Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-II (ABAS-II)
The ABAS-II is a standardized scale that measures a child’s adaptive and daily living skills used
to function in their everyday life.
Teacher/Caregiver Form
Adaptive Skill Area
Standard Score and
Standard Deviation
Parent/Primary Caregiver
Form
Standard Score and
Standard Deviation
61
1
6
6
90
Social Composite
Leisure
7
Social
10 (S)
84
Practical Composite
School/Home Living
8
Health and Safety
15 (S)
Self-Care
3
Motor
6
General Adaptive Composite
74 ( Greater then -1.5 standard
(GAC)
deviations)
Composite scores are bolded above and considered to be within the typical range between 85-115 (-1 to +1
Standard Deviation). Scaled Scores which are italicized above are considered to be within the typical
range with scores between 8-12. Skills that are relative strengths are indicated with an (S) in the table
above.
Conceptual Composite
Communication
Functional Pre-Academics
Self-Direction
70
4
8 (S)
4
67
4
5
64
5
4
5
10 (S)
70 (-2 standard deviations)
Scores from the ABAS-II were obtained by interview with Mrs. A, Richard’s current day care
provider and by parent interview, with Melissa, Richards’s mother who kindly served as
respondents. Overall, Richard demonstrates adaptive behaviors within the current day care
setting that fall within the average and borderline range, which is -2.00 standard deviations
below the mean of 100 for a child his age. Given day care provider’s input, Richard obtained
a GAC score of 70. Given the variability in any assessment there is a 95% chance that his
true score falls between 66-74. Richard’s GAC falls within the 2nd percentile. His parent
reported adaptive scores should be viewed with caution because there is a significant
difference between his composite scores, indicating some level of variability in terms of his
strengths and weaknesses. According to day care provider report, Richard’s functional preacademics and motor skills were in the average range, while all other skill areas were in the
borderline range. According to parent report, Richard’s communication and self care scores
fell within the extremely low range, while his scores in community use, functional preacademics, leisure, self-direction and motor were in the below average range.
In the conceptual domain, Richard’s strength was in functional pre-academics. He can sing
the alphabet, name basic colors, shapes and recognize his name. In terms of his
communication, Richard does not listen closely when people talk, discuss a topic for long
periods of time, and use irregular plural nouns. Self-direction is an area where his skills
need to continue to develop. He requires support from adults to maintain focus on a difficult
task as well as remain on task for longer periods of time. Richard also needs additional
reminders to ask permission from adults to do activities and support with controlling his
temper when he disagrees with friends.
Within the social skills domain, Richard’s scores ranged from below average to average. He
demonstrated reported difficulties with waiting his turn, initiating social interactions with
others, and placing reasonable demands on friends. The practical domain target skills are
important for school participation and independence. Scores between home and daycare in
this domain were variable. Richard’s health and safety skills were a relative strength for a
boy his age. His mother reported that Richard’s self care skills were an area of weakness.
There were significant differences between results gained from Richard’s parent and day
care provider reports and my observations within the classroom. The IEP teams should
discuss and clarify these differences at the IEP meeting.