Presentation on theme: "Rose Iovannone, Ph.D., BCBA-D"— Presentation transcript:
1Rose Iovannone, Ph.D., BCBA-D email@example.com Evaluating the Technical Adequacy of FBAs and BIPs: How are Schools Doing?Rose Iovannone, Ph.D., BCBA-D
2Objectives Participants will: Describe the purpose of the Technical Adequacy evaluation toolApply a scoring rubric to case examplesDiscuss further use of the evaluation in their settings
3Advance Organizer Essential Features of Tier 3 Behavior (FBA/BIPs) Review of the Technical Adequacy Evaluation Tool and RubricPractice scoringDiscussion of how to use the tool in the future
4Context for FBAs/BIPs FBA/BIP—substantial evidence base Behavior ‘gold’ standard for nearly 20 yearsSystemic and skill issues impeding implementationWealth of literature providing evidence-basisBUT, does not address the contextual fit of FBA in school culture (Scott & Kamps, 2007)Educators’ willingness and ability to engage in processLevel and intensity of FBA necessary to result in improvementsConceptually, FBA seen as tool for use in multi-tiered system of supports rather than separate processIf part of process, may change traditional definition of what and who is involved in FBA
5Examples of the Problem Forms vs. skills“Let’s create new forms” common solutionPaperwork vs. implementationGeneral vs. individualizedTraining vs. coachingExpert vs. collaborative team modelSeparate silos vs. integrated, consistent processLegalities vs. problem-solving
6The Top Twelve List of Things Needed at Tier 3/Individualized Behavior Supports (Iovannone & Kincaid, in prep.)Multiple levels of Tier 3Consistent, fluent process with problem solving-process frameworkCollaborative teamingProblem identificationData collection, simplifiedLinking hypothesis to the FBALinking BIP to hypothesisMulti-component behavior intervention plan matched to classroom contextTask-analyzed strategiesTeacher and classroom coaching/supportArray of outcome measures (child-specific, teacher fidelity, social validity, alliance, fidelity of process, technical adequacy of products)Maintenance (beyond “warranty”)
71. Multiple Levels of Tier 3 FBA Three levels of Tier 3Match the level of need to the studentLevel 1: Classroom consultation (Facilitator and teacher)Brief PTRERASE (Terry Scott)Guess and Check (Cindy Anderson)Level 2: Comprehensive support (e.g., PTR; team-based process)Level 3: Wrap around with person-centered planningTier 3 most effective if Tiers 1 and 2 implemented with fidelity
82. Consistent Tier 3 Process Standardized process for ALL students requiring FBAs/BIPsIncorporates following features:Identifying students needing Tier 3Determining level of FBA support necessary to answer referral concernDecision pointsTimelines between FBA, BIP, Support, Follow-upData tracking systemCoaching and fidelityFlowchart
92. Consistent Tier 3 Process—Problem Solving Process DEFINE THE PROBLEMWhat is the behavior of concern? What do we want to see less of? What do we want the student to do more of?PROBLEM ANALYSISFunctional Behavior Assessment HypothesisEVALUATEIs the plan effective? What are the next steps?DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT PLANBehavior strategies linked to hypothesis; coaching/support
103. Collaborative Teaming Discontinue expert model – need proficient facilitator to guide teamThree levels of knowledge represented on teamsKnowledge of studentKnowledge of ABA principlesKnowledge of district/campus contextConsensus process established
114. Problem Identification Primary problem with many ineffective FBA/BIPs is that the problem is not clearly identified:Too generalNot definedBaseline data confirming problem absentOften, several behaviors listed and unclear which behavior was the focus of the FBANot uncommon to see behaviors of concern “change” throughout one FBA/BIPNeed to identify both the replacement behavior to increase as well as problem behavior to decrease—consider broad categories including academic, social, behavior
125. Simplify Data Collection Progress monitoring must be:FeasibleReliableSensitive to changeFlexible to match individualStandardized (comparable across schools/students/districts)Direct Behavior Ratings (DBRs) offer a solutionResearch supports their effectiveness (see Chafouleas, Riley-Tillman)LEAP (Phil Strain)Individualized Behavior Rating Scale (IBRST) used in PTR (Iovannone et al., in press).
13Case Study- Mike: Behavior Rating Scale Screaming9+ times7-8 times5-6 times3-4 times0-2 times54321Hitting8+ times6-7 times4-5 times2-3 times0-1 timesExpressing Frustration40%+30-40%20-30%10-20%0-10%Transition to Non-preferredWhimper or squealLouder than indoor voiceOutdoor play voiceLouder than outdoor playEar penetrating01/15
15Other Uses of BRS Systemic data tracking method for Tier 3 Sample system created by:Cindy AndersonSchool district in Florida
166. Linking the Hypothesis to the FBA Primary reason FBA is conductedHypothesis should be multi-componentWhen (antecedents) these contextual/environmental events are present…….It is highly predicted that the behavior identified as the problem and focus of the FBA happensAs a result, the student:Gets out of or away from activities, people, tangibles, sensory input, painGets activities, people, tangibles, sensory input, pain attenuationConfirmed by the consequences (what others do in response to the behavior) that typically occurMethod of organizing informationCompeting behavior pathwayPTR Assessment Organization
17Step 3: Case Study – Mike Assessment Summary Table of Problem Behavior Prevention DataTeach DataReinforce DataNon-preferred taskReading, MathOther students upset/madTeacher attending to othersTransitionPreferred tonon-preferredChange in scheduleDenied item, told no, or tofix somethingGain attentionPeers, adultsDelayAccess to itemsRedirectedReprimandedCalm/soothePersonal spaceLater mustcomplete taskLoss of or delay inreinforcementScreaming, Hitting
18Step 3: Case Study – Mike Assessment of Appropriate Behavior Prevention DataTeach DataReinforce DataIndependent workOne-on-oneattentionSpecialsPeer interactionGetting attentionRaising handSharing attentionConversation skillsTaking turnsWaitingSelf-managementAsking for breakExpressing emotionsTreasure boxMovieAttentionHelping teacherGoing to mediacenterGoing outsideWalkFoodProsocial
19Mike’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 peersMike 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 tasksInappropriateAppropriate19
207. Linking the Hypothesis to the BIP Other primary purpose of conducting FBASTOP generating list of general strategiesEach component of hypothesis generates an interventionAntecedents modified and made irrelevantReplacement behavior so that problem behavior is ineffectiveFunctional equivalent reinforcer so the problem behavior is inefficient
218. Multi-Component Interventions Matched to Classroom Context Multi-component interventions include prevention, teaching and reinforcement strategiesTeam/Teacher(s) select strategies that arefeasibleeffectivelikely be implemented
239. Task Analyzed Strategies Forgotten artCan’t just say “give choices”, “reinforce appropriate behavior”, etc., “student will comply”Breaking down the interventions into sequence of stepsAllows teaching with precisionAllows assessment of teacher capacityProvides foundation for training and for fidelity
24Specific Strategy Steps Teach StrategiesSpecific Strategy StepsReplacement BehaviorMike 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.
25Paris—Step 4: PTR Intervention Prevent StrategiesSpecific Strategy stepsEnvironmental SupportParis 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 tasksThe 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
28Specific Strategy Steps Teach StrategiesSpecific Strategy StepsReplacement BehaviorReplacement behavior: Raising hand to ask for help or attentionParis will be taught how and when to raise her hand.A. Independent Work TimeWhen 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 InstructionWhen 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
29Specific Strategy Steps Teach StrategiesSpecific Strategy StepsSelf-ManagementParis 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.
31Specific Strategy Steps Reinforce StrategiesSpecific Strategy StepsReplacement Behavior: Raising Hand1. 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.
32Specific Strategy Steps Reinforce StrategiesSpecific Strategy StepsGroup Contingency1. 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-Management1. 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.
33Specific Strategy Steps Reinforce StrategiesSpecific Strategy StepsDiscontinue Reinforcement of Problem BehaviorIf 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.
34Case Study Jeff: PTR Intervention Plan Prevent StrategiesDescriptionChoice-MakingUsing 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 nowSteps: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
35Jeff—Intervention Plan Prevent StrategiesDescriptionEnvironmental SupportVisual 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.”
36Jeff—Intervention Plan Teach StrategiesDescriptionPro-academic Replacement Behavior—Academic EngagementJeff 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, conclusionTell 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.
37Jeff—Intervention Plan Reinforce StrategiesDescriptionReinforce Pro-academic Replacement Behavior—Academic EngagementJeff 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.
38Jeff—Intervention Plan Reinforce StrategiesDescriptionGroup 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!”
4110. Teacher and Classroom Coaching, Support Do not assume teacher/team knows how to implement planSchedule 30 minutes to review plan and go over stepsProblem-solve if teacher has difficultiesModify planChoose different interventionTeach the student the plan
4311. Array of outcome measures (child-specific, teacher fidelity, social validity, alliance, fidelity of process, technical adequacy of products)Individualized Behavior Rating ScaleFidelity scoresSocial 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?
44PTR Plan Self-Assessment Example for Mike Intervention TypeFidelityImpact1 = none; 5 = greatEnvironmental SupportMini schedule present and availableMini schedule reviewed prior to activityMike prompted to cross off items as completedY/N/NAReplacement Behavior—FunctionalVoice output device present and availablePrompted Mike to use voice output device to request, “I need to calm down”Prompted Mike to choose his calm down activityReinforce Replacement Behavior—FunctionalTeacher 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)
4512. Maintenance (beyond warranty) Dynamic process-not staticDecision making process based on dataDetermine levels of support needed, fading, shaping, generalizing, extending, etc.
46Steps for Evaluating Outcomes Make sure you have both fidelity measures (self and/or observation scores) AND student outcomes (Behavior Rating Scale measures)Decision rulesWhat constitutes adequate fidelity? 80%, 70%, something else?What constitutes adequate student progress? (e.g., 3 or more consecutive ratings at or above goal line?)
47Primary DecisionsIf Fidelity scores are inadequate, determine the reasons (intervention too difficult, not feasible, not described adequately….)Retrain/coach the teacher/implementerModify the interventions so that they are feasible, simplerSelect different interventions that match the hypothesisStudent outcomes (decision contingent upon outcome trend)Maintain interventionIntensify interventionModify interventionFade intervention componentsShape behavior outcomes to become closer approximations of desired behaviorExpand the intervention (additional people, additional settings or routines)Conduct another FBA if hypothesis is suspect, team has new data, or context has changed
48POSITIVE BEHAVIOR CHANGE BRS data indicate positive trends toward desired goalsGood fidelity implementation scoresNext StepsExtensionExtend the scope of the BIPGeneralization SettingsAdditional routinesMultiple classesAcross entire dayGeneralizationInterventionistsSchool staffMultiple service providersFamilyShapingIncrease desired goal responsesFading ReinforcersReduce type and/or amount of reinforcement providedDelayed GratificationIncrease time intervals within reinforcement scheduleIntermittent ScheduleProvide reinforcers at irregular intervalsSelf-ManagementShift control for behavior monitoring from teacher to student
49Increase in Problem Behavior BRS data indicate a trend/movement away from desired goalsFBA VariablesAppropriate function determined?Interventions match function?Appropriate replacement behaviordetermined and skills taught?Low Fidelity VariablesStrategies implemented as designed?Strategies implemented daily?All setting events addressed?Reinforcers provided as designated?Training and Technical AssistanceAdditional training outside classroomModeling of strategies with studentIncrease technical assistance in classroom (observation/feedback)BIP Variables:Interventions difficult to implement?Insufficient planning/prep time?Insufficient time to implement?Lack of resources?BIP StrategiesModify current interventionsSelect alternative strategiesDetermine appropriate reinforcersReinforcers readily available
50Evaluating the Technical Adequacy of FBAs and BIPs
51Current Status of FBA/BIP Implementation in Schools (Scott & Kamps, 2007) Although FBA in special education law since 1997, no systematic policies adopted at federal levelNo 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 processLoses 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 interactsRigid, rigorous procedures not feasible in public school settingsIn 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)
52Technical Adequacy Research Recent studies conducted exploring technical adequacy of FBAsBlood, 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 USReviewed 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 stateRating scale developed for analysis (see article for scale)
53Some Results of Technical Adequacy Research Teaming issues:Teacher and other input not includedIdentifying behaviorsTarget behaviors were missing or inadequately definedMatch of FBA to HypothesisAttempt 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 inadequateBehavior intervention plan developmentBehavior 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 includedVan Acker—46% FBA/BIPs reviewed only included aversive strategies
54Some Results of Technical Adequacy Research Follow-upLack of follow-up support for monitoring and evaluating plan including fidelityNo follow-through on next steps (promote and check maintenance and generalization of behavior change)Blood interviews with teachersNone was able to identify behavior goals nor describe behavior interventionDid not use FBA/BIPs in development of behavior interventions
55Purpose of Our ToolDetermine the technical adequacy of FBA/BIPs and establish baselineDistrictCampus/SchoolIndividualSecond 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
56Development of ToolReview of literature to identify essential components for adequate FBA/BIPsOriginal measure included 24 items (FBA/BIP)Edited to 20 itemsSent out to three national experts (Terry Scott, Cindy Anderson, Glen Dunlap) to reviewIs 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.
64Before practicing….Review of tool itemsEvaluationScoring guide
65Practice Time Team up with others Try scoring the sample completed FBA/BIP given to you with the evaluation toolCome to consensus on the scoresDebriefWhat did you like?What did you dislike?What was easy?What was difficult?What questions do you still have?
66Evaluating Your District’s FBA/BIPs Within your district team, evaluate the technical adequacy of your district’s FBA/BIPs brought to the trainingBe ready to debriefYou do NOT need to tell anyone your scoresDiscuss anything you learned or didn’t learn in evaluating technical adequacyUse outcomes to start developing strategic action plan steps to achieve district goals.
67Next Steps Action Planning What will you be doing in your district to improve your FBA/BIPs?
68PTR 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 ArticlesIovannone, 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, 9-22Strain, 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.