1. The Kansas-Illinois SW-PBS Tertiary Demonstration Center: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Continuum of Support Model July 23, 2008 Lucille Eber, IL PBIS Network Wayne Sailor, University of Kansas 2008 OSEP Project Director’s Conference

2. Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions 1-5% Individual students Assessment-based High intensity 1-5%Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions Individual students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures Tier 2/Secondary Interventions 5-15% Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small group interventions Some individualizing 5-15%Tier 2/Secondary Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small group interventions Some individualizing Tier 1/Universal Interventions 80-90% All students Preventive, proactive 80-90%Tier 1/Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive School-Wide Systems for Student Success: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model Academic Systems Behavioral Systems Illinois PBIS Network, Revised May 15, 2008. Adapted from “What is school-wide PBS?” OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Accessed at http://pbis.org/schoolwide.htm

3. Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model Tier 1/Universal School-Wide Assessment School-Wide Prevention Systems Tier 2/Secondary Tier 3/ Tertiary SIMEO Tools: HSC-T, RD-T, EI-T Small Group Interventions (CICO, SSI, etc) Intervention Assessment Illinois PBIS Network, Revised May 15, 2008 Adapted from T. Scott, 2004 Group Interventions with Individualized Focus (CnC, etc) Simple Individual Interventions (Simple FBA/BIP, Schedule/ Curriculum Changes, etc) Multiple-Domain FBA/BIP Wraparound ODRs, Attendance, Tardies, Grades, DIBELS, etc. Daily Progress Report (DPR) (Behavior and Academic Goals) Competing Behavior Pathway, Functional Assessment Interview, Scatter Plots, etc.

4. Continuum of Support for Tier 2/Secondary-Tier 3/Tertiary Level Systems 1.Group interventions: CICO, social or academic skills groups, tutor/homework clubs, etc. 2.Group intervention with a unique feature for an individual student, (e.g. CICO individualized into a Check & Connect; mentoring/tutoring, etc.) 3.Simple individualized function-based behavior support plan for a student focused on one specific behavior (e.g. simple FBA/BIP-one behavior; curriculum adjustment; schedule or other environmental adjustments, etc) 4.Complex function-based behavior support plan across settings (e.g. FBA/BIP home and school and/or community) 5.Wraparound : More complex and comprehensive plan that addresses multiple life domain issues across home, school and community (e.g. basic needs, MH treatment, behavior/academic interventions) as well as multiple behaviors Illinois PBIS Network, Revised May 15, 2008

5. Matrix of Secondary/Tertiary Interventions Key: Actual referred/receiving: 1 st # Responding: 2 nd # Check-in Check-out (CICO) Social/ Academic Instructional Groups Simple Tier 2 Interventions with indiv. features (e.g. CnC) Simple Function- based Interventions Complex/ Multiple-life -domain FBA/BIP Wrap- around Support

6. Check-In/Check-Out First Simple Secondary intervention within continuum of behavior support Requires the least resources, least intrusive The majority of kids will “start with” a CICO One adult supports multiple youth Progress-monitoring with Daily Progress Report (DPR) Same intervention for all kids (same DPR with school- wide expectations, etc…)

7. Tertiary Demo School Reduces ODRs & Increases Simple Secondary Interventions *CICO = Check in, Check Out IL Tertiary Demo

8. Social Skills Instructional Groups Three types of skills-building groups: 1) Pro-social skills 2) Problem-solving skills 3) Academic Behavior Skills May or may not involve DPR These are often the skill groups facilitated by social workers and counselors

9. How would life be different if things were better for this student, teacher, family? What would increase or strengthen this student’s friendships and social support? What would increase this student’s opportunity to exercise appropriate choice making and to have more control over aspects of his or her life? How can participation in the student’s home, school, and community be increased? What specific skills could be taught and environments arranged to promote practice and use of the skills?

10. Universal Screening: Implementation Between early September-first of November, completed screenings in 6 districts and 18 schools Initial results indicate that approximately 5%-9% of students enrolled in grades 1-6 were identified by the SSBD

11. A Middle school example: –Approximately 320 students enrolled in sixth grade were screened using the SSBD –38 six graders or 11% passed gate two –Tier 2 interventions such as Check-in- Check-out Implementation

12. Four Phases of Wraparound Implementation I.Team Development - Get people ready to be a team - Complete strengths/needs chats II.Initial Plan Development - Hold initial planning meetings - Develop a team “culture” III.Plan Implementation & Refinement - Hold team meetings to review plans - Modify, adapt & adjust team plan IV.Plan Completion & Transition - Define good enough - “Unwrap”

13. Phase I: Team Development Initiating the Wraparound Process  Prepare for wraparound meetings through individual conversations with core team members is a critical first step.  The first contact/s with the family should feel different than being invited to a meeting.  Gather information for a rich strength profile (this will be a valuable tool for action planning).

14. Phase I: Team Development Wraparound 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

15. Mary Ellen Home, School, Community Tool

16. “Roman” Using the Data to get to Strengths and Needs Home School

17. “Henry” Reason Referred to Tertiary Supports “Henry”, an elementary school student, had:  extremely poor attendance  failing grades  poor homework completion  trouble with the law in the community  and had a court assigned probation officer and a mandated Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) counselor

18. “Henry” Engagement and Team Preparation Wraparound team initially included –Henry –his mother –the school social worker –his primary classroom teacher –school principal, bi-lingual liaison –district SWPBS tertiary-tier coach Team met consistently to identify strengths, big needs and develop a wraparound plan for Henry.

19. Henry’s strengths identified by team included: –a good relationship with his teacher –responsiveness to positive attention from adults he likes –leadership among his peers –and effective self-advocacy Henry’s “big needs” as identified by the wraparound team: –Henry needs to feel as if he fits in with the other kids at school –Henry needs to feel successful at school –Henry to be invested in his education “Henry” Identifying Strengths and Big Needs

20. Henry was included in the “Check-and-Connect” intervention which was being delivered to other students in the school In addition, Henry and his teacher talked about individual behavior goals listed on his daily point card. He was put on “safety patrol” in which he was an older youth selected to be a positive role model to help monitor and improve his behavior in the hallways. Because Henry’s voice was important, the suggestion that he work with younger students in their classrooms was set aside due to Henry’s lack of interest. “Henry” Ongoing Plan Implementation and Refinement

21. From second quarter to third quarter, with wraparound in progress, Henry’s grades and attendance began to increase –Spelling: 15% to 40% –Math: 15% to 48.5% –Reading: 20% to 63% –His DIBELS score increased from 55 words per minute in the fall to 67 words per minute in the winter. –Attendance:15% in 1 st quarter 60% in 2 nd quarter, 75% in 3 rd quarter “Henry” Initial Outcomes

22. Henry’s Risk of Placement Data Referral-Disposition Tool (SIMEO)

23. Henry’s Behavior and Emotional Functioning at Home Home School Community Tool (HSC-T)

24. Henry’s Behavior and Emotional Functioning at School Home School Community Tool (HSC-T)

25. Henry’s Behavior and Emotional Functioning In the Community Home School Community Tool (HSC-T)

26. Henry’s progress was monitored through: –Office discipline reports –Attendance –Grades –DIBEL scores –Check In Check Out behavior card points –SIMEO Tools “Henry” Progress Monitoring

27. Ensuring Capacity at All 3 Tiers Begin assessment and development of secondary and tertiary tiers at start-up of universal –Assess resources and current practices (specialized services) –Review current outcomes of students with higher level needs –Position personnel to guide changes in practice –Begin planning and training with select personnel All 3 tiers addressed at all district meetings and at every training

28. Requirements for IL Tertiary Demos District Commitment Designated Buildings/District Staff External Tertiary Coach/Coordinator Continuum of Skill Sets (training, guided learning, practice, coaching, consultation) Commitment to use of Data System –Going beyond ODR’s (i.e. SSBD) –Self assessment/fidelity –SIMEO-Student Outcomes

29. District-wide Secondary/Tertiary Implementation Process District meeting quarterly –District outcomes –Capacity/sustainability –Other schools/staff Building meeting monthly –Check on all levels –Cross-planning with all levels –Effectiveness of practices (CICO/BIP/Wrap, etc) Secondary/Tertiary Coaching Capacity Wraparound Facilitators

30. System Data to Consider LRE –Building and District Level –By disability group Other “places” kids are “parked” –Alternative settings –Rooms w/in the building kids are sent Sub-aggregate groups –Sp. Ed. –Ethnicity

31. Ongoing Self–Assessment of Secondary/Tertiary Implementation Building Level: IL Phases of Implementation (PoI) Tool IL Secondary/Tertiary Intervention Tracking Tool Sp. Ed Referral Data Suspensions/Expulsions/Placements (ongoing) Aggregate Individual Student Data (IL SIMEO data) LRE Data trends Subgroup data (academic, discipline, Sp. Ed. Referral, LRE, etc) District Level: Referral to Sp.Ed. Data LRE Data (aggregate and by building) IL Out-of-Home-School-Tracking Tool (multiple sorts) Aggregate SIMEO data Aggregate PoI Data

32. Phases of Implementation IL Tertiary Demos Cohort 1 Change over Time (n=19)

33. Phases of Implementation Tertiary Demos Cohort 1 Change over Time (n=18)

34. Phases of Implementation IL Tertiary Demos Cohort 2 Change over Time (n=18)

35. Phases of Implementation Tertiary Demos Cohort 2 Change over Time (n=19)

36. Resources/References See “Commitments for Success” by going to www.pbisillinois.org and click on “Getting Started ” www.pbisillinois.org Also see “IL PBIS Network FY09 Phases of Implementation (PoI) Rubric by clicking on “Recognition Process,” then “Criteria” Eber et al. “Wraparound As a Tertiary Level Intervention for Students With Emotional/Behavioral Needs”. Teaching Exceptional Children, July/August 2008. Eber et al (in press). Completing the Continuum of School- wide Positive Behavior Support: Wraparound as a Tertiary Level Intervention. In Sailor, W., Dunlap, G., Sugai, G. and Horner, R. (Eds.), Handbook of Positive Behavior Support. Springer. NY,NY