1. Rose Iovannone, Ph.D., BCBA-D iovannone@usf.edu
Evaluating the Technical Adequacy of FBAs and BIPs: How are Schools Doing?
Rose Iovannone, Ph.D., BCBA-D

2. Objectives Participants will:
Describe the purpose of the Technical Adequacy evaluation tool
Apply a scoring rubric to case examples
Discuss further use of the evaluation in their settings

3. Advance Organizer Essential Features of Tier 3 Behavior (FBA/BIPs)
Review of the Technical Adequacy Evaluation Tool and Rubric
Practice scoring
Discussion of how to use the tool in the future

4. Context for FBAs/BIPs FBA/BIP—substantial evidence base
Behavior ‘gold’ standard for nearly 20 years
Systemic and skill issues impeding implementation
Wealth of literature providing evidence-basis
BUT, does not address the contextual fit of FBA in school culture (Scott & Kamps, 2007)
Educators’ willingness and ability to engage in process
Level and intensity of FBA necessary to result in improvements
Conceptually, FBA seen as tool for use in multi-tiered system of supports rather than separate process
If part of process, may change traditional definition of what and who is involved in FBA

5. Examples of the Problem
Forms vs. skills
“Let’s create new forms” common solution
Paperwork vs. implementation
General vs. individualized
Training vs. coaching
Expert vs. collaborative team model
Separate silos vs. integrated, consistent process
Legalities vs. problem-solving

6. The Top Twelve List of Things Needed at Tier 3/Individualized Behavior Supports (Iovannone & Kincaid, in prep.)
Multiple levels of Tier 3
Consistent, fluent process with problem solving-process framework
Collaborative teaming
Problem identification
Data collection, simplified
Linking hypothesis to the FBA
Linking BIP to hypothesis
Multi-component behavior intervention plan matched to classroom context
Task-analyzed strategies
Teacher and classroom coaching/support
Array of outcome measures (child-specific, teacher fidelity, social validity, alliance, fidelity of process, technical adequacy of products)
Maintenance (beyond “warranty”)

7. 1. Multiple Levels of Tier 3 FBA
Three levels of Tier 3
Match the level of need to the student
Level 1: Classroom consultation (Facilitator and teacher)
Brief PTR
ERASE (Terry Scott)
Guess and Check (Cindy Anderson)
Level 2: Comprehensive support (e.g., PTR; team-based process)
Level 3: Wrap around with person-centered planning
Tier 3 most effective if Tiers 1 and 2 implemented with fidelity

8. 2. Consistent Tier 3 Process
Standardized process for ALL students requiring FBAs/BIPs
Incorporates following features:
Identifying students needing Tier 3
Determining level of FBA support necessary to answer referral concern
Decision points
Timelines between FBA, BIP, Support, Follow-up
Data tracking system
Coaching and fidelity
Flowchart

9. 2. Consistent Tier 3 Process—Problem Solving Process
DEFINE THE PROBLEM
What is the behavior of concern? What do we want to see less of? What do we want the student to do more of?
PROBLEM ANALYSIS
Functional Behavior Assessment Hypothesis
EVALUATE
Is the plan effective? What are the next steps?
DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT PLAN
Behavior strategies linked to hypothesis; coaching/support

10. 3. Collaborative Teaming
Discontinue expert model – need proficient facilitator to guide team
Three levels of knowledge represented on teams
Knowledge of student
Knowledge of ABA principles
Knowledge of district/campus context
Consensus process established

11. 4. Problem Identification
Primary problem with many ineffective FBA/BIPs is that the problem is not clearly identified:
Too general
Not defined
Baseline data confirming problem absent
Often, several behaviors listed and unclear which behavior was the focus of the FBA
Not uncommon to see behaviors of concern “change” throughout one FBA/BIP
Need to identify both the replacement behavior to increase as well as problem behavior to decrease—consider broad categories including academic, social, behavior

12. 5. Simplify Data Collection
Progress monitoring must be:
Feasible
Reliable
Sensitive to change
Flexible to match individual
Standardized (comparable across schools/students/districts)
Direct Behavior Ratings (DBRs) offer a solution
Research supports their effectiveness (see Chafouleas, Riley-Tillman)
LEAP (Phil Strain)
Individualized Behavior Rating Scale (IBRST) used in PTR (Iovannone et al., in press).

13. Case Study- Mike: Behavior Rating Scale
Screaming
9+ times
7-8 times
5-6 times
3-4 times
0-2 times 5 4 3 2 1
Hitting
8+ times
6-7 times
4-5 times
2-3 times
0-1 times
Expressing Frustration
40%+
30-40%
20-30%
10-20%
0-10%
Transition to Non-preferred
Whimper or squeal
Louder than indoor voice
Outdoor play voice
Louder than outdoor play
Ear penetrating
01/15

14. BRS Psychometrics (Iovannone, Greebaum, Wang, Kincaid, & Dunlap, in press)
Kappa coefficients of:
Problem Behavior 1 (n = 105): .82
Problem Behavior 2 (n = 90) : .77
Appropriate Behavior 1 (n = 103): .65
Appropriate Behavior 2 (n = 56): .76

15. Other Uses of BRS Systemic data tracking method for Tier 3
Sample system created by:
Cindy Anderson
School district in Florida

16. 6. Linking the Hypothesis to the FBA
Primary reason FBA is conducted
Hypothesis should be multi-component
When (antecedents) these contextual/environmental events are present…….
It is highly predicted that the behavior identified as the problem and focus of the FBA happens
As a result, the student:
Gets out of or away from activities, people, tangibles, sensory input, pain
Gets activities, people, tangibles, sensory input, pain attenuation
Confirmed by the consequences (what others do in response to the behavior) that typically occur
Method of organizing information
Competing behavior pathway
PTR Assessment Organization

17. Step 3: Case Study – Mike Assessment Summary Table of Problem Behavior
Prevention Data
Teach Data
Reinforce Data
Non-preferred task
Reading, Math
Other students upset/mad
Teacher attending to others
Transition
Preferred to
non-preferred
Change in schedule
Denied item, told no, or to
fix something
Gain attention
Peers, adults
Delay
Access to items
Redirected
Reprimanded
Calm/soothe
Personal space
Later must
complete task
Loss of or delay in
reinforcement
Screaming, Hitting

18. Step 3: Case Study – Mike Assessment of Appropriate Behavior
Prevention Data
Teach Data
Reinforce Data
Independent work
One-on-one
attention
Specials
Peer interaction
Getting attention
Raising hand
Sharing attention
Conversation skills
Taking turns
Waiting
Self-management
Asking for break
Expressing emotions
Treasure box
Movie
Attention
Helping teacher
Going to media
center
Going outside
Walk
Food
Prosocial

19. Mike’s Hypotheses When…. he will As a result… Inappropriate
Mike is (a) asked to complete non-preferred tasks (Reading, Math), stop a preferred activity or transition to a non-preferred activity, or fix an error, or
(b) when the teacher is attending to other students,
scream and hit.
Mike is able to (a) delay the transition or non-preferred activity and (b) get attention from teachers and peers
Mike is (a) asked to a complete non-preferred task (Reading, Math), stop a preferred activity or transition to a non-preferred activity, or fix an error, or
(a) express his frustration appropriately.
(b) Transition from preferred to non-preferred tasks
Inappropriate
Appropriate 19

20. 7. Linking the Hypothesis to the BIP
Other primary purpose of conducting FBA
STOP generating list of general strategies
Each component of hypothesis generates an intervention
Antecedents modified and made irrelevant
Replacement behavior so that problem behavior is ineffective
Functional equivalent reinforcer so the problem behavior is inefficient

21. 8. Multi-Component Interventions Matched to Classroom Context
Multi-component interventions include prevention, teaching and reinforcement strategies
Team/Teacher(s) select strategies that are
feasible
effective
likely be implemented

23. 9. Task Analyzed Strategies
Forgotten art
Can’t just say “give choices”, “reinforce appropriate behavior”, etc., “student will comply”
Breaking down the interventions into sequence of steps
Allows teaching with precision
Allows assessment of teacher capacity
Provides foundation for training and for fidelity

24. Specific Strategy Steps
Teach Strategies
Specific Strategy Steps
Replacement Behavior
Mike will be taught to use his voice output device to express his need to calm down.
Steps:
Mike’s device will be programmed to say “I need to calm down.”
Prior to transitioning to a non-preferred activity or at the end of a preferred activity, say “If you start to get mad, you can choose to calm down.”
As soon as Mike starts to get upset, prompt him to use his device (hierarchy—hand-over-hand, gesture, verbal).
Once Mike communicates “I need to calm down”, present him with the choice board of calming strategies and ask him, “What do you want?”
As soon as he is calm, praise him (e.g., “You made a good choice.”.
Allow Mike to engage in his choice until he is calm for 1-minute.
If Mike does not want to leave his choice, then start becoming animated with students in the non-preferred activity.

25. Paris—Step 4: PTR Intervention
Prevent Strategies
Specific Strategy steps
Environmental Support
Paris will be provided a visual checklist that will list her tasks needing to be completed during independent work time. Paris will check off (a) completion, and (b) neatness.
Before independent work time, the teacher will give Paris a choice of vis-à-vis color pen to write down her tasks
The teacher will review “Complete” and “Neat” tasks with Paris and how Paris will self-evaluate.
The teacher and Paris will determine the number of checks Paris will need to get her choice reinforcer activity.
When Paris thinks she is finished, she will take her pen and check whether each task is complete and neat.
Paris will make eye contact with the teacher and raise her hand.
The teacher will indicate that she has seen her hand (popsicle stick) and either go over immediately or indicate to Paris to ‘wait’.
The teacher will provide Paris feedback on her self-evaluations of completeness and neatness, and if the teacher agrees with the feedback, release Paris to a chosen reinforcer activity

28. Specific Strategy Steps
Teach Strategies
Specific Strategy Steps
Replacement Behavior
Replacement behavior: Raising hand to ask for help or attention
Paris will be taught how and when to raise her hand.
A. Independent Work Time
When Paris requires assistance or attention, she will first make eye contact with her teacher—no sounds/words will come from Paris.
After eye contact, she raises her hand—making no noises/sounds. She keeps her hand in the air, straight.
The teacher indicates how long it will be before she can get to Paris (no more than 2 minutes should elapse).
B. Small Group Instruction
When Paris wants is answering a question or wants to make a comment, she will raise her hand straight up in the air. No words will be spoken.
Paris will wait until the teacher either (a) calls on her, or (b) indicates her hand raising with a popsicle stick

29. Specific Strategy Steps
Teach Strategies
Specific Strategy Steps
Self-Management
Paris will be taught to monitor her hand-raising behaviors.
1. A bar chart will be given to Paris to keep in a folder.
2. As Paris raises her hand and earns popsicle sticks, she will indicate on the graph the number of times she raises her hand each day.
3. A daily goal for hand raising behaviors will be set and reviewed.
5. A verbal/gestural prompt can be provided to remind Paris to graph her hand raising behaviors.

31. Specific Strategy Steps
Reinforce Strategies
Specific Strategy Steps
Replacement Behavior: Raising Hand
1. When Paris raises her hand, the teacher will either recognize Paris and have her ask her question, answer a question, or make her comment.
2. If the teacher is teaching a group, she will say, “Wait. Watch the clock second hand go around ___ time, and I’ll get your question.”
3. Each time Paris raises her hand, she will get a popsicle stick and verbal praise or positive gesture from the teacher.
4. The teacher will wear an apron (and Paris’ job will be to remind her to wear the apron). Popsicle sticks will be kept in one pocket. Each time Paris raises her hand and the teacher is unable to get to Paris or have her make a comment, the teacher will move one popsicle stick out of the holding pocket over to another pocket in which the ‘earned’ popsicle sticks will be kept.
5. At the end of instructional blocks, the teacher will have Paris count her popsicle sticks and arrange for Paris to trade them for orange cones (magnets) to be put on the board. Each 5 popsicle sticks will earn Paris a cone.

32. Specific Strategy Steps
Reinforce Strategies
Specific Strategy Steps
Group Contingency
1. For each 5 popsicle sticks earned, an orange cone symbol will be placed on the white board visible for the entire class.
2. After 5 cones get on the board (indicating 25 hand raises), the entire class will earn free time at the end of the day. They can go outside, see a movie, go to the library or play games.
3. The class will be prompted to praise Paris for helping them earn free time.
Self-Management
1. At the end of the day, Paris will record the number of popsicle sticks she earned for her hand raising behavior.
2. If she meets her goal (25), a good note will go home to her grandmother.
Environmental Support (completing task)
1. After Paris raises her hand indicating her work is completed and her checklist is filled in, the teacher will walk over to Paris’ desk.
2. The teacher will praise Paris for completing her checklist.
3. The teacher will provide feedback on Paris’ self-evaluation.
4. If Paris meets her goal, she will be praised and released to her selected reinforcing activity.
5. If Paris did not meet her goal, the teacher will verbally praise her for trying and have Paris say how she could meet her goal the next day.

33. Specific Strategy Steps
Reinforce Strategies
Specific Strategy Steps
Discontinue Reinforcement of Problem Behavior
If Paris calls out, the teacher will:
If Paris is looking at the teacher, the teacher will hold up a popsicle stick as a visual cue to remind her of her hand raising behavior. No verbal redirects will be given.
If Paris is not looking at the teacher, the teacher will say “Paris” in a flat affect. When Paris looks at the teacher, the teacher will hold up a popsicle stick as a cue.
The popsicle stick being held up moves into the ‘oops I forgot’ apron pocket. Initially, Paris will be allowed 10 oops popsicle sticks before they are subtracted from her total earned.
If during the next opportunity, Paris raises her hand unprompted after getting the oops stick, the teacher will move the oops stick into the ‘earned’ popsicle pocket.

34. Case Study Jeff: PTR Intervention Plan
Prevent Strategies
Description
Choice-Making
Using a choice matrix, decide upon the choice that will be offered to Jeff each day with his writing assignment. The following choices will be rotated: (a) Within—writing tool to use (pen/pencil), color notebook paper, color of eraser, topic; (b) Who—peer for writing partner; (c) Where—Robin’s room, round table, desk; (d) When—part now, part later, whole task now
Steps:
Right before giving the writing assignment to Jeff, decide upon the choice to be offered.
Once the choice is determined, present it to Jeff by saying, “What do you want to use for writing today? The pen or the pencil?”
Praise Jeff for making the choice—”Thank you for making a choice.” and honor the choice

35. Jeff—Intervention Plan
Prevent Strategies
Description
Environmental Support
Visual Timer: Set a visual timer for the amount of time agreed upon with Jeff to complete the writing assignment.
Steps:
Discuss the goal for completing the writing assignment. Say, “I think you can complete the assignment in ___ minutes. What do you think?”
Set the timer by saying, “Jeff, let’s see if you can beat the timer. Today, you have ___ minutes (time from step 1) to complete the writing. Ready, set, go.”

36. Jeff—Intervention Plan
Teach Strategies
Description
Pro-academic Replacement Behavior—Academic Engagement
Jeff will be taught how to remain engaged on a writing assignment. Engagement is defined as: working on a task without disrupting by raising hand to speak, keeping pencil upright, and letting neighbors work.
Steps:
Divide Jeff’s writing task into 3 major sections—starter, details, conclusion
Tell Jeff that for each section completed, he earns a “dot” that he should place in the envelope hanging at the side of his desk.
Inform him that he can use the dots later to get out of work and to get special rewards for himself and the rest of the class.
Review his self-management checklist/dot total sheet with Jeff. Review each section of the writing assignment (step 1), his goal (time for completion), and academic engaged behaviors.
On Monday, a weekly goal should be discussed and set.

37. Jeff—Intervention Plan
Reinforce Strategies
Description
Reinforce Pro-academic Replacement Behavior—Academic Engagement
Jeff will be reinforced for academic engagement and meeting his daily goal with allowable/earned escape represented by the dots. Jeff can use his dots to get out of doing work/problems during independent work times.
Steps:
At the end of the writing period or when Jeff completes his writing (whichever event occurs first), review Jeff’s self-management checklist.
For each behavior on the checklist, discuss with Jeff whether he performed the activity. If yes, place a check in the box. If no, place an “x” in the box. For each check, Jeff should be given a dot. When reviewing, say, “Jeff, did you write a starter sentence?”… Did you stay on task? Did you meet your goal?” When giving dots, say “Jeff, how many checks do you have today? How many dots do you earn?”
Jeff uses dots by sticking it over a problem/question he doesn’t want to do and showing the teacher when he uses a dot. He can escape as long as he has dots in his envelope.
If Jeff uses a dot to get out of work, immediately say “You used a dot to get out of ____. You earned it!”
If Jeff meets his weekly goal, he can go to his brother’s kindergarten class and read a book to them.

38. Jeff—Intervention Plan
Reinforce Strategies
Description
Group Contingency (Modified)
If Jeff meets his daily (time) goal for completing his writing assignment within the time agreed upon, the class earns a bonus letter toward the mystery reinforcer of the week. When Jeff earns the class this letter, the class provides attention to Jeff by thanking him and celebrating (clapping hands, saying “Yeah”.
Steps:
After reviewing Jeff’s self-management sheet, ask him, “Did you meet your goal today?”
If yes, “You did meet your goal. Let’s tell the class they’ve earned a letter for the mystery reinforcer.”
Tell the class, “Jeff met his goal today. We get another letter on the board.”
Prompt the class to thank Jeff (if they haven’t done so spontaneously).
If no, “You worked hard and tried. You’ll do it tomorrow!”

41. 10. Teacher and Classroom Coaching, Support
Do not assume teacher/team knows how to implement plan
Schedule 30 minutes to review plan and go over steps
Problem-solve if teacher has difficulties
Modify plan
Choose different intervention
Teach the student the plan

42. Case Study: Sample Coaching Checklist for Mike

43. 11. Array of outcome measures (child-specific, teacher fidelity, social validity, alliance, fidelity of process, technical adequacy of products)
Individualized Behavior Rating Scale
Fidelity scores
Social validity- Did teacher like the process, are they likely to use strategies, would they do it again, etc.?
Alliance—Did they like you? Did they feel like you respected their input? Did you do a competent job as a consultant?

44. PTR Plan Self-Assessment Example for Mike
Intervention Type
Fidelity
Impact
1 = none; 5 = great
Environmental Support
Mini schedule present and available
Mini schedule reviewed prior to activity
Mike prompted to cross off items as completed
Y/N/NA
Replacement Behavior—Functional
Voice output device present and available
Prompted Mike to use voice output device to request, “I need to calm down”
Prompted Mike to choose his calm down activity
Reinforce Replacement Behavior—Functional
Teacher responded to Mike’s request for “I need to calm down” with verbal praise (flat affect)
Teacher granted Mike his choice and provided verbal praise (flat affect)

45. 12. Maintenance (beyond warranty)
Dynamic process-not static
Decision making process based on data
Determine levels of support needed, fading, shaping, generalizing, extending, etc.

46. Steps for Evaluating Outcomes
Make sure you have both fidelity measures (self and/or observation scores) AND student outcomes (Behavior Rating Scale measures)
Decision rules
What constitutes adequate fidelity? 80%, 70%, something else?
What constitutes adequate student progress? (e.g., 3 or more consecutive ratings at or above goal line?)

47. Primary Decisions
If Fidelity scores are inadequate, determine the reasons (intervention too difficult, not feasible, not described adequately….)
Retrain/coach the teacher/implementer
Modify the interventions so that they are feasible, simpler
Select different interventions that match the hypothesis
Student outcomes (decision contingent upon outcome trend)
Maintain intervention
Intensify intervention
Modify intervention
Fade intervention components
Shape behavior outcomes to become closer approximations of desired behavior
Expand the intervention (additional people, additional settings or routines)
Conduct another FBA if hypothesis is suspect, team has new data, or context has changed

48. POSITIVE BEHAVIOR CHANGE
BRS data indicate positive trends toward desired goals
Good fidelity implementation scores
Next Steps
Extension
Extend the scope of the BIP
Generalization Settings
Additional routines
Multiple classes
Across entire day
Generalization
Interventionists
School staff
Multiple service providers
Family
Shaping
Increase desired goal responses
Fading Reinforcers
Reduce type and/or amount of reinforcement provided
Delayed Gratification
Increase time intervals within reinforcement schedule
Intermittent Schedule
Provide reinforcers at irregular intervals
Self-Management
Shift control for behavior monitoring from teacher to student

49. Increase in Problem Behavior
BRS data indicate a trend/movement away from desired goals
FBA Variables
Appropriate function determined?
Interventions match function?
Appropriate replacement behavior
determined and skills taught?
Low Fidelity Variables
Strategies implemented as designed?
Strategies implemented daily?
All setting events addressed?
Reinforcers provided as designated?
Training and Technical Assistance
Additional training outside classroom
Modeling of strategies with student
Increase technical assistance in classroom (observation/feedback)
BIP Variables:
Interventions difficult to implement?
Insufficient planning/prep time?
Insufficient time to implement?
Lack of resources?
BIP Strategies
Modify current interventions
Select alternative strategies
Determine appropriate reinforcers
Reinforcers readily available

50. Evaluating the Technical Adequacy of FBAs and BIPs

51. Current Status of FBA/BIP Implementation in Schools (Scott & Kamps, 2007)
Although FBA in special education law since 1997, no systematic policies adopted at federal level
No guidance on key components (who should do FBAs, what features must be included, etc.)
Three primary flaws in school-setting use (Scott, Liaupsin, Nelson, & McIntyre, 2005).
Often used as reactive process
Loses power of prevention in developing interventions addressing minor behaviors before they get serious
“Expert” model overlooks valuable input gained from persons with whom student consistently interacts
Rigid, rigorous procedures not feasible in public school settings
In response, schools have “implemented a variety of inexact practices and procedures that have been loosely labeled as FBA, the majority of which are not tied to any solid evidence base. (Scott, Anderson, & Spaulding, 2008)

52. Technical Adequacy Research
Recent studies conducted exploring technical adequacy of FBAs
Blood, E., & Neel, R. S. (2007). From FBA to implementation: A look at what is actually being delivered. Education and Treatment of Children, 30,
Evaluated FBAs/BIPs of 43 students in self-contained classrooms for EBD (K-12) in one school district in western US
Reviewed FBAs/BIPs for inclusion of essential components (listed in article)
Interviewed 6 EBD teachers about use of FBA/BIPs in planning and developing programs (e.g., “what is included on the plan?”, “How is plan implemented?” “How do you show progress?”
Van Acker, R., Boreson, L., Gable, R. A., & Potterton, T. (2005). Are we on the right course? Lessons learned about current FBA/BIP practices in schools. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14,
71 completed FBA/BIPs submitted for review from school districts across midwest state
Rating scale developed for analysis (see article for scale)

53. Some Results of Technical Adequacy Research
Teaming issues:
Teacher and other input not included
Identifying behaviors
Target behaviors were missing or inadequately defined
Match of FBA to Hypothesis
Attempt to assign one function/hypothesis to group of target behaviors (e.g., treated all behaviors as one behavior—collected data and developed interventions)
Hypothesis statements missing or inadequate
Behavior intervention plan development
Behavior strategies not linked with hypothesis statement(s)
Predominant type of BIP “hierarchical stock list of possible positive and negative consequences” that follow any problem behavior.
Replacement behaviors not included
Van Acker—46% FBA/BIPs reviewed only included aversive strategies

54. Some Results of Technical Adequacy Research
Follow-up
Lack of follow-up support for monitoring and evaluating plan including fidelity
No follow-through on next steps (promote and check maintenance and generalization of behavior change)
Blood interviews with teachers
None was able to identify behavior goals nor describe behavior intervention
Did not use FBA/BIPs in development of behavior interventions

55. Purpose of Our Tool
Determine the technical adequacy of FBA/BIPs and establish baseline
District
Campus/School
Individual
Second step in requesting Tier 3 technical assistance from Florida PBS/RTI:B Project (Interview of Tier 3 process first step)
Report generated to guide action planning

56. Development of Tool
Review of literature to identify essential components for adequate FBA/BIPs
Original measure included 24 items (FBA/BIP)
Edited to 20 items
Sent out to three national experts (Terry Scott, Cindy Anderson, Glen Dunlap) to review
Is the item essential?
Is the item worded clearly?
Final tool contains 18 items (9 FBA/9 BIP)
Scores range from 0-2 for each item.

57. Sample graphs/tables generated by tool

58. Sample Graphs—Baseline/post FBA

59. Sample Graphs BIP Baseline/Post

60. Sample Graph: Total FBA/BIP Baseline/Post

61. Sample Tables Baseline/Post

62. Sample Tables: Baseline/Post comparison

63. Practice time

64. Before practicing….
Review of tool items
Evaluation
Scoring guide

65. Practice Time Team up with others
Try scoring the sample completed FBA/BIP given to you with the evaluation tool
Come to consensus on the scores
Debrief
What did you like?
What did you dislike?
What was easy?
What was difficult?
What questions do you still have?

66. Evaluating Your District’s FBA/BIPs
Within your district team, evaluate the technical adequacy of your district’s FBA/BIPs brought to the training
Be ready to debrief
You do NOT need to tell anyone your scores
Discuss anything you learned or didn’t learn in evaluating technical adequacy
Use outcomes to start developing strategic action plan steps to achieve district goals.

67. Next Steps Action Planning
What will you be doing in your district to improve your FBA/BIPs?

68. PTR Publications PTR Manual Journal Articles
Dunlap, G., Iovannone, R., Kincaid, D., Wilson, K., Christiansen, K., Strain, P., & English, C., Prevent-Teach-Reinforce: The School-Based Model of Individualized Positive Behavior Support. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Journal Articles
Iovannone, R., Greenbaum, P., Wei, W., Kincaid, D., Dunlap, G., & Strain, P. (2009). Randomized controlled trial of a tertiary behavior intervention for students with problem behaviors: Preliminary outcomes. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 17,
Dunlap, G., Iovannone, R., Wilson, K., Strain, P., & Kincaid, D. (2010). Prevent-Teach-Reinforce: A standardized model of school-based behavioral intervention. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 9-22
Strain, P. S., Wilson, K., & Dunlap, G. (2011). Prevent-Teach-Reinforce: Addressing problem behaviors of students with autism in general education classroom. Behavior Disorders, 36,
Iovannone, R., Greenbaum, P., Wei, W., Kincaid, D., & Dunlap, G. (in press). Reliability of the Individualized Behavior Rating Scale-Strategy for Teachers (IBRS-ST): A Progress Monitoring Tool. Assessment for Effective Intervention.
Sears, K. M., Blair, K. S. C., Iovannone, R. & Crosland, K., (in press). Using the Prevent-Teach-Reinforce model with families of young children with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities.

69. Questions?