Webinar PowerPoint - National Center on Intensive Intervention

Support Systems for Intense
Behaviors: Conducting a School-wide
Needs Assessment
Lori Newcomer, Ph.D.
University of Missouri
February 2013
Today’s Goals
Identify key features of multi-tiered systems of behavior
Review self-assessment and gap analysis process
The Challenge
Clinic based interventions show rather large effect size;
similar outcomes less prevalent in school settings.
Build capacity to support implementation of researchbased interventions for students who require intensive
Implementation requires organizational structures that
facilitate effective teaming, data driven decision
processes, and evaluation.
Often a discrepancy exists between key system features
that support intensive interventions and current status
Districts and schools are increasingly building capacity to
implement prevention-based strategies to support positive
student social behavior and address problem behavior. To
build this capacity, schools are using a multi-tiered
continuum model that was first developed for use in public
health systems (Walker et al. 1996).
Prevention as an outcome
Primary Prevention seeks to prevent harm
Secondary Prevention seeks to reverse harm
Tertiary Prevention seeks to reduce harm
Walker & Sprague, 2002
Guiding principles of multi-tier
a) Provide all students with universal supports
b) Screen students to determine needed services
c) Deliver a continuum of services matched to the level of
support indicated by screening and assessment.
(Horner, Sugai, Todd, & Lewis-Palmer, 2005; Lane & Menzies, 2003; Nelson, Martella, &
Marchand-Martella, 2002; Sprick, Sprick, & Garrison, 1992)
Conceptualizing the Framework
Tertiary Prevention (Tier 3)
≈ 5%
Secondary Prevention (Tier 2)
Evidence-based intervention(s) of
moderate intensity that address
the learning or behavior challenge
of most at-risk students
Individualized intervention(s) of
increased intensity for students
who show minimal response to
secondary prevention
≈ 15%
Primary Prevention (Tier I)
High-quality core instruction
that meets the needs of
most students
≈ 80%
of Students
Positive Behavior Support
Addresses function of behavior to enhance needs of
individuals and specific support strategies
Prevents problem behavior through environmental
Provides active instruction of desired behaviors
Organizes consequences that promote desired behavior,
minimizes rewards for problem behavior, and provides
consequences for problem behavior
Carr et al., 2002
Context Matters!
Successful individual student behavior support is linked to
host environments or school climates that are effective,
efficient, relevant, durable, salable, & logical for all
(Zins & Ponti, 1990)
A systems approach to establish the social culture and
individualized behavior supports to create a safe, effective
learning environment for all students
(Colvin, Kame’enui & Sugai, 1993; Sprick, Sprick & Garrison, 1992; Walker et al.,
Multiple Systems Perspective
Critical School-wide PBIS Elements
Measurable academic and social behavior outcomes
Grounded in data-based decision making
Evidence-based interventions
Operational procedures, processes, and administrative
systems designed to increase accuracy and durability of
practice implementation
(Sugai & Horner, 2002; Sugai, Horner, McIntosh., 2008)
Why conduct a needs assessment
A systematic process for determining and addressing
needs, or "gaps" between current conditions and
requisite conditions.
The discrepancy between the current condition and
requisite condition is used to guide action planning
Purpose is to direct resources to establish and
strengthen the implementation of strategic system
features that are prerequisites to the ability to develop
and effectively deliver intensive interventions that are
driven by data.
Needs Assessment
Action steps to
close the gap
Desired Status
Deficiencies or
“gap” between
current and
desired status
Current Status
Needs Assessment
What action
steps are
necessary to
close the gap?
What strategic
system features
What is the
“gap” between
the current
status and the
desired status?
What strategic
system features
are in place?
Self-Assessment & Gap Analysis
 Two components
• Self-assessment questionnaire
• Gap analysis interview
Self-Assessment & Gap Analysis
Initial Self-Assessment
 Appraise status of multi-tier
supports and
organizational structures
necessary to develop and
deliver intensive
interventions that are
driven by data
Gap Analysis
Strategic Features
Current Status
Deficiencies (gaps)
Guiding thoughts
Future action
Completed by team (administrator, counselor, special
educator, general educator, Title I teacher, reading
specialist, other personnel associated with school
discipline data and intervention efforts).
Team response can reveal gaps between written policy
and actual practice.
Tier 1 Self Assessment
Strategic Features
1. School uses a school-wide approach to reinforce
appropriate social behavior (e.g. SWPBIS, BEST,
Character Education).
2. Expectations and routines are defined and explicitly
taught for all settings.
3. Students are reinforced for following rules and
4. There are clear, written procedures that lay out the
process for handling both major and minor discipline
incidents, including crisis situations.
4. Staff are informed and consistent about which behaviors
are staff/classroom managed and which behaviors are
handled by office or administrators
5. A data system is used to collect and analyze office
referral data; data are used to guide decisions regarding
behavior instruction, interventions and prevention efforts
6. Data reflect that most students (> 80%) receive less than
1 office referral per year.
Tier 2 Self Assessment
Strategic Features
7. Teams identify the percentage of students receiving Tier
2/Targeted intervention supports.
8. A Behavior Support Team exists to receive requests for
assistance, develop support plans, and monitor
intervention results
9. Data are used to identify students who may need Tier 2
and 3 supports
10. Personnel are designated to coordinate targeted and
intensive intervention across all students.
11. A consistent decision process to match students with
appropriate Tier 2 intervention.
12. A procedure to track all students on targeted and
intensive interventions.
13. All Tier 2 strategies are assessed for critical intervention
components and adhere to guidelines (see Tier 2
Intervention and Component analysis)
Tier 2 Intervention Audit and Component Analysis
Tier 2 supports include (a) targeted interventions, (b) small group interventions, and (c) simple function based individual supports.
a) Targeted interventions address the needs of a specific group of students by increasing structure and predictability, the intensity of
instruction and the frequency of contingent feedback.
b) Small group interventions include specially designed small-group instruction and counseling interventions provided by school
psychologists, school social workers, school counselors and other behavior specialists
c) Simple function based individual interventions may include prevention-based strategies that address setting events, antecedents, social
and communication skills, strategies for increasing reinforcement for using positive social replacement skills, and decreasing
reinforcement for problem behavior.
Enter the name of each targeted interventions delivered in your school. For each intervention component, determine if there is documentation
that the component is in place (1) or if there is no documentation regarding the intervention component (0). Typical targeted interventions
include Check-in Check-out, Social Skills Instruction, Check and Connect, and Organization Skills
Targeted Interventions
Intervention Name
1. There is a designated coordinator and personnel to deliver the intervention
2. Intervention has operational definition of target behavior/skill deficit
3. Intervention has operational definition of replacement behavior/skill
4. Intervention has written materials that describe core features, functions,
and systems of strategy
5. Intervention has written procedures for implementation
6. Intervention has written procedures to teach replacement behavior
7. Staff have been trained on responsibilities and how to implement
8. Intervention has written data decision rules to match student with strategy
9. Intervention has written data-based guidelines for when to fade or intensify
10. Intervention fidelity is assessed on a regular basis
11. Intervention has procedure for progress monitoring
12. Student progress is monitored at least weekly
13. Overall intervention effectiveness is monitored monthly
14. Intervention includes frequent communication with family
15. Intervention is implemented within 3 days of determination that student
should receive intervention
16. Formal procedures exist to notify teacher(s) involved with student about
student’s participation
17. Orientation materials provide information for a student to get started on
the intervention.
18. Opportunities to practice new skills are provided daily
Tier 3 Self Assessment
Strategic Features
14. Students are appropriately identified and provided with
intensive supports.
15. A team exists that builds and implements individual
behavior support plans.
16. Team members have sufficient formal training in
Functional Assessment and evidence-based
17. The school/district has written procedures on how to
conduct a Functional Assessment
18. Data are used to monitor fidelity of implementation of
individual intensive supports
19. Coaching or some other form of support is available to
teachers to assist them in implementing intensive
interventions as designed.
Gap Analysis
Clarifying questions listed to help discern how current
practices differ from full implementation of strategic
Questions designed to identify deficiencies in training,
resource allocation, planning, or accurate implementation
related to the strategic feature.
Team determines what needs to be in place to close the
Needs are prioritized and translated into action
NCII Self-Assessment Gap Analysis
The gap-analysis is formatted for use by an external consultant and is designed to be used with the Self-Assessment Questionnaire to determine
the current status of behavior support and deficiencies across Tiers 1, 2 and 3. The Gap Analysis is divided into four areas:
1. Strategic Feature: The first column on the left identifies a strategic feature of behavior support that corresponds with each question on the
Self-Assessment Questionnaire. Strategic features are considered key elements of a systemic, multi-tiered approach to prevention and
intervention of problem behaviors.
2. Current Status: The second column provides guiding questions that can be used to probe for additional information to determine the quality
and integrity of implementation for each item. When a team reports that a feature is in place, these clarifying questions can help determine
if actions are needed to strengthen the implementation of the feature. For example, a team may report that the school has a schoolwide
approach to proactive discipline in place; however the clarifying questions may indicate that professional development and consistency
across staff are inadequate. This would indicate a deficiency or gap between the current status and having the feature in place.
3. Deficiencies: The third column provides a space to write deficiencies that must be addressed
4. Guiding Thoughts: The fourth column provides guiding thoughts and suggestions for action steps when deficiencies are noted.
5. Recommendation for Future Action: The final column provides a space to record any recommendations made to the school/team regarding
the implementation of the strategic feature.
Tier 1: Primary Prevention
Clarifying Questions &
Current Status
there specific
Consensus among
behavior support team barriers to having a team
collaborate on completing
regarding status of
the questionnaire?
Strategic Feature
Guiding Thoughts
Recommendation for
Future Action
 Administrators may
report that procedures
exist and are
documented; however
including other staff in
the self-assessment
process can reveal gaps
between written policy
and actual practice.
 If assessment was
completed only by
administrative staff,
include other staff in
Data Systems Across Tiers
Strategic Feature
Clarifying Questions
An efficient data system •
is used to collect and
analyze office referral
Data are used to guide
decisions regarding
interventions, and
prevention efforts.
Who reviews the data?
How frequently is it
What are the guidelines
or cut points to indicate
when a student needs
additional support?
Tier 1
Closing the Gap
System to review ODR
and suspension rates
as a reflection of overall
school climate.
System to use ODR to
identify students or
teachers that may be in
need of additional
Establish data decision
Arrange professional
development in data
analysis and decision
Data Systems Across Tiers
Strategic Feature
Clarifying Questions
Data are used to
identify students who
may need Tier 2 and 3
Tier 2
Closing the Gap
What data are used to •
determine which
students need
additional help?
Have specific cut
points or decision rules
been established?
How often is the data
Who reviews the data?
Establish schedule
and decision rules to
identify students who
are not responsive to
Tier 1.
Data Systems Across Tiers
Tier 3
Strategic Feature
Clarifying Questions
Closing the Gap
Possible areas for
professional development
and technical support:
• Data/progress
monitoring systems
• Excel spreadsheets
Data are used to
monitor the progress
of students on
individual support
Who is responsible for
collecting and
analyzing the data?
Are there guidelines or
decision rules based
on the data to guide
intervention revisions?
How is the data shared
with relevant
Are data graphically
Based on responses to items 1 through 6,
does the school have the foundations of
primary prevention in place?
Continue with follow-up
interview to assess current
level of Tier 2 supports
Provide contact information
for state or regional PBIS
Coordinator to request
information on training and
technical assistance
Common gaps in Tier 2 systems
 Data-based decision rules to identify students who need
Tier 2 support have not been identified.
 Tier 2 interventions often lack the critical components of
effective intervention strategies.
 Absence of adequate progress monitoring
 Absence of fidelity measures
Final Thoughts
Efficient systems at the Tier 1 and Tier 2 level enhance
schools’ ability to effectively provide intensive behavioral
support for the most challenging students.
Build Tier 3 systems on adequate Tier 1 and Tier 2
The devil is in the details
Carr, E.,G., Dunlap, G., Horner, R.H., Koegel, R.L., Turnbull, A.P., Sailor, W., et al. (2002).
Positive behavior support: Evolution of an applied science. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 4(1), 4-16.
Colvin, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Sugai, G. (1993). Reconceptualizing behavior management
and schoolwide discipline in general education. Education and Treatment of Children,16,
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Todd, A. W., & Lewis-Palmer, T. (2005). School-wide positive
behavior support. Individualized supports for students with problem behaviors: Designing
positive behavior plans, 359-390.
Lane, Kathleen L., and Holly M. Menzies (2003). The effects of a school-based primary
intervention program: Preliminary outcomes. Preventing School Failure 47.1 (2003): 2632.
Nelson, J. Ron, Ronald M. Martella, and Nancy Marchand-Martella (2002). "Maximizing
Student Learning The Effects of a Comprehensive School-Based Program for Preventing
Problem Behaviors." Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 10.3 (2002): 136148.
Sprick, R., Sprick, M., & Garrison, M. (1992). Foundations: Developing positive school-wide
discipline policies. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive
behavior supports. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 24(1-2), 23-50.
Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., & McIntosh, K. (2008). Best practices in developing a broad-scale
system of support for school-wide positive behavior support. Best practices in school
psychology V, 3, 765-780.
Walker, H. M., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Bullis, M., Sprague, J. R., Bricker, D., & Kaufman,
M. J. (1996). Integrated approaches to preventing antisocial behavior patterns among
school-age children and youth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4(4),
Zins, J. E., & Ponti, C. R. (1990). Strategies to facilitate the implementation, organization,
and operation of system-wide consultation programs. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation, 1(3), 205-218.
Walker, H.M., & Sprague, J. (2002). Intervention strategies for diverting at-risk children and
youth from destructive outcomes. Report on Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in
Youth, 1, 5-8, 18-19.
This webinar was produced under the U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No.
H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project
The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the
positions or polices of the U.S. Department of Education. No
official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of
any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in
this website is intended or should be inferred.
Lori Newcomer, Ph.D.
E-Mail: [email protected]
University of Missouri, 16 Hill Hall
Columbia, MO 65211
General Information: 800-356-2735
Website: www.intensiveintervention.org
While permission to redistribute this webinar is not
necessary, the citation should be:
National Center on Intensive Intervention. (2013).
Support Systems for Intense Behaviors: Conducting
a School-wide Needs Assessment. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs, National Center on Intensive
Thank you for participating in this NCII Webinar! We are very
interested in your experience, and would like to ensure
future Webinars are presented effectively. Please take a
moment to click the link below and fill out this survey—it will
take you 5 minutes!
Your browser will be re-routed to this link after the

similar documents