Interconnected Systems Framework Kelly Perales Midwest PBIS Network www. midwestpbis. org National PBIS TA Center www. pbis. org January 25, 2018
Where We’ve Been: • 2002 -2007: Site Development with PBIS Expansion (informal and independent) • 2005: Co. P focus on integration of PBIS and SMH • 2008: ISF White Paper: formal partnership between PBIS and SMH • 2009 - 2013 Monthly calls with implementation sites, national presentations (from sessions to strands) • 2009 -2011 Grant Submissions • June 2012 - September 2013 ISF Monograph • Monograph Advisory group • 2015: ISF Learning Community, SOC Webinar Series • 2016: RCT Grant awarded • 2016: Targeted Work Group Webinars (8) • 2017: Targeted Work Group Webinars continuing, knowledge development sites across country
School District Knowledge Development Sites • • • Marion County, Florida Alton, Illinois Community Consolidated School District, Illinois Sandoval, Illinois Springfield, Illinois Special School District of St. Louis, Missouri
School District Knowledge Development Sites • • • Buncombe County, North Carolina Chapel Hill-Carrboro City, North Carolina Bellefonte Area, Pennsylvania Keystone Central, Pennsylvania Scranton, Pennsylvania Charleston, South Carolina
Role of the ISF State and/or Regional “Facilitators” (within ISF Targeted Work Group) • Coordinates and leads state teams through the process of establishing and maintaining the implementation of ISF • Coordinates and communicates across levels of implementation with direct connection to state/region and building • Provides coordination and leadership for team and action plan implementation. • Facilitates the collection, aggregation and utilization of data for decision making. • Select local district/community(s) to work though the ISF • Provides training and technical assistance to district community teams. • Assesses training needs, arranges training experiences and develops capacity.
Advancing Education Effectiveness: Interconnecting School Mental Health and School-Wide Positive Behavior Support Editors: Susan Barrett, Lucille Eber and Mark Weist pbis. org csmh. umaryland IDEA Partnership NASDSE
Content 1. How can we install effective systems for mental health support for all youth through schools? 1. Describe history, rationale and structure for an integrated framework (The Interconnected Systems Framework-ISF). 1. Share local examples of community and school leaders and practitioners exploring, adopting, installing, implementing, refining, and improving an integrated system. 1. Resources available to support implementation
Partnerships are needed: One in 5 youth have a MH “condition” At least 50% of those get no treatment School is “defacto” MH provider Juvenile Justice system is next level of system default Suicide is 2 nd leading cause of death among young adults Factors that impact mental health occur ‘round the clock’ It is challenging for educators to address the factors beyond school • It is challenging for community providers to address the factors in school • •
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 • “Referrals to a MH person” viewed as an intervention
Challenges • Ad hoc and weak connections of community mental health providers to schools – Need for systematic MOUs that clarify roles – Integration into school-based teams – Funding support to function at Tier 1 and 2, and to not be “co-located” at Tier 3
Compelling Factors Detention/ RTF AAA APS Probation Partial Detox Court Mentor Truancy Psych Residential Special Ed Counseling Referral Intake Referral Eligibility Intake Ed. Sys JJ Sys rral Residential Case Work Intake CW Sys Intake Foster Care Referral MH Sys MR Sys Intake Psychiatrist th D&A Sys Refe Therapist. MCO Sys Partial Health Sys Referral Case Mgmt. . ER Hospital. Intake TSS/BSC Mobile T Intake Primary Care Mgmt. Case Mgmt. Inpatient
SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT FRAMEWORK: ~5% ~15% Primary Prevention: School-/Classroom. Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings Tertiary Prevention: Specialized Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior Secondary Prevention: Specialized Group Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior • Students • Staff • Parents/F amilies ~80% of Students
Experimental Research on SWPBIS Bradshaw, C. P. , Koth, C. W. , Thornton, L. A. , & Leaf, P. J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10(2), 100 -115 Bradshaw, C. P. , Koth, C. W. , Bevans, K. B. , Ialongo, N. , & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462 -473. Bradshaw, C. P. , Mitchell, M. M. , & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133 -148. Bradshaw, C. P. , Reinke, W. M. , Brown, L. D. , Bevans, K. B. , & Leaf, P. J. (2008). Implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1 -26. Bradshaw, C. , Waasdorp, T. , Leaf. P. , (2012 )Effects of School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems and adjustment. Pediatrics, 130(5) 1136 -1145. Horner, R. , Sugai, G. , Smolkowski, K. , Eber, L. , Nakasato, J. , Todd, A. , & Esperanza, J. , (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133 -145. Horner, R. H. , Sugai, G. , & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1 -14. Ross, S. W. , Endrulat, N. R. , & Horner, R. H. (2012). Adult outcomes of school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions. 14(2) 118 -128. Waasdorp, T. , Bradshaw, C. , & Leaf , P. , (2012) The Impact of Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Bullying and Peer Rejection: A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial. Archive of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine. 2012; 166(2): 149 -156 Bradshaw, C. P. , Pas, E. T. , Goldweber, A. , Rosenberg, M. , & Leaf, P. (2012). Integrating schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports with tier 2 coaching to student support teams: The PBISplus Model. Advances in School Mental Health Promotion, 5(3), 177 -193. doi: 10. 1080/1754730 x. 2012. 707429 Freeman, J. , Simonsen, B. , Mc. Coach D. B. , Sugai, G. , Lombardi, A. , & Horner, ( submitted) Implementation Effects of School-wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports on Academic, Attendance, and Behavior Outcomes in High Schools. SWPBIS E xperimenta l ly Related to: 1. Reducti on in prob lem behav 2. Increas ior ed academ ic perform 3. Increas ance ed attenda nce 4. Improve d perceptio n of safety 5. Reducti on in bully ing behav 6. Improve iors d organiza tional effic 7. Reducti iency on in staff turnover 8. Increas ed percept ion of teac 9. Improve her efficac d Social E y motional c ompetenc e
PBIS Provides a Solid Foundation…. but More is Needed… • Many schools implementing PBIS struggle to implement effective interventions at Tiers 2 and 3 • Youth with “internalizing” issues may go undetected • PBIS systems (although showing success in social climate and discipline) often do not address broader community data and mental health prevention.
Comparison of School-wide and Program-wide PBIS Common to Both School-wide and Program-wide PBIS
ISF Defined – Structure and process for education and mental health systems to interact in most effective and efficient way. – Guided by key stakeholders in education and mental health/community systems – Who have the authority to reallocate resources, change role and function of staff, and change policy.
ISF Enhances MTSS Core Features Effective teams that include community mental health providers Data-based decision making that include school data beyond ODRs and community data Formal processes for the selection & implementation of evidence-based practices (EBP) across tiers with team decision making Early access through use of comprehensive screening, which includes internalizing and externalizing needs Rigorous progress-monitoring for both fidelity & effectiveness of all interventions regardless of who delivers Ongoing coaching at both the systems & practices level for both school and community employed professionals
Comparison of School-wide and Program-wide PBIS Stronger in School-wide • • • Focus on public areas like hallways, cafeteria, etc. Emphasis on tangible reinforcement for meeting behavior expectations Consequences for undesired behavior are specified and predictable Stronger in Program-wide • • • Specific social skills instruction is often provided as targeted group support. Depending on age of students, it may or may not be part of universal instruction. SW PAPBS facilitator is usually either a consultant provided by the IU or a contracted behavioral health provider • Focus on classrooms Usually some combination of tangible and social reinforcement for meeting behavior expectations Family involvement is specifically called for in the EC Benchmarks of Quality Specific social skills instruction is part of universal instruction. Children needing targeted supports usually get additional instruction and/or practice rather than new content. Most programs support one of their own staff to become a PW PAPBS facilitator
Traditional An Interconnected Systems Framework MH counselor “sees” student at appointments MH person on teams at all tiers. Interventions are defined (core features, dosage. Frequency, outcomes) Clinicians only do “mental health” MH is everyone’s job. Clinicians contribute to integrated plan Case management notes Fidelity AND outcome data determined before delivery; data monitored continuously by teams
is s s e c c A. 2 gh u o n e T NO 1. Single System of Delivery Key Messages 4. MTSS essential to install SMH 3. Mental Health is for ALL
1. Single System of Delivery • One committed and functional team with authority guides the work, using data at three tiers of intervention • MH/community partners participate across ALL Tiers • Evidence Based Practices/ Programs integrated at each tier • Symmetry (of process) at District and Building level • District has a plan to integrate MH at all buildings • Plan is based on community and school data • Plan to build “social emotional” capacity across staff • Training and Coaching in place for ALL staff (community and school employed) • Staff are competent and confident in identifying, intervening and/or referring
ISF Implementation Inventory SW PBIS Implementation Teaming Cross Training and Planning • Core features of PBIS continue to be implemented at each tier, as measured by the School-Wide Evaluation Tool, Benchmarks of Quality, Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers or Tiered Fidelity Inventory • Effective teams that include school and community mental health providers, family/youth • Multi-level teaming within and across tiers • Ongoing coaching at both the systems and practices level. • Cross system training in ISF, mental and behavioral health and wellness, and selected interventions Family and Youth Engagement • Family and youth perspectives are solicited at all tiers • Family members and youth are on teams as appropriate • Family and youth are included in intervention planning and delivery Intervention Selection, Implementation and Progress • Formal processes for the selection and implementation of evidence based practices (EBP) • Rigorous progress-monitoring for both fidelity and effectiveness SW Data-Based Decision Making • Early access through use of comprehensive screening • Rigorous progress-monitoring for both fidelity and effectiveness
What Does it Mean to Integrate? Change in routines and procedures? (e. g. who needs to be available to participate in team meetings? ) Change in how interventions are selected and monitored? (e. g. team review of data/research vs individual clinician choice? ) Change in language we use? (e. g. identifying specific interventions vs generic terms such as “counseling” or “supports”? ) Changes in Roles/functions of staff? (e. g. clinicians coordinating/overseeing some interventions that non-clinicians deliver? )
Who should be on the team? Academic MTSS Director School Improvement Special Education Director, Professional Development/Teacher Mentoring Local MH provider/Core Service Age Board Member Family Youth Community Leaders District Community Leadership Team Implementation Team Juvenile Services Coordinator Social Services Afterschool Dept of Recreation Services Law Enforcement Youth Move Administrative and Teacher Representative (Union) Student Supports Director
Who should be on the team? Program Improvement EC Administrator Local MH provider/Core Service Agency Professional Development/Teacher Mentoring EC Administrator Family Youth Community Leaders Early Childhood Community Leadership Team Implementation Team Family Center Early Intervention B-3 Early Intervention Preschool Library Dept of Recreation Services EC Administrator Social Services
Trauma Informed Strategies Discipline Handbook School Mental Health Wraparound Check & Connect Function-based Support Classroom Management Restorative Practices Academic & Social Emotional Behavior Success Wellness & Self-Regulation Cognitive Behavior Counseling Check In Check Out Social Emotional Learning Dropout Prevention Bullying Prevention School Climate Cultural Responsiveness Literacy Instruction Social Skills Programming
Example of Work Flow Checklist 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Form or Expand District Team (Workgroup of existing team? ) • Membership Establish Operating Procedures Select Sites (knowledge Development/Demonstration) Conduct Resource Mapping of current programs/initiatives/teams • Identify gaps/needs • Assess staff utilization • Examine organizational barriers • Establish priority- measureable outcomes Develop Evaluation Plan • District and School Level • Tools Identified • Economic Benefits Develop Integrated Action plan • Identification of Formal Process for Selecting EBP’s • System for Screening • Communication and Dissemination Plan Write MOU- Determine who will implement the plan
CIU 10 ISF Installation • Bellefonte Area School District • Keystone Central School District • Early Childhood, School Age, other Community Stakeholders
Getting Started • We got support from the Leadership Team to move ahead and asked them who they felt should be invited to the table • An email was sent to various community agencies including the Infant Development Program, The Women’s Center, Children and Youth, Probation, various Mental Health providers, Drug and Alcohol prevention and counseling services, community drug/alcohol prevention groups, Lock Haven University, Lock Haven and Renovo YMCA, Clinton County Commissioners, Police agencies/Clinton County District Attorney, physicians, preschools, Head Start, Clinton County Economic Partnership, KCSD School Board President, and members of the Leadership Team for the district • We promised lunch…they came to the meeting!
Getting Started cont. • Discussion of moving beyond access – SAP Data on referrals and those connected to interventions within the community • Discussion of Early Childhood and School Age connections – education and mental health • Discussion of school and community data
Moving forward • All agencies are overwhelmed by the needs in our community…there is no doubt we have to work together if any of us are going to be successful • The communication has already brought to light how little we sometimes know about one another…and how important it is that we become better acquainted with what our agencies and programs have to offer • This communication has opened lines for better problem solving and a “we’re all in this together” mentality
Integrated Action Plan • School employed and community employed staff share responsibilities and resources • Uses framework of PBIS and blends in SMH across Tiers to provide full continuum of prevention and intervention based on data and use of EBPs
2. Access is NOT enough All work is focused on ensuring positive outcomes for ALL children and youth and their families. • Interventions matched to presenting problem using data, monitored for fidelity and outcome • Teams and staff are explicit about types of interventions students and youth receive (e. g. from “student receives counseling” to “student receives 4 coping skills group sessions) • Skills acquired during sessions are supported by ALL staff (e. g. staff are aware that student is working on developing coping skills and provides prompts, precorrects, acknowledges across school day)
Messages on Data-Based Decision Making • Expanded view of data within schools – Visits to nurse, counselor, time out of class • Expanded view of data from community – Student and family perception – Connected to other child serving systems – JJ, CYS – Risk and protective factors – Demographics – High rate of: unemployment, military, immigrant
Where Do Specific “MH” Interventions Fit? § That depends on the data of the school and community Examples of Expanded View of data: • • Child welfare contacts, Violence rates Incarceration rates Deployed families, Homeless families, Unemployment spikes New comers
Multi-Tiered System of Support Staff to Student Ratio Tier 3 Individual students that are receiving support from individualized teams of adults Tier 2 Groupings of youth that are being supported by 12 adults at a time Tier 1 All youth interspersed with all adults. All staff are supporting all youth. Staff Students
Multiple Evidence-Based Interventions of Varying Intensity • Install foundational interventions School-wide • Ensuring identification, monitoring, and selection process are in place • Identifying additional interventions that might be needed such as: • Trauma Informed Interventions • Coping Cat • Check and Connect
School Data Community Data Student and System level • Academic (Benchmark, GPA, Credit accrual etc) Discipline Attendance Climate/Perception Visits to Nurse, Social Worker, Counselor, etc • Screening from one view • • • Community Demographics • Food Pantry Visits • Protective and Risk Factors • Calls to crisis centers, hospital visits • Screening at multiple views
3. Mental Health is for ALL • Positive school climate and culture serves as protective factor. Social/emotional/behavioral health addressed with same level of attention and concern as is our children’s academic and cognitive achievement. • Social behavior skills taught and reinforced by ALL staff across ALL settings, and embedded in ALL curriculum • Behavior and social emotional examples used to explicitly teach what behaviors look like and sound like across school settings.
Messages on Continuum of Interventions • SEL/PBIS begin with foundation at Tier One • Increase support with CICO and DPR • Small group instruction on specific skill sets – Social, coping, problem solving etc. skills as low level generic, higher frequency dosage of teaching – Skills are layered into DPR • Small group instruction to address a specific identified need – Use of screening, expanded data, referral
Review of Data “generic” coping skills Coping skills for anxiety (i. e. , module from MATCH-ADTC or Coping Cat) Coping skills for Trauma (i. e. , module from MATCH-ADTC or SPARCS) “generic” social skills Aggression Replacement Training (ART)
ISF Spreadsheet (BESS + Early Warning System Data) Teacher Behavior Emotional Risk Index Externalizing Risk Index Internalizing Risk Index Overall Score ODRs Attend OSS ESE Total Risk Score DE LA ROCHA, LUCY RIVERA, HEATHER Extremely Elevated Risk 3 10 13 5 N 11 Elevated Risk Extremely Elevated Risk 2 10 11 3 Y 10 BORDELL, BOBBIEJO Extremely Elevated Risk 3 6 7 3 Y 10 316108 HAHN, DONNA Extremely Elevated Risk Normal Risk 3 2 13 1 N 10 312017 MCLEARY BOLAND, SANDRA Extremely Elevated Risk Normal Risk 3 10 4 6 Y 10 315508 MCLEARY BOLAND, SANDRA Extremely Elevated Risk Normal Risk 3 5 6 9 N 10 315764 KING, LINDA Extremely Elevated Risk 3 2 18 2 N 10 339888 SELLERS, KATRINA Extremely Elevated Risk Normal Risk 3 2 9 3 N 9 Student Number 337005 320011 314331 Private Student and Teacher info
Which students might we consider for Social Academic Instructional Groups? Why?
4. Installed and aligned with core features of MTSS framework. • Integrated teams representative of all stakeholders including families and students; • Apply data-based decision making; • Have a formal process for selecting and implementing evidence-based practices; • Ensure early access through comprehensive screening; • Progress monitor for both fidelity and effectiveness; • Ensure coaching.
“Social & Academic Daily Instructional Groups” (sample academic skills group) EXPECTATIONS Be Safe Progress Report (DPR) Sample NAME: ___________ DATE: _________ (FBA/BIP) 1 st block 2 1 “Individualiz ed Student Card for Mark” 0 2 nd block 3 rd block 4 th block 5 th block 6 th block 7 th block 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 Walk to class Mark will keep Keep hands to self Be Respectful 2 Be Responsible 2 1 0 Possible behaviors taught in previous SAIG gro Replacement behavior Use appropriate Mark will hold up a language yellow card to Raise needing hand toa indicate break speak Mark fill out Bring will materials assignment Fill out assignment notebook Total Points Teacher Initials 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0
Before you Start Developing NEW, Assess What’s Currently in Place • What groups are currently running? • Who are they led by? • What data is gathered to assess: – If students are responding? – If the intervention is being done with fidelity? • • Is the intervention being done with fidelity? Are students responding? IF YES- KEEP IT! IF NO - Consider modifying or adding NEW
Example of a School Assessment of Social Academic Instructional Groups Name of Group How many youth have received How many youth responded Is the curriculum Evidence Based Is the group being implemented with fidelity? Problem Solving 20 10 YES NO Pro-Social 30 25 YES Divorce Group 7 3 NO NO Coping Cat 12 12 YES Girls Group 30 10 NO NO
The Hexagon Tool The National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) • http: //implementation. fpg. unc. edu/sites/implementation. fpg. unc. edu/file s/NIRN-Education-The. Hexagon. Discussionand. Analysis. Tool. pdf • http: //implementation. fpg. unc. edu/sites/implementation. fpg. unc. edu/file s/NIRN-Education-The. Hexagon. Discussion. Capture. Tool. pdf The Hexagon Tool can help states, districts, and schools appropriately select evidence-based instructional, behavioral, and social- emotional interventions and prevention approaches by reviewing six broad factors in relation to the program or practice under consideration.
Think big and ask questions first
Installation of SWPBIS Tiers Tier 1 SWPBIS Tiers 2 & 3 SWPBIS 2012 -2013 Full (SET = 100 / 93) Informal mentoring system 2013 -2014 Full (Bo. Q = 89) SPO, SAP, Project RENEW 2014 -2015 Full (Bo. Q = 97) SPO, SAP (MH / D&A Assessments), Choices, Project RENEW 2015 -2016 Full (Bo. Q = 96) SPO, SAP, ART, Choices, RENEW, Positive Academic Year Action Note. SET = Schoolwide Evaluation Tool; Bo. Q = Benchmarks of Quality; SPO = School Police Office; SAP = Student Assistance Program; ART = Aggression Replacement Therapy; RENEW = Rehabilitation, Empowerment, Natural Supports, Education, and Work. 50
Office Discipline Referral Data
Department of Public Instruction Trauma-Sensitive Schools Resources http: //sspw. dpi. wi. gov/sspw_mhtrauma
Daily Progress Report (DPR) Sample NAME: ___________ DATE: _________ Teachers please indicate YES (2), SO-SO (1), or NO (0) regarding the student’s achievement in relation to the following sets of expectations/behaviors. 1 st block 2 nd block 3 rd block 4 th block EXPECTATIONS Be Safe 2 1 0 Be Respectful 2 1 0 Be Responsible 2 1 0 Total Points Teacher Initials Adapted from Grant Middle School STAR CLUB
Trauma-Informed. Daily Tier 2 Group Progress Report (DPR) Sample NAME: ___________ DATE: _________ Teachers please indicate YES (2), SO-SO (1), or NO (0) regarding the student’s achievement in relation to the following sets of expectations/behaviors. 1 st block 2 nd block 3 rd block 4 th block EXPECTATIONS Be Safe 2 1 0 Self-Check Use calming strategy Be Respectful 2 1 0 2 1 0 Use your words Use safe hands Be Responsible Ask for help Connect with safe person Total Points Teacher Initials Adapted from Grant Middle School STAR CLUB
“Tier 2 Trauma- Daily Progress Report (DPR) Sample Informed Group NAME: ___________ DATE: _________ DPR” Teachers please indicate YES (2), SO-SO (1), or NO (0) regarding the student’s achievement in relation to the following sets of expectations/behaviors. 1 st block 2 nd block 3 rd block 4 th block EXPECTATIONS Be Safe 2 1 0 SOS (slow down, orient, self-check) Use mindfulness Be Respectful 2 1 0 2 1 0 Distract & Self. Soothe Let ‘M Go Be Responsible Make A Link Make Meaning Total Points Teacher Initials Adapted from Grant Middle School STAR CLUB
MS Pyramid of Interventions Tier 3: Individualized Supports -Structured Interventions for the few students with the greatest need • Complex Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) and Behavior Support • 3 R (Respectful, Relevant, Realistic) Plan(s) • Individualized Family and Youth-Driven Planning and Support • Community Supports (WRAP, DCYF, Mental Health, and Child and Family Services) • Enhanced Academic Seminar Tier 2: Behavioral Interventions & Supports- Supports for some students who struggle with meeting the expectations • Simple Behavior Support Plans • Simple Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBA) • Targeted Counseling, • Coping CAT • Academic Seminar • Check In/Check Out, • Mentoring Individualization and Intensity of Interventions Increases A Few Students >5% Some Students >15% Tier 1 Interventions & Supports- Structured Behavior Interventions for all students • PRIDE Expectation Matrix, • PRIDE Classroom Expectations & PRIDE Classroom Lessons • Guidance Services, • Homeroom Guidance • Continuum of Discipline Responses • Student/Parent Conferences, • Before & After School Program • Project Success (Substance Use) ALL Students 100%
Teaching Matrix Expectations Respectful Achieving & Organized INCORPORATE Coping Strategies for Managing Stress All Settings Halls s n io t a t Be on task. Give your best effort. Be prepared. Walk. Be kind. Hands/feet to self. Help/share with others. Use normal voice volume. Walk to right. c e p x E. 1 Playgrounds Have a plan. Share equipment. Include others. Recycle. Clean up after self. Invite those sitting alone to join in Study, read, compute. Sit in one spot. Watch for your stop. Whisper. Return books. Listen/watc h. Use appropriate applause. Use a quiet voice. Stay in your seat. Push in chairs. Treat books carefully. Pick up. Treat chairs carefully. Wipe your feet. Have a lunch plan and choose quiet or social lunch area Invite friends to join me c i f i c e p S Responsible r o s s e r l o u i v R a. h 3 Be Pick up litter. Maintain physical space. Lunch Library/ Comput er Lab Use equipment properly. Put litter in garbage can. Use my breathing technique Listen to my signals CO Assembly Bus 2. NT NA EX TU T( R Lo AL ca tio ns
How Can Schools Engage the Early Childhood Community?
What is your Community? Pennsylvania Examples: Lancaster County Northeastern York School District York County Communities within Allegheny County
Who are Your Local Partners? Group Care
Who are Your Local Partners? Community Activities
Who are Your Local Partners? Places Young Families Gather
What are the considerations for partnering? $ Borders Regulations Funding Ages Served
Resources and Strategies for Community-wide Support
Where We Are Headed: • 2017 -18 TWG webinars and knowledge development sites continue • Training/TA curriculum and workbook available online • Other resources, tools, examples also available • In process of developing “Monograph Volume 2: An Implementation Guide”
www. midwestpbis. org
Several Pages are Available
Sharing Examples from Sites
New Workbook with Hyperlinks
Join the Targeted Workgroup Webinars
Question/Discussion Similarities/Differences with Vision/Systems in your state/region/district? • Does your District have a current district-level leadership team that has responsibility for overseeing/supporting MTSS in all schools? • Are there community/family representatives on this team? • Are roles clearly defined?
Question/Discussion: What is “Current Status” of MH in your Schools? 1. Mainly a referral/handoff system? 2. MH clinicians delivering interventions in schools but through separate systems? 3. Some level of integrated system for delivery of interventions? 4. Data used regularly by teams?
Question/Discussion: • What elements/features of an interconnected system are evident or emerging in your districts/schools? • What action/steps could move your school(s) towards more efficient and effective integrated ‘behavioral health’ system in your state/district/schools? • Questions/comments?
Contact info: Kelly Perales Kelly. perales@midwestpbis. org 717 -770 -9365