Support Systems for Intense Behaviors: Conducting a School-wide N eeds A ssessment

1. Support Systems for Intense Behaviors: Conducting a School-wide Needs Assessment Lori Newcomer, Ph.D. University of Missouri February 2013

2. Today’s Goals • Identify key features of multi-tiered systems of behavior support • Review self-assessment and gap analysis process

3. The Challenge • Clinic based interventions show rather large effect size; similar outcomes less prevalent in school settings. • Build capacity to support implementation of research- based interventions for students who require intensive support. • Implementation requires organizational structures that facilitate effective teaming, data driven decision processes, and evaluation. • Often a discrepancy exists between key system features that support intensive interventions and current status

4. Districts and schools are increasingly building capacity to implement prevention-based strategies to support positive student social behavior and address problem behavior. To build this capacity, schools are using a multi-tiered continuum model that was first developed for use in public health systems (Walker et al. 1996).

5. Prevention as an outcome Primary Prevention seeks to prevent harm Secondary Prevention seeks to reverse harm Tertiary Prevention seeks to reduce harm Walker & Sprague, 2002

6. Guiding principles of multi-tier systems Provide all students with universal supports Screen students to determine needed services Deliver a continuum of services matched to the level of support indicated by screening and assessment. (Horner, Sugai, Todd, & Lewis-Palmer, 2005; Lane & Menzies, 2003; Nelson, Martella, & Marchand-Martella, 2002; Sprick, Sprick, & Garrison, 1992)

7. Conceptualizing the Framework Tertiary Prevention (Tier 3) ≈5% Individualized intervention(s) of increased intensity for students who show minimal response to secondary prevention Secondary Prevention (Tier 2) Evidence-based intervention(s) of moderate intensity that address the learning or behavior challenge of most at-risk students ≈15% Primary Prevention (Tier I) High-quality core instruction that meets the needs of most students ≈80% of Students

8. Positive Behavior Support • Addresses function of behavior to enhance needs of individuals and specific support strategies • Prevents problem behavior through environmental redesign • Provides active instruction of desired behaviors • Organizes consequences that promote desired behavior, minimizes rewards for problem behavior, and provides consequences for problem behavior Carr et al., 2002

9. Context Matters! Successful individual student behavior support is linked to host environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, durable, salable, & logical for all students (Zins & Ponti, 1990)

10. School-wide-PBIS A systems approach to establish the social culture and individualized behavior supports to create a safe, effective learning environment for all students (Colvin, Kame’enui & Sugai, 1993; Sprick, Sprick & Garrison, 1992; Walker et al., 1996)

11. Multiple Systems Perspective

12. Critical School-wide PBIS Elements • Measurable academic and social behavior outcomes • Grounded in data-based decision making • Evidence-based interventions • Operational procedures, processes, and administrative systems designed to increase accuracy and durability of practice implementation • (Sugai & Horner, 2002; Sugai, Horner, McIntosh., 2008)

13. Why conduct a needs assessment • Asystematic process for determining and addressing needs, or "gaps" between current conditions and requisite conditions. • The discrepancy between the current condition and requisite condition is used to guide action planning • Purpose is to direct resources to establish and strengthen the implementation of strategic system features that are prerequisites to the ability to develop and effectively deliver intensive interventions that are driven by data.

14. Needs Assessment 14

15. Needs Assessment 15

16. Self-Assessment & Gap Analysis • Two components • Self-assessment questionnaire • Gap analysis interview

17. Self-Assessment & Gap Analysis Initial Self-Assessment • Appraise status of multi-tier supports and organizational structures necessary to develop and deliver intensive interventions that are driven by data Gap Analysis • Strategic Features • Current Status • Deficiencies (gaps) • Guiding thoughts • Future action

18. Self-assessment Completed by team (administrator, counselor, special educator, general educator, Title I teacher, reading specialist, other personnel associated with school discipline data and intervention efforts). Team response can reveal gaps between written policy and actual practice. 18

19. Tier 1 Self AssessmentStrategic Features • School uses a school-wide approach to reinforce appropriate social behavior (e.g. SWPBIS, BEST, Character Education). • Expectations and routines are defined and explicitly taught for all settings. • Students are reinforced for following rules and expectations. • There are clear, written procedures that lay out the process for handling both major and minor discipline incidents, including crisis situations.

20. Staff are informed and consistent about which behaviors are staff/classroom managed and which behaviors are handled by office or administrators • A data system is used to collect and analyze office referral data; data are used to guide decisions regarding behavior instruction, interventions and prevention efforts • Data reflect that most students (> 80%) receive less than 1 office referral per year.

21. Tier 2 Self AssessmentStrategic Features • Teams identify the percentage of students receiving Tier 2/Targeted intervention supports. • A Behavior Support Team exists to receive requests for assistance, develop support plans, and monitor intervention results • Data are used to identify students who may need Tier 2 and 3 supports • Personnel are designated to coordinate targeted and intensive intervention across all students.

22. A consistent decision process to match students with appropriate Tier 2 intervention. • A procedure to track all students on targeted and intensive interventions. • All Tier 2 strategies are assessed for critical intervention components and adhere to guidelines (see Tier 2 Intervention and Component analysis)

23. 23

25. Tier 3 Self AssessmentStrategic Features • Students are appropriately identified and provided with intensive supports. • A team exists that builds and implements individual behavior support plans. • Team members have sufficient formal training in Functional Assessment and evidence-based interventions.

26. The school/district has written procedures on how to conduct a Functional Assessment • Data are used to monitor fidelity of implementation of individual intensive supports • Coaching or some other form of support is available to teachers to assist them in implementing intensive interventions as designed.

27. Gap Analysis • Clarifying questions listed to help discern how current practices differ from full implementation of strategic features. • Questions designed to identify deficiencies in training, resource allocation, planning, or accurate implementation related to the strategic feature. • Team determines what needs to be in place to close the gap. • Needs are prioritized and translated into action statements.

28. Desired Status Current Status “Gap” Action Items

29. ExampleData Systems Across Tiers Tier 1

30. ExampleData Systems Across Tiers Tier 2

31. ExampleData Systems Across Tiers Tier 3

32. Based on responses to items 1 through 6, does the school have the foundations of primary prevention in place? • Yes Continue with follow-up interview to assess current level of Tier 2 supports • No Provide contact information for state or regional PBIS Coordinator to request information on training and technical assistance http://pbis.org/links/pbis_network/default.aspx

33. Common gaps in Tier 2 systems • Data-based decision rules to identify students who need Tier 2 support have not been identified. • Tier 2 interventions often lack the critical components of effective intervention strategies. • Absence of adequate progress monitoring • Absence of fidelity measures

34. Final Thoughts Efficient systems at the Tier 1 and Tier 2 level enhance schools’ ability to effectively provide intensive behavioral support for the most challenging students. Build Tier 3 systems on adequate Tier 1 and Tier 2 systems The devil is in the details 34

35. References • Carr, E.,G., Dunlap, G., Horner, R.H., Koegel, R.L., Turnbull, A.P., Sailor, W., et al. (2002). Positive behavior support: Evolution of an applied science. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 4(1), 4-16. • Colvin, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Sugai, G. (1993). Reconceptualizing behavior management and schoolwide discipline in general education. Education and Treatment of Children,16, 361-381. • Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Todd, A. W., & Lewis-Palmer, T. (2005). School-wide positive behavior support. Individualized supports for students with problem behaviors: Designing positive behavior plans, 359-390. • Lane, Kathleen L., and Holly M. Menzies (2003). The effects of a school-based primary intervention program: Preliminary outcomes. Preventing School Failure 47.1 (2003): 26-32. 35

36. References • Nelson, J. Ron, Ronald M. Martella, and Nancy Marchand-Martella (2002). "Maximizing Student Learning The Effects of a Comprehensive School-Based Program for Preventing Problem Behaviors." Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 10.3 (2002): 136-148. • Sprick, R., Sprick, M., & Garrison, M. (1992). Foundations: Developing positive school-wide discipline policies. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. • Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 24(1-2), 23-50. • Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., & McIntosh, K. (2008). Best practices in developing a broad-scale system of support for school-wide positive behavior support. Best practices in school psychology V, 3, 765-780. 36

37. References • Walker, H. M., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Bullis, M., Sprague, J. R., Bricker, D., & Kaufman, M. J. (1996). Integrated approaches to preventing antisocial behavior patterns among school-age children and youth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4(4), 194-209. • Zins, J. E., & Ponti, C. R. (1990). Strategies to facilitate the implementation, organization, and operation of system-wide consultation programs. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 1(3), 205-218. • Walker, H.M., & Sprague, J. (2002). Intervention strategies for diverting at-risk children and youth from destructive outcomes. Report on Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in Youth, 1, 5-8, 18-19. 37

38. Disclaimer This webinar was produced under the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or polices of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this website is intended or should be inferred.

39. Lori Newcomer, Ph.D. E-Mail: NewcomerL@missouri.edu University of Missouri, 16 Hill Hall Columbia, MO 65211 General Information: 800-356-2735 Website: www.intensiveintervention.org 39

40. While permission to redistribute this webinar is not necessary, the citation should be: National Center on Intensive Intervention. (2013). Support Systems for Intense Behaviors: Conducting a School-wide Needs Assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Intensive Intervention.

41. Thank you for participating in this NCII Webinar! We are very interested in your experience, and would like to ensure future Webinars are presented effectively. Please take a moment to click the link below and fill out this survey—it will take you 5 minutes! https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/R9GN2QY Your browser will be re-routed to this link after the presentation.