programming– Housing unit programming– Security programming– Mental health programming– Recreation programming– Other programming

• Must work together to form a seamless system for youth

K. Jolivette, 2009

Systems Issues• Hierarchies and politics within

and across programs– Power– History

• Changing adult behavior = a positive change in youth behavior

• Make “peace” with the history and move forward

K. Jolivette, 2009

Data Issues• Different types of and reporting mechanisms for

data collected– Anecdotal, frequency, duration– Daily, weekly, monthly, semester reports

• A common “merger” of data collected required• Limited sharing of data

– Across staff within and outside of programs• A shared data set with a schedule for sharing

• “Big Picture” of what’s going on often missing– Disconnect between morning, school, lunch, after-school,

afternoon, evening, nighttime events• Common “debriefing” on a regular basis

K. Jolivette, 2009

Practice Issues• “Saboteurs”

– Lack of “buy-in” by ALL staff across systems• Administrator for each program sets the tone• Needs to be a job expectation

• Use of non-scientific strategies, interventions, and curricula– Lack of “knowing” or time to investigate/staying with current

practices• Effectiveness related to the practices employed

• Conflicting & low expectations of youth– Lack of administrative and staff consensus on

strategies/interventions• A team (reps. from each system) needs to take the lead

– Expectations change dependent on the environment, staff, time of day, etc.

• Consistency is a key in prevention• Common policies and procedures

– Trying to catch youth being “bad” (punishment focus)• Equitable reinforcement for positive social and academic

behavior a must– Freedom, control, independence

• Reinforcement for implementation by staff a must

Non-classr

oom

Setting Systems

ClassroomSetting Systems

Individual Student

Systems

School-wideSystems

School-wide PositiveBehavior Support

Systems

Education Program

Housing Units

Other Programs

Facility-wide Systems

PositiveBehavior SupportSystems in Secure

Facilities

Individual Youth

    32%

   

Are these proportions characteristic of youth in facility?

~ 23%Secondary Prevention

~53% TertiaryPreven-

tion

~24%Primary Prevention

Primary Prevention:1 or 0 discipline reports per month

Secondary Prevention:2-5 discipline reports per month

Tertiary Prevention:Multiple discipline reports per month

~80% of Youth

~15%

~5%

Or, are these?

Continuum of Support for ALL

Dec 7, 2007

Prob Sol.

Leadership

Adult rel.

Anger man.

Attend.

Peer interac

Ind. work

Label intervention…not youth

Implementation Process

• Establish a leadership team• Secure administrator support • Secure a commitment from at least

80% of the staff • Conduct self assessment • Create an implementation action

plan • Regularly collect and analyze data • Use data to make decisions• Evaluate impact• Program for sustainability

Exemplar• Illinois Youth Center

380 boys 13-21Medium-maximum securityCorrectional model

Illinois Youth Center (IYC): Team/Resources

• What does it take to do PBIS? – People: Staff must be committed– Equipment: Very little…computers for data

collection…printers…AV system– Locations: Throughout the school areas at IYC

Harrisburg.– Support: From the facility administrators, the

school district, and the Illinois PBIS network.

Universal Interventions• All settings, all students• Preventive, proactive

• Teams – Teachers and Students• Orientation of Youth• Reinforcement System• Social Skill Lessons• Discipline Policy• Professional Development

Intensive, Individual Interventions• Individual Students• Assessment-based• High Intensity

Targeted Group Interventions• Some students (at-risk)• High efficiency• Rapid response

• Check-In with a Teacher• One-on-One• Wrap-Around: Use the ‘Community’• Involve School Psychologists• Confinement/Segregation• Behavior Intervention Programs

What can PBIS do? IYC-Harrisburg results

42Pre PBIS Nov. 00 - Jan. 01

Nov. 02 - Jan. 03

Nov. 03 - Jan. 04

Nov. 04 - Jan. 05

Nov. 05 - Jan. 06

Nov. 06 - Jan 07 Nov. 07 - Jan. 08

Nov. 08 - Jan 090

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

872 259 152 125 157 268 362 295

BEHAVIOR REPORTS WRITTEN AND POPULATION

REPORTED BEHAVIORS

POPULATION

70% reduction

43

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

525

122

62

157

Pre PBIS Through PresentSchool Reported Major and Minor student behavirs

Nov. 01 - Jan. 02

Nov. 02 - Jan. 03

Nov. 04 - Jan. 05

Nov. 05 - Jan. 06

Student Be-haviors

77% reduction

44

Sexually Innapropriate Fighting/ Assault0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

30

6

12

0

7

0

6

Student Behaviors

Nov. 1, 01 to Jan. 31, 02

Nov. 1, 02 to Jan. 31, 03

Nov. 1, 04 to Jan. 31, 05

Feb. 1, 05 to Sept. 30, 05

60% reduction

45De-cember

January February March April May June July August Sep-tember

October No-vember

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

177

323

228

316

179

284

151

386

410

517

388

263

15 11

70 70

11

122

4526

93

18 22 16

Major and Minor Reported Student Behaviors

Pre PBIS 2000 and 2006

Pre PBIS 2006

86% reduction

46

STUDENTS WITH ZERO BEHAVIOR

REPORTS80%,339

STUDENTS WITH BEHAVIOR RE-

PORTS, 86, 21%

APRIL 2009

47

www.pbis.org

Juvenile Justice

48

49

50

51

Strategies: Lessons Learned• Start small/ Attain successes on which to

build• Maintain administrative support• Link to mission, ongoing initiatives• Incorporate a data collection and decision

model• Fit into existing overall treatment plan• Sustaining much more difficult than initial

implementation• Changing youth behavior is the easy part!

Thank you!

• mike.nelson@uky.edu