Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Wraparound & School-wide PBS:Integrating Data-based
Decision-making into IndividualStudent/Family Wraparound Teams
Children’s Mental Health Research ConferenceTampa, FloridaMarch 2005
Lucille Eber Ed.D. & Kelly Hyde Ph.D.
Patricia Miles- Portland, Oregon
Diane McDonald –Wraparound/PBIS CoachTodd Jackson- Wraparound Data Coordinator Youth and Families who participatedSchool Personnel who participated
Rob Horner- UO National PBIS CenterGeorge Sugai- UO National PBIS Center
Acknowledgements:
Academic Systems Behavioral Systems
1-5% 1-5%
5-10% 5-10%
80-90% 80-90%
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•High Intensity
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•Intense, durable procedures
Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response
Targeted Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response•Individual or Group
Universal Interventions•All students•Preventive, proactive
Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive
Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success
• Facilitate individual student/family teams that plan/implement/monitor comprehensive supports by building partnerships among families, teachers, community resources (wraparound process)
• Develop/implement/monitor highly individualized support plans that include a) academic and behavioral support plans b) interventions for needs in multiple life domains (basic needs, safety, medical, emotional/social, cultural/spiritual, etc)
• Include strategies for accessing a full range of school and community supports both formal & informal for student, caregivers, teachers
School-wide PBIS Practices at the
Intensive Level for 1-5% students:
Intensive Level:Individualized Comprehensive Teams/Plans
What?The development of a very unique, individualized, strength-based team & plan with the youth and family that is designed to improve quality of life as defined by the youth/family .
Who?• Youth with multiple needs across home, school, community• Youth with multiple life domain needs • The adults in youth’s life are not effectively
engaged in comprehensive planning (i.e. adults not getting along very well)
Intensive Level:Individualized, Comprehensive Teams/Plans
What Do Intensive Plans include?Supports and interventions across multiple life domains and settings (i.e. behavior support plans, academic interventions, basic living supports, multi-agency strategies, family supports, community supports, etc.)
What’s Different?Natural supports and unique strengths are emphasized in team and plan development. Youth/family access, voice, ownership are critical features. Plans include supports for adults/family as well as youth.
2
Tertiary-level Interventions focus on:
Improved quality of life
Social and academic success
Use of function-based support plans (needs-driven)
Improved family partnering & family support
Community networking to ensure full range of supports across multiple life domains
Empowering Youth/family teams via data-based decision-making
Student/family voice and choice
Teams at the Intensive Level
Are unique to the individual child & family– Blend the family’s supports with the school
representatives who know the child bestMeeting Process
– Meet frequently – Regularly develop & review interventions
Facilitator Role– Role of bringing team together– Role of blending perspectives– Guide Data-based Decision-making
Can individual child/family teams use data-based decision-making to prioritize needs, design strategies, & monitor progress of the child/family team?
Big Question ?
more efficient teams, meetings, and plans?less reactive (emotion-based) actions? more strategic actions?more effective outcomes?longer-term commitment to maintain success?
Four Phases of Wraparound Implementation
Team Preparation– Get people ready to be a team– Complete strengths/needs chats
Initial Plan Development– Hold initial planning meetings– Develop a team “culture”
Plan Implementation & Refinement– Hold team meetings to review plans– Modify, adapt & adjust team plan
Plan Completion & Transition– Define good enough– “Unwrap”
First Phase of Wraparound: Team Development
Facilitator– Meets with family & stakeholders– Gathers perspectives on strengths & needs– Assess for safety & rest– Provides or arranges stabilization response if
safety is compromised– Explains the wraparound process– Identifies, invites & orients Child & Family Team
members– Completes strengths summaries & inventories– Arranges initial wraparound planning meeting
First Phase of Wraparound: Team Development
Completed Products– A strength summary detailing the family’s story– A strength inventory listing of family strengths– List of potential team members– Initial needs list– Student referral form– Educational Information Form– Youth & Family Checklist
3
Second Phase of Wraparound: Plan Development
Facilitator:• Holds an initial (or 2) wraparound plan development meeting• Introduces process & team members• Presents strengths & distributes strength summary• Solicits additional strength information from gathered group• Leads team in creating a mission• Introduces needs statements & solicits additional perspectives on
needs from team• Creates a way for team to prioritize needs• Leads the team in generating brainstormed methods to meet needs• Solicits or assigns volunteers• Documents & distributes the plan to team members
Second Phase of Wraparound: Initial Plan Development
Completed Products– A written plan of care that
• Details the Mission Statement• Needs selected for action• Interventions/actions including who will do what
when & what strengths are being built on• A written crisis response plan detailing anticipated
event & response as well as a notification plan– Parent/Primary Caregiver Satisfaction Form– Youth Satisfaction Form
Third Phase of Wraparound: Plan Implementation & Refinement
Facilitator– Sponsors & holds regular team meetings– Solicits team feedback on accomplishments & documents– Leads team members in assessing & analyzing the plan
• For follow through• For Impact
– Creates an opportunity for modification• Adjust services or interventions currently provided• Stop services or interventions currently provided• Maintains services or interventions currently provided
– Solicits volunteers to make changes in current plan array– Documents & distributes team meeting minutes
Third Phase of Wraparound: Plan Implementation & Refinement
Completed Products– Ongoing meeting minutes that detail changes in the
Plan of Care– Quarterly reports that detail progress toward
meeting needs/achieving outcomes (the graphs)– Ongoing record of team member participation
detailing who has attended & who has not– Parent/Primary Caregiver Satisfaction Form– Youth Satisfaction Form– Dispositional Form
Fourth Phase of Wraparound: Plan Completion & Transition
Facilitator– Holds meetings
• Solicits all team members sense of progress• Charts sense of met need• Has team discuss what life would like after Wraparound
– Reviews underlying context/conditions that brought family to the system in the first place to determine if situation has changed
– Identifies who else can be involved– Facilitates approach of “post-system” wraparound
resource people– Creates or assigns rehearsals or drills with a “what if”
approach– Formalizes structured follow-up if needed– Creates a commencement ritual appropriate to family &
team
Fourth Phase of Wraparound: Plan Completion & Transition
Completed Products• Written Transition Plan that details how to access
ongoing services/supports if necessary• Written crisis plan that details who & how to
contact individuals• Follow up phone numbers for team members• Formal Discharge Plan detailing strengths &
interventions that were successful & those that weren’t
• Disposition form
4
IL FULL EVAUATION OF WRAPAROUND (FEW) 2-Year PILOT
(FY03 AND FY04) Purpose:
1. Structure for integrating data-based decision-making into the wraparound process
2. Evaluate progress/outcomes of students with intensive-level needs (1-5%) in IL schools
FY03 >> 12 kids with 2 or more data points all in PBIS schools, data not used by teams; data usedin training facilitators
Fy04 >> Virtual system, 28 kids entered, 11 with 2 or more data points; data used with some teams; training of facilitators continues
FY 2003 IL AGGREGATE WRAP EVALUATION
• Student Referral Form• Education Information Form• Youth and Family Checklist
(strengths/needs checklist)
• Parent Satisfaction• Youth Satisfaction
FY 2003 IL AGGREGATE WRAP EVALUATION
• 11 students with data
• 11 students with baseline and time 2• 9 students with time 2 and time 3• 7 students with time 3 and time 4
FY 2003 EBDAGGREGATE WRAP EVALUATION
Typical Student
-Caucasian male-10 years of age
-5th grade, Special Education Student-Primary Diagnoses of “Multiple Disabilities”
-Referred for Social Skills, Academics, Behavior, Emotions-Home Placement Not “At-Risk”; Not in DCFS Care
-School Placement at Risk of Failure
FY 2003 ILAGGREGATE WRAP EVALUATION
EDUCATION FORMImproved findings: Baseline to 3 Months
-Appropriate behavior with peers-Appropriate behavior with adults
-Participates in extracurricular activities-Academic performance
-Performance commensurate with abilities
FY 2003 IL AGGREGATE WRAP EVALUATION
No change or slight decrease: Baseline to 3 Months
-Pays attention in class-Works independently
-Attends school-Completes homework
-Participates in classroom discussions
5
FY 2003 Aggregate AnalysisYouth and Family Checklist: Home
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Baseline Time 2 Time 3Home- Emotional Functioning
FY 2003 Aggregate AnalysisYouth and Family Checklist: School
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Baseline Time 2 Time 3School-Behavioral Functioning
FY 2003 Aggregate AnalysisHigh Risk Behaviors
1
1.5
2
Baseline Time 2 Time 3Verbal Abuse Threatening Mood Swings
FY 2003 IL AGGREGATE WRAP EVALUATION
1
1.5
2
2.5
Baseline Time 2 Time 3 Time4Behaviors Supports Academic Supports
YOUTH AND FAMILY CHECKLIST Emotional Functioning:School
Data from three points in time (12-02 to 06-03)
0
1
2
3
4
baseline 3 months 6 months
controls anger feels they belongknows when to ask for help handles disagreementsresponds like other youth in emotional situations
Strength: High
Strength: Somewhat
Need: Somewhat
Need: High
YOUTH AND FAMILY CHECKLISTBehavioral Functioning: Home/Family
0
1
2
3
4
baseline 5 months 7 monyhs
seeks appropriate attention follows rules controls self cares for personal safety participates in activities
Strength: High
Strength: Somewhat
Need: Somewhat
Need: High
6
YOUTH AND FAMILY CHECKLISTBehavioral Functioning: School
0
1
2
3
4
baseline 5 months 7 months
seeks appropriate attention follows rules controls self cares for personal safety participates in activities
Strength: High
Strength: Somewhat
Need: Somewhat
Need: High
FY 2004 IL AGGREGATE WRAP EVALUATION
• Student Referral Form• Education Information Form• Youth and Family Checklist
• Parent Satisfaction• Youth Satisfaction
• Student Disposition Form
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Length of Time in Program
Number of Months
14.012.010.08.06.04.02.0
Length of Time in Full Wrap
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
10
8
6
4
2
0
Std. Dev = 2.61 Mean = 6.9
N = 28.001
7
9
5
4
2
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students in PBIS Schools
FY 2004 EBD Network
Students in PBIS Schools
N=28
Is this student in a PBIS school?
YesNo
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
25
20
15
10
5
0
19
9
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students in PBIS Schools
FY 2004 EBD Network Full Evaluation
Students in Special Education
N=28
Students in Special Education
yesNo
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
20
15
10
5
0
18
10
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Age
Age of Students Served
18.016.014.012.010.08.06.0
FY 3004 EBD Network Full Evaluation
Students Served by Age
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
10
8
6
4
2
0
Std. Dev = 2.97 Mean = 11.0
N = 27.00
7
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Grade
Grade
14.012.010.08.06.04.02.0
FY 2004 EBD Network Full Evaluation
Students Served by Grade
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
10
8
6
4
2
0
Std. Dev = 3.17 Mean = 6.1
N = 27.00
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Gender
FY 2004 EBD Network Full Evaluation
Students by Gender
N=28
Gender
MaleFemale
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
23
5
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Race
FY 2004 EBD Network Full Evaluation
Students Served by Race
N=28
Race
HispanicAfrican AmericanCaucasian
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
88
12
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Primary Caretaker
FY 2004 EBD Network
Role of Student's Primary Caretaker
N=28
Role of Caretaker
OtherFoster CareFatherMother
Freq
uenc
y
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 22
23
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Primary Language
FY 2004 EBD Network Full Evaluation
Student and Caretaker Primary Language
N=28
Missing Data=3
Primary Language Spoken
HispanicEnglish
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
24
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Primary Disability
FY 2004 EBD Network Full Evaluation
Students by Primary Disability
Primary Disability
No Disability
Autism
Developmental Delay
Multiple Disabilitie
Health Impairm
ent
Emotional Disturb
Speech & Language
Specific Learning
Mental Retardation
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
10
8
6
4
2
0
65
111
9
12
1
8
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Top Reasons for Referral
FY 2004 EBD Network Full EvaluationTop Ten Risk Factors Contributing to Referrals
10
11
12
16
17
17
21
23
11
6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Housing Diff iculties
Financial Hardship
Mental Health-Child
Poor Peer Relations
Academic Performance
Parent/Child Relations
Limited Family Support
Poor Social Skills
Emotional Needs
Child Behavior
Number of StudentsPresenting with Risk Factor
Yes
FY 2004 EBD NETWORKFULL EVALUATION REFERRAL SUMMARY
Students by Environments at Risk
FY 2004-EBD Full Eval Referral StudentsPercent of Placements at Risk
21% (6)
64% (18)
32% (9)32% (9)
0153045607590
Home School Community No PlacementsAt-Risk
Percent
Placements At-Risk
A Preliminary Look at FY04 Student Outcome
> Eleven (11) students with 2 data points during FY04 ….
EBD FULL WRAP EVALUATION SUMMARY
STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS (N=11)11 YOUTH TOTAL (8 in PBIS schools)
• 9 North
• 1 Chicago
• 1 Central
• 10 MALE
• 1 FEMALE
• 5 CAUCASIAN
• 3 AFRICAN-AMERICAN
• 3 HISPANIC/LATINO
• 5 YOUTH under 10 yrs
• 6 YOUTH over 10 yrs
• 10 live w/ mother (only)
• 54% (6) in SP. Ed.
• 36% (4) diagnosed ED
FY04 IL FEW Study
Percent of Placements At-Risk (n=11)
8
42 2
32
0
6
02468
10
Scho o l H o me C o mmunity N oP lacement
A t -R isk
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
Baseline 3 Months
EBD Full Eval Wrap Students Assessment of Academic Performance
3.09
2.55
1
2
3
4
5
Baseline Three Months
9
EBD Full Eval Wrap Students Assessment of Behavioral Functioning : School
2.171.89
1
2
3
4
Baseline Three Months
EBD FULL WRAP EVALUATION SUMMARY
NEED FOR BEHAVIORAL AND ACADEMIC SUPPORT
FY 2004-4th Qtr StudentsNeed for Additional Classroom Services
7062
45
84
30
45
60
75
90
Baseline Three Months
Perc
ent
Academic Behavioral
EBD FULL WRAP EVALUATION SUMMARY
CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR ASSESSMENT
EBD Full Eval Wrap Students Assessment of Classroom Functioning
2.772.42
1
2
3
4
Baseline Three Months
EBD FULL WRAP EVALUATION SUMMARY
EMOTIONAL ASSESSMENT: HOME
EBD Full Eval Wrap Students Assessment of Emotional Functioning: Home
2.221.77
1
2
3
4
Baseline Three Months
EBD FULL WRAP EVALUATION SUMMARY
EMOTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT: COMMUNITY
EBD Full Eval Wrap Students Emotional and Behavioral Functioning: Community
2.25
1.64
2.39
1.91
1
2
3
4
Baseline Three Months
Emotional Behavioral
EBD FULL WRAP EVALUATION SUMMARY
HIGH RISK BEHAVIORS ASSESSMENT
EBD Full Eval Wrap Students Assessment of High Risk Behaviors
1.491.79
1.611.91
1
2
3
4
Baseline Three Months
Oppostional Verbal Aggression
10
EBD FULL WRAP EVALUATION SUMMARYPARENT SATISFACTION
EBD Full Eval Wrap Students Assessment of Parent Satisfaction
3.78
2.92
1
2
3
4
Baseline Three Months
EBD FULL WRAP EVALUATION SUMMARY
YOUTH SATISFACTION
EBD Full Eval Wrap Students Assessment of Youth Satisfaction
3.53
1.96
12
3
45
Baseline Three Months
Full Evaluation Wrap ProcessEvaluation Overview
FY 2003 and FY 2004
combined analysis22 students with two or more data points
Full Evaluation Wrap ProcessStudent Demographics: PBIS School
Enrollment of Students
Full Evaluation Wrap Process
Students in PBIS Schools
N=22
Youths in PBIS Schools
YesNo
Freq
uenc
y
20
10
0
17
5
Full Evaluation Wrap ProcessStudent Demographics: Special Education
Enrollment of Students
Full Evaluation Wrap Process
Students in Special Education
N=22
Is student in Special Education?
yesNo
Freq
uenc
y
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
15
7
Full Evaluation Wrap ProcessStudent Demographics: Special Education Students
by Primary Disability
Full Evaluation Wrap Process
Student's by Primary Disability
N=22
Students Primary Disability
No DisabilityAutism
Multiple DisabilitieHealth Impairment
Emotional DisturbancSpecif ic Learning
Freq
uenc
y
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
55
4
1
6
1
11
Full Evaluation Wrap ProcessStudent Demographics: Most Commonly Identified
Risk Factors Related to Referral
17 1715
1312
11
0
5
10
15
20
Students
Social Skills EmotionalNeeds
BehavioralNeeds
Family Conflict AcademicNeeds
FamilyResources
Most Common Risk Factors of Students Involved in Wrap
Full Evaluation Wrap ProcessStudent Demographics: Most Commonly Identified
High Risk Behaviors
1615 15
12
87
02468
10121416
Students
Oppostional Lying Verbal Abuse Aggression Danger to others Mood/Thought
Most Common Risk Behaviors Displayed
Full Evaluation Wrap Process 03-04 combined (n=22)Outcome Data Analysis:
Reduction in High Risk Behaviors
Presence of High Risk Behaviors
1.5
1.9
1.4
1.7
1.5
1.21
1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.9
2
Mean: Baseline Mean: 3 Months
Oppositional (P<.001) Verbal Abuse (P<.01)Lying (P<.01)
NO
YES
Full Evaluation Wrap Process03-04 combined
(n=22) Outcome Data Analysis:Increase in Social Functioning of Students
Social Functioning of Students: N=22
2.82.52.3
2.2
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Mean: Baseline Mean: 3 Months
Home (P<.07) School (P<.50)
High Strength
Somewhat Strength
Somewhat of a Need
High Need
Full Evaluation Wrap Process03-04 combined (n=22)Outcome Data Analysis:Increase in Emotional Functioning of Students
Emotional Functioning of Students: N=22
2.41.92
1.7
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Mean: Baseline Mean: 3 Months
Home (P<.001) School (P<.15)
High Strength
Somewhat Strength
Somewhat of a Need
High Need
Full Evaluation Wrap Process03-04 combined (n=22) Outcome Data Analysis:Increase in Behavioral Functioning of Students
Behavioral Functioning of Students: N=22
2.52.22.25
2
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Mean: Baseline Mean: 3 Months
Home (P<.04) School (P<.09)
High Strength
Somewhat Strength
Somewhat of a Need
High Need
12
Full Evaluation Wrap Process03-04 (n=22) Outcome Data Analysis:
Classroom Behavior and Academic Achievement
Classroom Behavior and Academic Achievement
2.812.542.95
2.42
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Mean: Baseline Mean: 3 Months
Behavior (P<.03) Academics (P<.02)
Above Average
Poor/Failing
Below Average
Excellent
Full Evaluation Wrap Process03-04 combined (n=22) Outcome Data Analysis:
Need for More Behavioral and Academic Assistance
Need for More Academic and Behavioral Assistance
1.5
1.9
1.6
1.4
11.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.9
2
Mean: Baseline Mean: 3 Months
Behavior (P<.05) Academic (P<.16)
NO
YES
Full Evaluation Wrap Process03-04 combined (n==22) Outcome Data Analysis:
Parent and Youth Satisfaction
Satisfaction of Parents and Youths: N=22
3.73
2.94 3.52
2.41
11.5
22.5
33.5
4
Mean: Baseline Mean: 3 Months
Parent (P<.000) Youth (P<.000)
Highly Satisfied
Highly Dissatisfied
Full Evaluation Wrap Process03-04 combined (n=22) Correlational Associations/Relationships
Between Variables
Longer Length of Time in Program Significantly Associated with:
• Students attending PBIS Schools (.475)• Increase in Positive Classroom Behavior
(.431)• Decrease in High Risk School Behaviors
(-.783)• Increase in Positive Social Functioning in
School (.545)• Increases in Positive Behavioral
Functioning at Home (.492)
Students Attending PBIS Schools Significantly Associated with:
• Decrease in High Risk School Behaviors(-.478)
• Increase in Positive Classroom Behavior (.545)
• Increases in Positive Health/Safety Functioning in Home (.424)
Can individual child/family teams use data-based decision-making to prioritize needs, design strategies, & monitor progress of the child/family team?
Big Question ?
more efficient teams, meetings, and plans?less reactive (emotion-based) actions? more strategic actions?more effective outcomes?longer-term commitment to maintain success?
Wraparound Case Study“Carlos”
Reason for Referral for Comprehensive Wraparound Plan (Nov. 03)
• Behavior difficulties• Academic difficulties• Emotional needs• Social skills needs
13
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
Reason for Referral cont.
• Impaired family relationships• Impaired peer relationships• Family support needs• Mental health needs (depression)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
Student Baseline Information
• Repeated seventh grade• General ed classroom 100% of day• Failing academics (GPA 0 – 59%)• 6 or more detentions• 2 – 5 in-school suspensions
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Classroom Functioning
From three points in time(11/03 – 06/04)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Classroom Functioning
From three points in time(11/03 – 06/04)
Question: Student Completes Assignments
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Strengths Sustained at Six Months
(11/03 – 06/04)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
(11/03 – 06/04)Question: BEHAVIORAL: Pays attention to directions
14
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Strength Sustained at Six Months
(11/03 – 06/04)Works independently
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Need Becomes Strength at Six Months
(11/03 – 06/04)Has enough to do (age-appropriate activities)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
Ongoing Needs/Six Months(11/03 – 06/04)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
Ongoing Needs/Six Months(11/03 – 06/04)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
Academic Performance
• Carlos experienced considerable academic improvement one year from first data point.
• What trend is seen in academic performance from baseline to 5th data point?
• At fourteen months, Carlos has had no detentions, suspensions or expulsions.
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Classroom Functioning From five points in time
(11/03 – 2/05)
15
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Classroom Functioning From five points in time
(11/03 – 02/05)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Classroom Functioning From five points in time
(11/03 – 02/05)Question: Student Completes Assignments
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Strength Sustained 2nd Year
(11/03 – 02/05)Question: BEHAVIORAL: Works independently
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
Ongoing Needs 2nd Year(11/03 – 02/05)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
Ongoing Needs 2nd Year(11/03 – 02/05)Question: EMOTIONAL FUNCTIONING: Responds
like other youth to emotional situations
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Strength Sustained 2nd Year
(11/03 – 02/05)Question: BEHAVIORAL: Works independently
16
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Strengths Gained 2nd Year
(11/03 – 02/05)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Strengths Gained 2nd Year
(11/03 – 02/05)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Need Becomes Strength 2nd Year
(11/03 – 02/05)Question: SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS: Is accepted by other children
Challenges and Next Steps:
Wider accessTechnology RefinementFidelity Measurements (used by teams)
Facilitator Practice PatternsTraining refinement (data-based decision-making)
For a complete report on the 2-year Full Evaluation of Wraparound (FEW) pilot, see Appendix K (pages 127-152) of
FY04 Progress Report of the Illinois PBIS Project
at
www.ebdnetwork-il.org
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Supports and Interventions cont.
Three Months• Managing anger is a significant issue for Carlos.
He has been working with Youth in Crisis to develop effective coping skills.
Six Months• Youth in Crisis was an existing school program
and not tailored specific enough to Carlos. The team will examine interventions better suited to meet his individual needs. (What data offers ideas for tailoring interventions to achieve this outcome with Carols?
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Supports and Interventions cont.
Three Months• Carlos’ therapist is locating summer programs
with fun physical activities to help Carlos control his weight and spend less time exposed to domestic problems at home. (Change in use of MH personnel)
Six Months• The team has recommended an outdoor
summer job program organized by the community police department.
17
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Supports and Interventions cont.
Three Months• Natural supports are being explored through the
family’s church.Six Months• Carlos has re-established a relationship with his
paternal grand-father and will visit his grandparents in Mexico. Mom supports grandfather in becoming a positive male role model, staying connected by letters and phone.
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Supports and Interventions cont.
Three Months• Mom is concerned with Carlos’
aggressive outbursts at home, especially toward his sister
Six Months• The team assisted mom with developing
a safety plan for the family at home.
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.
Supports and Interventions
Three Months• Carlos performs better in school with fewer
teachers. Carlos was moved to a classroom that offered one teacher for all subjects and improved his academics.
Six Months• Ratings in academics were slightly lower by the
3rd data? It was reported he was receiving less one to one support from his teacher.
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Supports and Interventions cont.
Three Months• Relationships have a strong impact on Carlos.
(What data indicates this as a strength?• Carlos is attending a social skills group to improve
his relationships with peers.(Is it effective?)Six months• Carlos can demonstrate positive interactions with
peers when he feels respected by the adult providing supervision. (How can this data be used?)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Supports and Interventions cont.
Fourteen Months• Safe Schools social worker began making home
visits (Why is this important?)• Mom has noticed Carlos has improved
relationship with sister. (What does this change suggest for Carlos?)
• Carlos respite worker who has gottenhim focused on better eating habits and exercise (How does this help Carlos?)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Supports and Interventions cont.
Fourteen Months• The team realized home-based services were
essential. (How does this support Best Practice ?)
• Carlos is failing some classes this quarter for not completing homework. However, he refuses to participate in the homework club. (How can the team assist Carlos with improving school performance?)
18
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Supports and Interventions cont.
Fourteen Months• Carlos continues having difficulty
controlling his anger but can identify his role in reacting to situations (How did the team address medication issues?)
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Youth Satisfaction Measures
(11/03 – 02/05
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Student Disposition at
5th Data Point
Issues attained to satisfaction of team:• Attendance• Domestic Violence• Exhausted Resources• Medical Needs
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Student Disposition at
5th Data Point
Issues partially attained or resolved:• Child’s Mental Health• Parent’s Mental Health• Financial Hardship• Academic Performance• Isolation• Parent Child Relationship
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Student Disposition at
5th Data Point
Issues partially attained or resolved:• Emotional Needs• Peer Relationships• Social Skills• Multiple Agencies• Family Supports
Wraparound Case Study “Carlos” cont.Ongoing Supports/2nd Year
• Youth Mentor• Family Counseling• Parent Counseling• Parent Supports• Social Skills Assistance