Leadership in Implementing School wide PBIS February 27

Leadership in Implementing School -wide PBIS February 27 Rob Horner University of Oregon OSEP TA-Center on PBIS www. pbis. org

Goals • Define current status of SWPBIS implementation • Define lessons learned about effective leadership in implementation of SWPBIS. • Define role of the Implementation Blueprint • Detail how the collection and use of data affects implementation of SWPBIS • Provide opportunity for questions.

Themes Affecting Education: Multi-tiered Systems, Evidence-based Practices, Implementation Science Evidence-based Practices Performance Assessment (Fidelity) Adaptive y nc ete mp Co Implementation Science n io Decision Support Data System Leadership Drivers Technical at Effective Implementation iz an Facilitative Administration Training Selection Multi-tiered Systems of Support rg Systems Intervention O Coaching

School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS) • The social culture of a school matters. • A continuum of supports that begins with the whole school and extends to intensive, wraparound support for individual students and their families. • Effective practices with the systems needed for high fidelity and sustainability • Multiple tiers of intensity

What is School-wide Positive Behavior Intervention and Support? • School-wide PBIS is: • A framework for establishing the social culture and behavioral supports needed for a school to achieve behavioral and academic outcomes for all students. • Evidence-based features of SWPBIS • • Prevention Define and teach positive social expectations Acknowledge positive behavior Arrange consistent consequences for problem behavior On-going collection and use of data for decision-making Continuum of intensive, individual intervention supports. Implementation of the systems that support effective practices

Why SWPBIS? • The fundamental purpose of SWPBIS is to make schools more effective learning environments. Predictable Positive Consistent Safe

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. , (in press). Effects of School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems and adjustment. Pediatrics. 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 SWPBIS E x perimental 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 t urnover 8. Increas ed percept ion of teac 9. Improve her efficac d Social E y motional c ompetenc e

Summary of Research • School-wide PBIS is an evidence-based practice • Implementation is related to improved academic and social behavior. • Tier I SWPBIS can be implemented with fidelity by any school in the U. S. without new resources or dramatic reorganization. • Successful Schools: • Define a clear commitment to school-wide social culture • Add data systems (fidelity and Student Outcomes) • Provide the leadership to allow effective team-based decisionmaking. • Tier II and Tier III supports will require more adaptation

SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT ~5% ~15% Primary Prevention: School-/Classroom. Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings 27 Tertiary Prevention: Specialized Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior Secondary Prevention: Specialized Group Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior Main Ideas: 1. Invest in prevention first 2. Multiple tiers of support intensity 3. Early/rapid access to ~80% of Students support

Math Remember that the multiple tiers of support refer to our SUPPORT not Students. Avoid creating a new disability labeling system. Behavior Health Reading

Number of Schools Implementing SWPBIS since 20000 19, 054 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10' 11' 12' 13'

0 Alaska Wyoming Wisconsin West Virginia Washington DC Washington State Virginia Vermont Utah* Texas Tennessee South Dakota South Carolina* Rhode Island Pennsylvania Oregon* Oklahoma Ohio North Dakota* 1600 North Carolina* Illinois New York New Mexico New Jersey* New Hampshire Nevada Nebraska Montana* Missouri* Mississippi Minnesota Michigan Massachusetts Maryland* Maine Louisiana* Kentucky Kansas* Iowa* Indiana Illinois Idaho Hawaii Georgia Guam Florida* Delaware Connecticut Colorado* California Arkansas 1800 Arizona 1200 Alabama Count of School Implementing SWPBIS by State February, 2013 14 States > 500 Schools 1400 Arizona 1000 800 600 400 200

0 Alaska Oregon* Rhode Island Wyoming Wisconsin West Virginia Washington DC Washington State Virginia Vermont Utah* Texas Tennessee South Dakota South Carolina* 0. 7 Pennsylvania 0. 8 Oklahoma Ohio North Dakota* North Carolina* New York New Mexico New Jersey* New Hampshire Nevada Nebraska Montana* Missouri* Mississippi Minnesota Michigan Massachusetts Maryland* Maine Louisiana* Kentucky Kansas* Iowa* Indiana Illinois Idaho Hawaii Georgia Guam Florida* Delaware Connecticut Colorado* California Arkansas Arizona 0. 6 Alabama Proportion of Schools Implementing SWPBIS by State February, 2013 0. 9 12 states over 40% of all schools implementing SWPBIS Arizona 0. 5 0. 4 0. 3 0. 2 0. 1

Using the PBIS Implementation Blueprint • Exploration • Annual Assessment • Action Planning

Visibility Funding Political Support Policy Leadership Team Active Coordination Training Coaching Behavioral Expertise Evaluation Local School/District Teams/Demonstrations Sugai et al. , www. pbis. org

GOAL: District and/or state level capacity to establish, sustain, and scale-up of accurate implementation of a continuum (multi-tiered) of SWPBS across multiple schools. O ct N ov D ec Ja n Fe b M ar A pr M ay Ju n Ju l A ug Se p O ct D ec Ja n Policy Political Support Visibility Se p Funding Behavioral Expertise Evaluation A ug Training Ju l Month Coaching/ Facilitation Leadership/ Coordination Activity/Action (Person/s) Action Planning: For Items not Implemented: 1. Select next action/activity (and for each action define who will perform, and when action will be accomplished). 2. The active actions become items for weekly/monthly meetings

Imp F n io t a io n al ti nt i n e em l p Im Stages of Implementation t s n l l a i t a on u m ll en ta t I xp lo ra tio n pl e Im E lem Tim entatio e: 2 – 4 n Take Yea s rs I

Stages of Implementation Focus Should we do it! Stage Description Exploration/ Adoption Decision regarding commitment to adopting the program/practices and supporting successful implementation. Installation Set 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! Steve Goodman

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 Exploration Leadership Team Funding Visibility Political Support Policy Training Coaching Expertise Evaluation Demos Installation Initial Imp Full Imp Innovation Sustainability

Exploration and Adoption Installation Initial Implementation Do you have a state What were critical What were specific leadership team? issues that activities the team confronted the If you do, how was team as it began your first leadership to install systems team developed? Leadership Team (coordination) changes? Who were members? Who supported/lead the team through the exploration process? Was any sort of selfassessment completed (e. g. the PBIS Implementation Blueprint Assessment)? What was the role of State agency personnel in the exploration phase? Full Implementation Did the team change personnel did to ensure or functioning as success of the initial the # of implementation schools/districts efforts? increased? Innovation and sustainability 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)?

Descriptive Summary: Oregon 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1995 -96 1996 -97 1997 -98 1998 -99 1999 -00 2000 -01 2001 -02 2002 -03 2003 -04 2004 -05 2005 -06 2006 -07 2007 -08 2008 -09 2009 -10 Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp /Full Imp & Innovate

Descriptive Summary: Missouri 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 97 -98 98 -99 99 -00 00 -01 01 -02 02 -03 03 -04 04 -05 05 -06 06 -07 07 -08 08 -09 09 -10 10 -11 Exploration / Installation /Initial Imp / Full Imp & Innovate

Descriptive Summary: North Carolina 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 00 -01 01 -02 02 -03 03 -04 04 -05 05 -06 06 -07 07 -08 08 -09 09 -10 Exploration / Installation / Initial & Full Imp / Innovate

Descriptive Summary: Colorado 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 02 -03 03 -04 04 -05 05 -06 06 -07 07 -08 08 -09 09 -10 Exploration / Installation / Initial & Full Imp / Innovate 10 -11

Descriptive Summary: Florida 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 01 -02 02 -03 03 -04 04 -05 05 -06 06 -07 07 -08 08 -09 09 -10 Exploration/ Installation/ Initial Imp / Full Imp / Innovate

Descriptive Summary: Maryland 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp / Full Imp / Innovate 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Descriptive Summary: Illinois 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 98 -99 99 -00 00 -01 01 -02 02 -03 03 -04 04 -05 05 -06 06 -07 07 -08 08 -09 09 -10 10 -11 Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp /Full Imp & Innovate

Lessons Learned • 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

Lessons Learned • Scaling is NOT linear • Sustained scaling requires continuous regeneration • Threats to Scaling: • • • Competing initiatives The seductive lure of the “new idea” Leadership turnover Legislative mandates Fiscal constraint Regular Dissemination of Fidelity and Impact data is the best “protective factor” for threats to scaling

Lessons Learned • Scaling requires planned efficiency • The unit cost of implementation must decrease as the number of adoptions increases. Shift from external trainers to within state/district trainers Use local demonstrations as exemplars Increased coaching capacity can decrease investment in training Improved “selection” of personnel decreases turnover and development costs • Use existing professional development and evaluation resources differently • • • Basic Message: The implementation practices that are needed to establish initial exemplars may be different from the practices used to establish large scale adoption. • Jennifer Coffey, 2008

Effective PBIS Leadership • Define a five year vision: • Number of districts/ schools • Extend that vision to incorporate at least 80% of all schools in the state • Clarify role of Leadership Team • Active leadership and guidance. Not just “informational” or “consultative” • Meet regularly, carry tasks between meetings, use data • Need formal “coordinator” role… to ensure that things get done • Establish Workgroups • Policy/ Funding • Training • Evaluation • Coordination/Communication

Summary • Leadership is essential for successful implementation of PBIS. • Vision, Local Capacity, Assess, Adapt.

Lesson #7: Invest in Intensive Supports (Tier II, III) • Establish the organizational capacity to support students with more severe problem behavior. • The three areas of “knowledge” needed by a team. • Bennazi et al. , (2006) • Knowledge about student • Knowledge about context • Knowledge about behavioral theory • The importance of understanding “function” of behavior. • Sheldon Loman and Kathleen Strickland-Cohen (2013) • Typical school personnel can assess and manage “Basic” individual behavior challenges.

School-wide PBS • Establishing additional supports for students with more intense needs

Behavior Support Elements *Response class *Routine analysis *Hypothesis statement *Supporting data *Alternative behaviors *Competing behavior analysis *Indicated, evidence-based interventions *Contextual fit *Strengths, preferences, & lifestyle outcomes Problem Behavior Functional Assessment Intervention & Support Plan • Team-based • Behavior competence *Implementation support *Data plan *Continuous improvement *Sustainability plan Fidelity of Implementation Impact on Behavior & Lifestyle

Lesson #8: Collect and use Data for Active Decision-Making • Give each team concrete measures that they can use to determine if they are successful. • Measure use of practices: www. pbisassessment. org • Are we doing what we want to be doing? • • Team Checklist Benchmark of Quality EBS Survey SET • Measure impact on valued outcomes • • • Office discipline referrals Attendance Suspension/Expulsion rates Student academic achievement Student Individual Intensive Supports