1. Rob Horner Justyn Poulos University of Oregon Wisconsin PBIS Network www.pbis.org State and District-level Role in Implementation, Scaling and Sustaining PBIS Session A-3

2. Maximizing Your Session Participation Work with your team Consider 4 questions: – Where are we in our implementation? – What do I hope to learn? – What did I learn? – What will I do with what I learned? Consider 4 questions: – Where are we in our implementation? – What do I hope to learn? – What did I learn? – What will I do with what I learned?

3. Goals Link PBIS Implementation with “Implementation Science” Lessons learned from seven states Features of District Capacity Example from Wisconsin’s journey

4. Compression Implementation Grassroots Demand Policy Incentive Expectation Large Scale, High Fidelity, Sustained Implementation Technical Assistance Capacity Large Scale, High Fidelity, Sustained Implementation Network of Trainers Fidelity Measure Coaching Network Outcome Measures Alignment Protocols Defined roles at all levels of system

5. Compression Implementation 20,000 Schools using PBIS ESEA, IDEA, School Climate Trans Grants/ AWARE State/ District Improvement Plans Multi-tiered Positive Behavior Support OSEP TA- Center National Network of Trainers PBIS Framework PBIS Fidelity Tools PBIS Discipline Data Tools PBIS Professional Development Blueprint Training WIKI State Coaching Networks State / National Behavioral Expertise

6. PBIS Implementation Roles State o Establish social behavior as a core outcome o Require planning to document an evidence-based approach to achieve a positive social culture and effective social emotional competence o Provide incentives for investing in effective implementation District o Policy for selecting effective practices o Process for selecting personnel with MTSS competence o Process for Training, Coaching and Performance Feedback for personnel o Data systems (fidelity, impact) o Organizational accountability… Schools reporting to decision-makers.

7. PBIS Implementation Capacity Using PBIS Implementation Blueprint o Leadership Team o Demonstrations o Establishing capacity for sustainable implementation Using Implementation Science o Selecting effective practices o Building teams o Honoring stages of implementation o Building the “drivers” that are needed for high fidelity and sustainability o Using the decision-cycles needed for scaling and improvement

8. Leadership Team Funding Visibility Political Support TrainingCoachingEvaluation Local School Demonstrations Active Coordination Technical Expertise Policy

9. Implementation Science Frameworks WHO Teams WHEN Stages HOW Drivers HOW Cycles WHAT Interventions

10. © Fixsen & Blase, 2008 Performance Assessment (Fidelity) Coaching Training Selection Systems Intervention Facilitative Administration Decision Support Data System Implementation Drivers Competency Drivers Organization Drivers Leadership AdaptiveTechnical Successful Student Outcomes Program/Initiative/Framework (e.g. RtI)

11. Implementation Stages Exploration Installation Initial Implementation Full Implementation Implementation occurs in stages: Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005 2 – 3 Years

12. Stages of Implementation FocusStageDescription Exploration/ Adoption Decision regarding commitment to adopting the program/practices and supporting successful implementation. InstallationSet up infrastructure so that successful implementation can take place and be supported. Establish team and data systems, conduct audit, develop plan. Initial Implementation Try out the practices, work out details, learn and improve before expanding to other contexts. Full Implementation Expand the program/practices to other locations, individuals, times- adjust from learning in initial implementation. Continuous Improvement/ Regeneration Make it easier, more efficient. Embed within current practices. Work to do it right! Work to do it better! Should we do it! Steve Goodman

13. Time in Years Early Later Percentage of Schools Implementing 0% Predicted Trajectory based on theory of critical mass Model Demonstrations Replications Too often, actual results 10% 50% 80% Steve Goodman

14. Scaling up School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: The Experiences of Seven States with Documented Success Rob Horner, Don Kincaid, George Sugai, Tim Lewis, Lucille Eber, Susan Barrett, Celeste Rossetto Dickey, Mary Richter, Erin Sullivan, Cyndi Boezio, Nancy Johnson, (2014 ), JPBI ExplorationInstallationInitial ImpFull Imp Leadership Team Funding Visibility Political Support Policy Training Coaching Expertise Evaluation Demos Interviews and Data Reviews with the PBIS implementers from Seven States that had at least 500 schools using PBIS.

15. Exploration and Adoption InstallationInitial Implementation Full Implementation Innovation and sustainability Leadership Team (coordination) Do you have a state leadership team? If you do, how was your first leadership team developed? Who were members? Who supported/lead the team through the exploration process? Was any sort of self- assessment completed (e.g. the PBIS Implementation Blueprint Assessment)? What was the role of State agency personnel in the exploration phase? What were critical issues that confronted the team as it began to install systems changes? What were specific activities the team did to ensure success of the initial implementation efforts? Did the team change personnel or functioning as the # of schools/districts increased? What has the Leadership team done to insure sustainability? In what areas is the State “innovating” and contributing to the research and practice of PBIS (e.g. linking PBIS with literacy or math)?

16. Descriptive Summary: Oregon Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp /Full Imp & Innovate

17. Descriptive Summary: Missouri Exploration / Installation /Initial Imp / Full Imp & Innovate

18. Descriptive Summary: North Carolina Exploration / Installation / Initial & Full Imp / Innovate

19. Descriptive Summary: Colorado Exploration / Installation / Initial & Full Imp / Innovate

20. Descriptive Summary: Florida Exploration/ Installation/ Initial Imp / Full Imp / Innovate

21. Descriptive Summary: Maryland Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp / Full Imp / Innovate

22. Descriptive Summary: Illinois Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp /Full Imp & Innovate

23. Lessons Learned: Moving from 10% to 40% Multiple approaches to achieving scaled implementation Colorado: Started with Leadership Team Illinois: Started with Leadership Advocates and built team only after implementation expanded. Missouri: Strong initial demonstrations led to strong state support All states began with small “demonstrations ” that documented the feasibility and impact of SWPBIS. Only when states reached 100-200 demonstrations did scaling occur. Four core features needed for scaling: Administrative Leadership / Support/ Funding Technical capacity (Local training, coaching, evaluation and behavioral expertise) Local Demonstrations of feasibility and impact (100-200) Evaluation data system (to support continuous improvement) Essential role of Data : Fidelity data AND Outcome data

24. Time in Years Early Later Percentage of Schools Implementing 0% Predicted Trajectory based on theory of critical mass Model Demonstrations Replications Too often, actual results 10% 50% 80% Steve Goodman

25. No “Tipping Point” 0-10%: Start with Demonstrations o Document feasibility and impact 10-40%: Build capacity to improve efficiency o Improve speed and cost to implement PBIS o Local trainers, coaches o Expand range of valued outcomes 40%-80%: Scale to Level of Systems Change o Adequate technical assistance capacity o Alignment strategy o Formal presence within decision-making at state level o Emphasis on systems (school, district, region, state) o Data, data, data, data

26. Moving from 40% to 80% Formal System for Initiative Selection and Alignment Implement with Depth o Tier I through “classroom” o Establish data systems (BOTH data collection and data use) o Tiers II and III o Greater attention to PBIS Systems Embed and Adapt (with consistent core) o Presence at decision points (which are not always well defined) o Make PBIS relevant to current target areas o Support new strategies to achieve PBIS core features. NOTE: The key to effective adaptation is regular measurement of fidelity

27. Districts Coherent District Policy o Social behavior is a priority in district improvement plan o District commitment to selecting practices that are evidence-based o District process for aligning multiple initiatives. Evaluation Capacity o Data systems that inform decision-making and provide policy feedback ** Fidelity and Impact Recruitment, Hiring, Evaluation o “Preference will be given to individuals with knowledge and experience in implementation of multi-tiered academic and behavior supports.” Team Based Implementation

28. Districts Annual Faculty/Staff Orientation o Defines PBIS as a priority o Defines what to expect in a school using PBIS. o 30-60 min of annual orientation Professional Development (Training) o PD is always tied to core improvement goals o PD typically involves distributed training (multiple events) o PD is always linked to on-site coaching. o PD is always linked to fidelity measure Coaching HOW Drivers

29. Wisconsin: A State that has Implemented PBIS and Built State/District Capacity

30. WI Demographics Approximately 2200 public schools, 424 districts State Priorities o Every Child a Graduate o Agenda 2017 - Career and College Ready o Results Driven Accountability Reading o Reducing Discipline and Academic Gaps Students with Disabilities Students of Color PBIS is part of RtI center Includes CR MLSS

31. Wisconsin Schools Coming on Board... 1109

32. State Organization for PBIS

33. Wisconsin Implementation Team 5 Regions ~ 1.5 FTE per region (Currently about 150 schools implementing per 1 FTE) Strategic Plan 3 Goals: Define, Model, Reach Districts/Schools

34. State Leadership Team 2010 – DPI formed Advisory Group – PBIS Membership includes representation from: Department of Public Instruction CESAs Parent Organizations Administrator Organizations School Districts Other initiatives/priorities Meets Quarterly

35. SLT Work Groups 2014 – Created 5 Work Groups Determined by State Priorities, Capacity Building Needs: Culturally Responsive Practices – Closing the Gap SWD – Closing the Gap District Implementation Family Engagement Building Capacity through Institutes of Higher Ed

36. Rate of Implementation Growth as State Supported Initiative WISCONSIN Illinois Florida NC November 2010 – SLT Meeting Help!!!!

37. Capacity Efforts Training of Trainers in a number of our larger districts and CESAs. o They are then able to train their schools and neighboring schools Communities of Practice o Working to build a network of practitioners who can lean on each other for support. (example: Dane County coaches/admin – networking meetings rotate between schools, admin now meet up for coffee and support, etc.)

38. Trainers - 2012 Internal Staff Trainer District/CESA Trainer

39. Trainers - Now Internal Staff Trainer District/CESA Trainer

40. Supporting Schools/Districts

41. Leadership Team Funding Visibility Political Support TrainingCoachingEvaluation Local School Demonstrations Active Coordination Technical Expertise Policy

42. We thought....

43. We’ve learned... ANNUALLY

44. Critical next steps Partnerships! SLT work groups o What they are and goals of each Connecting to other efforts in the state o FBA o 9 SMT work groups What they are..... Focus on big 3 and connection that work in the state. Connecting with other initiatives

45. Local School Demonstrations Leadership Team Funding Visibility Political Support TrainingCoachingEvaluation Technical Expertise Policy District Example Appleton Area School District Started with a few, showed effectiveness Data to school board -> budget line DLT w/ Active Coordination Coaches Trainers Annual institute Regular eval and support

46. Appleton School District Looking to integrate academic RtI (MTSS) and PBIS o Summer Institute o District Leadership Team SAS: 2013/14: o ~90% of schools at fidelity on SAS BoQ: o 100% of schools at fidelity on BoQ

47. Appleton. Share their process, their data, etc. Pull some of kent mcintosh’s sustainability features and share with AASD data. Maybe what WI is doing with those features.

48. Recommendations... (things we’re working on) Connect o Show how this work fits within other requirements. Stay visible (with data) o District: District administration, school boards, community, families, staff o State: Dept of Ed (and departments within), Educational organizations, District and school administrators Don’t be afraid to change o Adjust as your needs change. It’s not about the training... o Schools need support. Districts need support.

49. There is no tipping point...

50. Summary PBIS is a major component of effective education PBIS will be part of federal initiatives for the next decade Delivering on the promise will require greater attention to: o Building local technical assistance capacity (train, coach, eval, expertise) o Evaluation of fidelity as well as impact o Linking PBIS with mental health and justice outcomes o Building the state-level capacity to align, embed, adapt while retaining core features. Questions, Comments, Insights