PowerPoint - Wisconsin PBIS Network


WI Coaches forum August 2013

Building Tier 2/3

Capacity Within


Systems of PBIS

Lucille Eber IL PBIS Network www.pbisillinois.org

This is a presentation of the IL PBIS Network. All rights reserved.


Context for Tier 2/3 systems development

The Tier 2/3 Readiness Process

Teaming Model & Examples of Interventions

Tools to Support Tier 2/3

A Tier 3 Coaching and TA Process

IL Tier 2/3 Tools

Available at PBISILLINOIS.org

1. Tier 2/3 Readiness Tools

2. Guiding Questions

3. Tier 2/3 Tracking Tool

4. Reverse Request for Assistance

5. IL PoI Tool

6. System Response Tool

7. Tier 3 Wraparound Follow-up Checklists

Resources Available at www.pbis.org

Building Tier 2 / Tier 3 Capacity within A PBIS System of Support:

Model Development and Lessons Learned

Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers

Tools Used to Build District and

Building Level Action Plans for

Secondary/Tertiary Implementation

Guiding Questions Tool

Secondary/Tertiary Tracking Tool

Systems Response Tool

Phases of Implementation (PoI)

Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers




What is meant by

“layering” interventions?



Tertiary Prevention:



Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior

Secondary Prevention:

Specialized Group

Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior

Primary Prevention:


Wide Systems for

All Students,

Staff, & Settings

~80% of Students







More Students Access Tier 2/3

Interventions When Tier 1/ Universal is in Place

FY09 School Profile Tool

Students Accessing Tier 2/Tier 3 Interventions



Partially Implementing


Fully Implementing


Tier 2/3…..

Changing Existing Systems

Harder than starting from scratch

Schools think they are “already doing it”…

Need to “deconstruct” some existing teaming approaches and practices

Data not being used except to justify placements

Tools to Support Secondary/Tertiary


Tier 2/3 Readiness Checklists

Secondary/Tertiary Tracking Tool

Reverse Request for Assistance

Systems Response Tool

Guiding Questions Document

Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT)

Some “Big Picture” Challenges

Low intensity, low fidelity interventions for behavior/emotional needs

Habitual use of restrictive settings (and poor outcomes) for youth with disabilities

High rate of undiagnosed MH problems (stigma, lack of knowledge, etc.)

Changing the routines of ineffective practices

(systems) that are “familiar” to systems

Examples of Ineffective

Secondary/Tertiary Structures

1. Referrals to Sp. Ed. seen as the


2. FBA seen as required “paperwork” vs. a needed part of designing an intervention

3. Interventions the system is familiar with vs. ones likely to produce an effect

(Ex: student sent for insight based counseling at point of misbehavior)

Tier 2/3 Readiness

District-level support is necessary for successful building-level Tier 2 & 3 implementation

District commitments should be in place before

Tier 2/3 training occurs

Building-level leaders should be aware and supportive of what Tier 2/3 requires

District-wide Tertiary

Implementation Process

District meeting quarterly

District outcomes


Other schools/staff

Building meeting monthly

Check on all levels

Cross-planning with all levels

Effectiveness of practices (FBA/Wrap)

Tertiary Coaching Capacity

Facilitators for complex FBA/BIP and wraparound teams

Components of Tier 2/3 Model

Differentiated Teaming Structures

Across all 3 Tiers

Assigned roles for Coordination/Facilitation

A Full Continuum of Interventions

Scaling up and down the continuum

Universal Screening

Beyond ODRs

Ongoing Use of More Specified Data

Tools for Monitoring Systems and Outcomes

Coordinator vs. Facilitator


Organizes and/or oversees the specific interventions such as

CICO, S/AIG & Group with Individual


Roles include: scheduling meetings, review & collect data to share during team meetings, etc…


Directly provides intervention support services to youth/families

Roles include: meeting with students for CICO, running groups

QUICK Reflection

Where is your district/school(s) with regards to the readiness criteria?

Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports:

A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model

Tier 1/Universal

School-Wide Assessment

School-Wide Prevention Systems



Tardies, Grades,

DIBELS, etc.

Daily Progress

Report (DPR)

(Behavior and Academic Goals)

Competing Behavior

Pathway, Functional

Assessment Interview,

Scatter Plots, etc.

Individual Student

Information System (ISIS)

Tier 2/



Check-out (CICO)


Instructional Groups (SAIG)

Tier 3/


Group Intervention with

Individualized Feature

(e.g., Check and Connect - CnC and Mentoring)

Brief Functional Behavior Assessment/

Behavior Intervention Planning (FBA/BIP)

Complex or Multiple-domain FBA/BIP

SIMEO Tools:



Illinois PBIS Network, Revised October 2009

Adapted from T. Scott, 2004

Data-Based Decision Making

Numbers to Keep in Mind

7-15% : Percent of total population expected to need and be supported by Tier 2 interventions

1-5% : Percent of total population expected to need and be supported by Tier 3 interventions

70% : Percent of youth (receiving intervention “X”) that should be responding to intervention

Data-based Decision-Rules for ‘determining response’ must be defined

Data sources defining response are efficient

Ex. Daily Progress Report (DPR) cards: Student

maintains an 80% average on DPR for 4 weeks

Check-in-Check-out (CICO)

Merely an extension of Tier 1

Some get high frequency scheduled positive contact with adults

Youth solicit the positive contact/feedback

Low effort for teacher if built on Tier 1

Need to have 7-12% accessing if it is to come to be a routine in your school(s)

If you only have 1-2% on CICO, those are likely to be kids who need more….

Why do you want 7-12% on CICO?


Kids who here-tofor would have gotten nothing (‘til they ‘got worse”) now get a positive boost of support (sea of ineligibility)


All teachers will expect that every day they will have kids cross their threshold who need higher rate of positive contact


Quicker/easier to support kids who need Tier 3


Structure to build transference and generalizing from Social Skills instructional groups and function-based behavior plans

Tertiary Demos

Tertiary Demo School Reduces ODRs & Increases

Simple Secondary Interventions











5 5

Aug to Nov 2006


Aug to Nov 2007

2-5 ODRs 6+ ODRs CICO*


CICO = Check in, Check Out

John Greer Elementary School

Suspensions and Students

Succeeding on CICO

CICO with individualized features

This is an intervention that adds support to generic CICO.

Teachers choose these more individualized options on the reverse request for assistance


Teachers are given the option to choose from these features after CICO was not enough support for a student.

CICO Individualized Features

What it is

Options are pre-determined and communicated to all stakeholders.

What it isn’t

Changing the goal line one child at a time

Secondary systems team designs the options for the building.

Changing or adding a goal for one child

Quick & Efficient

A list of specified options teachers can choose from listed on the reverse request for assistance

Changing the goals on the

Daily Progress Report for one child or a group of children

A meeting with the specialized staff and the teacher changing a student’s DPR.

CICO Individualized Features

What it is

Used after generic CICO has been tried for a set time (for example 4-6 weeks) and the student has not met the pre-determined goal set for all children.

Options for individualizing the intervention are generic and quick

What it isn’t

One adult changing/ adding goals or DPR

Changing or adding a goal for a group of kids

(homework, grades, or a specific behavior).

Uses the same DPR as used in generic CICO

Examples of CICO with

Individualized Features

Example one:

Extra check in time before/after lunch with secretary in office

Example two:

Peer accompanies student to check in at beginning of day and check out at end of day

Example three:

Check in with supportive adult prior to a difficult class period

When would a child have goals that are specific to him/her?

This is an intervention that is designed after a Functional

Behavioral Assessment is completed and created with the problem solving team as part of a Behavior

Intervention Plan.

This intervention is specific to the



Instructional Groups

Selection into groups should be based on youths’ reaction to life circumstance not existence of life circumstances (ex. fighting with peers, not family divorce)

Goals for improvement should be common same group (ex. use your words) across youth in

Data should measure if skills are being USED in natural settings, not in counseling sessions (transference of skills to classroom, café etc.)

Stakeholders (teachers, family etc.) should have input into success of intervention (ex. Daily Progress Report)

Brief vs. Complex FBA/BIP


Generic Individual

Problem solving Team





Meeting time/day usually already determined

Plan developed quickly/easily

Meeting time/day decided by individualized team

Interventions are highly individualized

Brief vs. Complex FBA/BIP


Every school has this type of meeting


May be a new type of meeting for schools

Behavior intervention plans address only one behavior, typically only in one setting

Interventions/ strategies address multiple settings and/or behaviors

Brief vs. Complex FBA/BIP


SWIS data, Daily Progress

Report (DPR) points,

Functional Assessment interviews


SWIS data, Daily Progress

Report (DPR) points, Functional

Assessment interviews, SIMEO

Data, direct observation data, additional tools as needed

Effectiveness of system monitored by Secondary

Systems Planning Team

Effectiveness of system monitored by Tertiary Systems

Planning Team

Data reviewed at least every other week

Data reviewed at least weekly

Quick Assessment of Student Access to Intervention

Total enrollment of your school?

Number of students accessing CICO?

Number of students on complex functionbased or wraparound plans?

Percent of total population of the school?

Individualized Teams at the

Tertiary Level

Are unique to the individual child & family

Blend the family’s supports with the school representatives who know the child best

Meeting Process

Meet frequently

Regularly develop & review interventions

Facilitator Role

Role of bringing team together

Role of blending perspectives

Individualized Comprehensive



Youth with multiple needs across home, school, community

Youth with multiple life domain needs

The adults in youth’s life are not effectively engaged in comprehensive planning

(i.e. adults not getting along very well)


The development of a very unique, individualized, strength-based team & plan with the youth family that is designed to improve quality of life as defined by the youth/family.

Individualized, Comprehensive


What Do Tertiary Plans include?

Supports and interventions across multiple life domains and settings (i.e. behavior support plans, academic interventions, basic living supports, multi-agency strategies, family supports, community supports, etc.)

What’s Different?

Natural supports and unique strengths are emphasized in team and plan development. Youth/family access, voice, ownership are critical features. Plans include supports for adults/family, as well as youth.

What is Wraparound?

Wraparound is a tool (e.g. a process) used to implement interagency systems of care in achieving better outcomes for youth and their families.

The wraparound process is similar to person-centered planning, the individualized Positive Behavior Support

(PBS) planning process.

What is Wraparound?

Wraparound is a process for developing family-centered teams and plans that are strength and needs based.

(Not deficit based)

Across multiple settings and life domains.

Wraparound plans include natural supports, are culturally relevant, practical and realistic.

Implementing Wraparound:

Key Elements Needed for Success

Engaging students, families & teachers

Team development & team ownership

Ensuring student/family/teacher voice

Getting to real (big) needs

Effective interventions

Serious use of strengths

Natural supports

Focus on needs vs. services

Monitoring progress & sustaining

System support buy-in

What’s New in Wraparound?

Skill set specificity

Focus on intervention design/effectiveness

Integration with school-wide PBS

Phases to guide implementation/supervision

Data-based decision-making

Integrity/fidelity assessment (WIT)

Tools to guide teams:

Home School Community

Education Information Tool

Wraparound Skill Sets

1. Identifying “big” needs (quality of life indicators)

“Student needs to feel others respect him”

2. Establish voice/ownership

3. Reframe blame

4. Recognize/prevent teams’ becoming immobilized by “setting events”

5. Getting to interventions that actually work

6. Integrate data-based decision-making into complex process (home-school-community)

It Takes a


…..that builds system capacity for advanced tiers

Continuum of Teaming:

Systems & Student-Specific

Secondary Systems Planning Team

Secondary (Generic) Problem Solving Team

Tertiary Systems Planning Team

Individual Youth FBA/BIP Team

Wraparound Team

District Tertiary Leadership Team




Plans schoolwide & classroom supports

3-Tiered System of Support

Necessary Conversations (Teams)


Systems Team


Uses process data; determines overall intervention effectiveness

Problem Solving

Team Meeting

Standing team; uses

FBA/BIP process for one student at a time

Tertiary Systems

Team Meeting

Uses process data; determines overall intervention effectiveness







Group w. individual feature








Illinois PBIS Network

Rev. 11.19.2012

Teaming at Tier 2

Secondary Systems Planning ‘conversation’

Monitors effectiveness of CICO, S/AIG,

Mentoring, and Brief FBA/BIP supports

Review data to make decisions on improvements to the interventions

Individual students are NOT discussed

Problem Solving Team ‘conversation’

Develops plans for one student at a time

Every school has this type of meeting

Teachers and family are typically invited


Is the idea of separating out functions

(progress monitoring, brief problemsolving, complex interventions, etc) new to your districts/schools?

Progress Monitoring

Secondary/Tertiary Interventions

Teams need to track and monitor interventions by category:

1. How many students are receiving each intervention?

2. How many students are responding to each intervention?

3. What data is used to monitor each intervention type?

Tier 2/Tier 3 (Secondary/Tertiary) Tracking Tool

Activity : Using Data to Improve

Tier 2/Tier 3 Systems of Support

Review Tracking Tool & Systems Response Tools.

How can these tools help your school(s) to identify strengths and weaknesses of their Tier

2/3 systems of support?

How will you encourage/prompt others to use these data for progress monitoring system responses that need to change?

How will you encourage/prompt others to use data for progress monitoring Interventions at

Tiers 2/3?

Universal Screening for Behavior


Gate 1

Implementation Process Summary:

Multiple Gating Procedure

(Adapted from Severson et al. 2007)

Teachers Rank Order then Select Top


Students on Each Dimension

(Externalizing & Internalizing)

Gate 2

Pass Gate 1

Teachers Rate Top 3

Students in Each Dimension

(Externalizing & Internalizing)

Using a Research-Validated

Tool (e.g., SSBD, BASC-


Pass Gate 2

Tier 2


Universal Screening: Suggested Features

Obtain district and building level buy-in for universal screening (e.g., build case for links between student mental health and academic performance)

Build, or strengthen Tier 2 systems and practices (use selfassessment tools, e.g. BAT to monitor progress)

Inform parents/guardians of upcoming screening process

Use teacher nomination process to initially identify students demonstrating internalizing/externalizing behaviors

Incorporate a validated screener that can reliably identify a broad range of externalizing and internalizing behaviors

Obtain consent for students meeting screening criteria

Monitor student response to intervention regularly and use data to determine next steps

A Model for Building Fluency with FBA/BIP

Increased focus on building capacity for school-based T2 and T3 supports

FBA-BIP support

Kathleen Strickland-Cohen, Ph.D.

 strickla@uoregon.edu

Address some of the most common errors in BSP development

Common Mistakes Seen in Behavior

Intervention Plans

“Stuck” on setting events beyond the control of the school,

Student does not take medication at home

ID factors the school can impact

Skipping the replacement behavior

Must have a alternative or replacement behavior that student is taught, practiced, reinforced

Inadequate density for teaching and/or opportunities to practice replacement skill

Insufficient density of reinforcement

EX: If you’re good all week, you can have a soda on Friday

Other Common Mistakes…

The problem behavior is not operationally defined:

Observable, countable, measurable

Aggressive versus hits other peers during unstructured time on a daily basis

There is more than one function

Lack of accurate identification of routines in which problem behavior occurs

Lack of contextually fit strategies in 3 areas

Antecedent: Preventing problem behavior,

Behavior: teaching replacement and desired behaviors

Consequence: BOTH

Minimizing reinforcement of problem behavior

Reinforcing the use of desired/alternative behavior

Redefining the Role of the Behavior Specialist

District Behavior


Train and coach use of

EBP at the school-wide and individual student level


Teams building behavior support plans from

Assessment information

Train 2-3 people per school to conduct




How would this model of rethinking District

Behavior Specialist work within your district?

Can you think of a handful of teachers who could conduct basic FBAs?

Could your team use support in aligning

BSPs with FBAs?

How do/can you apply principles of instruction to supporting your team / staff?

Coaching Tier 3 Implementation

Complex FBA/BIP


Wrap-based RENEW

Tertiary Interventions

Phases of Tier 3 Coaching

Phase 1: Modeling - Coach models the desired skills and competencies

Phase 2: Support and Feedback - Coach provides support and feedback

Phase 3: Monitoring – Coach monitors to ensure fidelity


IL Coaching Plan for Tier 3 Interventions

Coaches & Facilitators participate in intervention specific training

Facilitator/s begin implementing intervention immediately

(i.e. identify youth within week or two of training)

ECs connect with Tier 3 Facilitators to answer questions, ensure youth are identified & Tier 3 processes are starting, and ensure Facilitators are signed up for Adobe Connect Tier 3 TA

Within several weeks of training, Facilitators and External Coaches participate in an Adobe Connect Tier 3 TA group call

Facilitators continue to participate in Adobe Connect Tier 3 TA group calls monthly until fluent with the intervention

ECs continue to participate in Adobe Connect Tier 3 TA group calls monthly until fluent with providing Tier 3 TA themselves

ECs sustain process of providing intensive Tier 3 TA for their district/s

Facilitators & coaches may be invited to participate in a Tertiary

Learning Community (TLC)

Logistics for Tier 3 TA Calls

Trainers connect with External Coaches (EC)

External Coaches gather Tier 3 plans from Tier 3 Facilitators and forwards to Trainers

Trainer uses track changes to highlight positive notes, comments/questions, and corrections to each plan submitted and sends back to External Coaches to give back to Facilitators

Coaches should review edited to plans to learn how to replicate this process in future

Trainer selects 2-3 plans to review on each call

Facilitators of those plans are on the call to receive the TA

Other Facilitators listen/observe to make or understand edits to their own plans

ECs listen/observe to learn how to replicate this process in future

Process repeats for as many rounds as Coaches & Facilitators need

Sample ?’s for Wraparound TA

Have you chosen your first child/family, describe

How did you engage the family? Where did you meet? What questions did they have? How did you describe wraparound?

What tools have you used to gather information ?

(i.e. EI-T, HSC-T,) Describe your experience with the tools

Describe the strengths inventory process.

Share the big need, how did you determine the big need?