Virginia PBIS Conference | June 30, 2011

Building Capacity for

Progress Monitoring within School-wide Systems of PBIS

Lucille EberIL PBIS Network

www.pbisillinois.org

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

IndividualizedSystems for Students

with High-Risk Behavior

~80% of Students

~15%

~5%

SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR

SUPPORT

SYSTEM

S

PRACTICES

DATA

OUTCOMES

٭

Adapted from “What is a systems Approach in school-wide PBS?”OSEP Technical Assistance onPositive Behavioral Interventions andSupports. Accessed at http://www.Pbis.org/schoolwide.htm

SupportingStaff Behavior

SupportingDecisionMaking

SupportingStudent Behavior

Social Competence &Academic Achievement

PBIS Evaluation Tools

• Getting Started– Self Assessment Survey (SAS) – Team Implementation Checklist (TIC) – School Safety Survey (SSS)

• Getting to Implementation Fidelity– TIC– Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ)– Phases of Implementation (PoI)– Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT)

• Sustaining Improvement– SAS, BoQ, SSS, BAT, PoI

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.,2009Adapted from T. Scott, 2004

Tier 2/Secondary

Tier 3/Tertiary

Inte

rven

tio

nAssessm

en

t

Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions 1-5%•_____________________•_____________________•_____________________

1-5% Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions•___________________________•___________________________•___________________________

Tier 2/Secondary Interventions 5-15%•___________________________•___________________________•___________________________•___________________________•___________________________•___________________________

5-15% Tier 2/Secondary Interventions•____________________________•____________________________•____________________________•____________________________•____________________________•____________________________

Tier 1/Universal Interventions80-90%•________________________•________________________•________________________•________________________•________________________•________________________

80-90% Tier 1/Universal Interventions•____________________________•____________________________•____________________________•____________________________•____________________________

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/school-wide.htm

Continuum of Support for Tier 2/Secondary-Tier 3/Tertiary Level Systems

1. Small group interventions: Check-in Check-Out (CICO), social/academic instructional groups (SAIG), tutor/homework clubs, etc.

2. Group interventions with individualized focus: Utilizing a unique feature for an individual student, e.g. CICO individualized into a Check & Connect (CnC), mentoring/tutoring, etc.

3. Simple individual interventions: A simple individualized function-based behavior support plan for a student focused on one specific behavior, e.g. brief FBA/BIP-one behavior; curriculum adjustment; schedule or other environmental adjustments, etc.

4. Multiple-domain FBA/BIP: A complex function-based behavior support plan across settings, e.g. FBA/BIP home and school and/or community

5. Wraparound: A more complex and comprehensive plan that addresses multiple life domain issues across home, school and community, e.g. basic needs, MH treatment, behavior/academic interventions, as well as multiple behaviors

Illinois PBIS Network, Revised Sept., 2008

Data-Based Decision-Making

Student outcome data is used to:– Identify youth in need of support and to identify

appropriate interventions– Progress-monitor youth response to intervention– Exit or transition youth off of interventions

Intervention process data is used to:– Assess intervention fidelity– Monitor the effectiveness of the intervention itself– Make decisions regarding the continuum/ menu of

interventions/supports

Intervention Process Data

• Assess intervention fidelity– Are teams doing what they say they are doing?– Are interventions being applied the way they were

intended/created to be (evidence-based)

• Monitor the effectiveness of the intervention itself– What’s the percent-effectiveness rate? (how many

youth are responding to the intervention?)

• Make decisions regarding the continuum / menu of interventions/supports– What’s missing? What needs to be created?

3-Tiered System of Support Necessary Conversations (Teams)

CICO

SAIG

Group w. individual

feature

Complex

FBA/BIP

Problem Solving Team

Tertiary Systems Team

Brief

FBA/BIP

Brief FBA/BIP

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

Sept. 1, 2009

UniversalTeam

Universal Support

Examples of Tier 2/3 Tools

• IL PBIS tier 2/3Tracking Tool• IL PBIS Systems Response Tool• IL PBIS Guiding Questions Tool• Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT)

Guiding Questions Tool

• Assessing and planning your Tier 2 and Tier 3 Systems, data and practices

Please list below how your school defines “responding” at each of the six levels:1. Responding to CICO:2. Responding to Social/Academic instructional groups:3. Responding to Simple Tier 2 with Individualized Features (i.e. CNC):4. Responding to Brief Function-Based Interventions:5. Responding to Complex Function-based Interventions:6. Responding to Wraparound Plans:

Parkwood Elementary School (U-46)

• 72% (18/25) students averaged daily points at or above 80%

• 28% (7/25) students averaged below 80%• Out of 20 referrals during the four weeks, 11

were received by CICO students• 60% (17) students have not received a

referral since CICO

Perry Elementary School (D300)

Entrance to CICO:• Teacher referral• Two of more office referrals

Progress Monitoring on CICO:• PAWS (positive actions with support) for PALS (respect property, all others,

learning and self). Each student has the ability to earn 56 points a day. (4 areas, 2 point maximum during 7 one hour periods) the goal is that each student will achieve 45 points (or 80%).

Exiting CICO:• Student s graduate from CICO if they have met 80% or better of their goals during a

four week period.

Currently 35 students on CICO• Approximately 70% of students are increasing total points on a weekly basis.• 17.5% of students are being moved to more intensive interventions.

Tier 2 Refinement Impacts Student Outcomes,Lakewood School

• Began their Tier 2 Check-In Check-Out (CICO) system in the Fall of 2008.

• A review of CICO data this February revealed that many students were not meeting the expectation of 80% on their DPR.

• The team determined that DPRs were not being consistently provided or documented throughout the school day.

• The team re-trained the school staff on the CICO systems, reiterating that the intervention is positive student-adult contact and the DPR card is the tool to create the opportunity for interaction.

• The renewed focus on implementing CICO with fidelity has already had an impact with the average student CICO score increasing from 52% to 86%.

Lakewood School, CUSD 3002011 CICO Scores

CICO Individual Student Progress Report

4/7 4/14 4/21 4/28 5/5 5/12

Tertiary Demo School Reduces ODRs & Increases Simple Secondary Interventions

*CICO = Check in, Check Out

Tertiary Demos

Clearview Elementary Fidelity and Discipline Data Over 3 Years

Tier 2 Progress:

Rob’s Discipline Data

Ben’s Plan

• A history of psychiatric hospitalizations.• Challenging start to fourth grade: a pattern of disruptive and

aggressive behaviors.• A Check-in-Check-out (CICO) intervention was initiated.• A mentor was assigned when CICO data showed he wasn’t

experiencing success (partnership btw school & local church).• Responded well to his mentor and began meeting his behavioral

goals.• However by December, Ben was asking his mother if he could be

hospitalized so he “could get better”. • Building upon the relationship established during CICO, the social

worker and mother quickly formed a wrap team. • The wrap plan increased collaboration with his mental health

provider and incorporated function-based behavior interventions with Ben’s existing supports.

 

Ben’s Outcomes

• Ben’s behavior improved significantly. His Daily Progress Report (DPR) indicates that Ben met classroom behavioral expectations.

• Received fewer Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs) dropping from 30 ODRs, prior to implementing his wraparound plan, to four by the end of the school year.

• Ben’s out of school suspensions declined from three at baseline  to one before the end of the school year.

• His grades simultaneously improved from an average of 75% to 83%, an 8% improvement.

• Over time, Ben was viewed as a student who respected adults and regularly demonstrated self-control at school.

 

Ben’s Daily Progress Report and Office Discipline Referral Data

Ratings of Ben’s Social/Emotional Functioning at School

Existing Tools for Assessing Process

• Universal Component of SWPBS– External

• School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)– Self Assessment

• Team implementation Checklist (TIC)• Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ)

• Targeted & Intensive Components of SWPBS– External

• Individual Student Systems Evaluation Tool (ISSET)– Self Assessment

• Benchmarks for Advanced Tiers (BAT)

Three Sections of BAT

• Foundations/Universal

• Targeted Interventions

• Intensive Support Systems

BAT-Foundations

• Implementation of School-wide PBIS (A)

• Commitment (B)

• Student Identification (C)

• Monitoring and Evaluation (D)

BAT- Tier 2: Targeted Interventions

• Support Systems (E)

• Main Tier 2 Strategy Implementation (F)

– Monitoring and Evaluation (G)

BAT-Tier 3: Intensive Support Systems

• Intensive Support Systems (H)

• Assessment & Plan Development (I)

• Monitoring and Evaluation (J)

Individual Student Systems Evaluation Tool and Checklist for Individual Student Systems (CISS)*,

2007-10 (n=8 schools)

*CISS tool renamed as Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT)