School-wide Positive Behavior Support Implementers’ Blueprint and Self-Assessment

OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports3

University of Oregon
www.pbis.org

The OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports is grateful to the students, educators, adminis trators, families, support providers, researchers, and teacher trainers who have worked tirelessly to improve educational outcomes for all students and who have con tributed to our understanding of the critical practices and systems of positive behavior support.

These materials have been developed to assist local and state education agents in their efforts to improve school climate and positive behavior support for all students. Photocopying, use, and/or sale of these materials are forbidden without expressed written permission by the OSEP Center for Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. To obtain a personal copy of these materials, contact the Center at 541-346-2505, pbis@oregon.uoregon.edu, or www.pbis.org.

3The Center is supported by a grant from the Office of Special Education Programs US Department of Education (H326S980003). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the US Department of Education, and such endorsements should not be inferred.

 

Introduction

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this blueprint is to present a rationale for adopting school-wide positive behavior support (SW-PBS), describe the key features of SW-PBS, and illustrate processes, structures, and supports of SW-PBS.

Definition of a Blueprint

A "blueprint" is a guide designed to improve the efficiency and success of large-scale replications of a specific demonstration or example. SW-PBS has been demonstrated to be a feasible and valued approach for improving the social climate of schools and supporting intervention programming for students with high risk problem behavior.

This blueprint is intended to make the conceptual theory, organizational models, and specific practices more accessible for those involved in changing how schools, districts, and state education systems operate effectively and efficiently.

The contents of this blueprint should be considered dynamic and iterative in that guidelines will be improved as new implementations are tried and studied, and as new research is conducted.

Audience for the Blueprint

This blueprint is designed for use by individuals who are interested in or are implementing SW-PBS, and/or interested in tactics for sustaining or expanding (go-to-scale) their efforts. Implementers include school, district, and state level administrators; staff developers; educational policy and decision makers; higher education personnel preparers; consultants; program evaluators; and researchers.

Using the Blueprint

The organization of this blueprint emphasizes efficient and effective implementation. To the greatest extent possible, (a) descriptive task analyses and checklists are used to sequence procedures and processes, (b) sample forms and worksheets are provided to enhance task completion, and (c) examples are included. To support and extend implementation efforts, references and additional resources are included in appendices. The contents of this blueprint should be viewed as a "guide" to essential of effective SW-PBS implementation rather than a "cookbook" of practices and systems.

This blueprint is divided into two main sections:

  • Section I: Describing School-wide Positive Behavior Supports

    In this section, a rationale for adopting a school-wide positive behavior support approach is provided, and the features of this approach are described.

  • Section II: Implementing a Systems Approach to School-wide Positive Behavior Supports

    In this section, the organizational processes, structures, and supports for adopting a systems approach to SW-PBS are described. School-, district-, and state-wide implementation features are described. The use of a self-assessment checklist is emphasized.

Section I: Describing School-Wide Positive Behavior Support: Challenges, Solutions, and Features

What Challenges Do Schools Face in Addressing Their Education Mission?

The mission of schools is to maximize opportunities for students to achieve three primary and inter-related expectations that enable participation, contributions, and success in schools and larger communities:

  • Academic Skill Competence,
  • Social Skill Competence, and
  • Lifestyle skills competence.

Achieving these expectations, however, is hampered by many competing social and behavioral factors. Current data suggest that while extreme violence is stabilizing (and historically low) the rate of disruptive problem behavior is escalating (U.S. Surgeon General, 2000). The single most common request for assistance from teachers is related to behavior and classroom management (Elam, Rose, & Gallup, 1999).

Schools struggle with addressing problem behavior for a variety of reasons:

  • Students are more different from each other than similar.
  • Multiple initiatives compete and overlap.
  • School climates are reactive and controlling.
  • School organizational structures and processes are inefficient and ineffective.
  • Public demand is high for greater academic accountability and achievement.
  • Occurrences of antisocial behavior in school (e.g., aggression, substance use, dropping out, attendance, and insubordination/noncompliance) are more severe and complex.
  • Limited capacity exists to educate students with disabilities.
  • Media that portrays role models are violent and antisocial.

School attempts to respond to these challenges often result in an over-reliance on the use of aversive and exclusionary consequences. For example, teachers respond to student displays of chronic problem behavior by increasing their use of verbal reprimands, exclusionary consequences (e.g., in school detention and out-of-school suspensions), and loss of privileges. If student behavior does not improve, school systems increase their reactive responses by establishing zero tolerance policies, increasing surveillance, posting security personnel, and excluding students from school.

This over-reliance on reactive management practices is a predictable outcome because teachers, parents, and administrators experience immediate reductions or removals of the problem behavior when they use strong aversive consequences. Having experienced reductions and relief from student problem behavior, they are more likely to use reactive management practices when future student problem behavior occurs, which can be described from a classic negative reinforcement perspective. Unfortunately, these reductions are temporary and problem behaviors typically reoccur, sometimes at higher rates and more intensive levels. Justification for the increased use of reactive management strategies is based on the erroneous assumption that the student is "inherently bad," will "learn a ‘better way’ of behaving next time," and will "never again" engage in the problem behavior.

Although the use of aversive consequences can inhibit the occurrence of problem behavior in students who already are relatively successful at school, these procedures tend to be the least effective for students with the most severe problem behaviors. In addition, a number of negative side effects are associated with the exclusive use of reactive approaches to discipline (Shores, Jack, Gunter, Ellis, DeBriere & Wehby, 1993; Sugai & Horner, 1999; Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1994; Tolan & Guerra, 1994):

  • A punishing climate can be a setting event for problem behaviors (Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1994).
  • A school climate relying on punishing consequences can provoke problem behaviors (Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1994), for example, increases in antisocial behavior, breakdown of student-teacher relations, degradation of school/social climate, and/ordecreases in academic achievement.

The science of human behavior has taught us that students are not "born with bad behavior," and that they do not learn better ways of behaving when presented aversive consequences for their problem behaviors (Alberto & Troutman, 2001; Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1994; Walker et al., 1996). In addition, successfully addressing problem behavior requires an increased emphasis on proactive approaches in which expected and more socially acceptable behaviors are directly taught, regularly practiced in the natural environment and followed by frequent positive reinforcement.

What is Needed to Address These Challenges?

To shift from a reactive and aversive approach to managing problem behavior to one that is preventive and positive, schools must

  • Work for and with all students, since every child entering school needs behavior support.
  • Give priority to empirically validated procedures and systems that have demonstrated effectiveness, efficiency, and relevance.
  • Integrate academic and behavioral success for all students.
  • Emphasize prevention in establishing and maintaining safe and supportive school climates.
  • Expand the use of effective practices and systems to district, county, regional, and state levels.
  • Increase collaboration among multiple community support systems (i.e., education, juvenile justice, community mental health, family, and medical).
  • Build a school environment where team building and problem solving skills are expected, taught, and reinforced.

What is School-wide Positive Behavior Support?

School-wide Positive behavior support (SW-PBS) is comprised of a broad range of systemic and individualized strategies for achieving important social and learning outcomes while preventing problem behavior with all students. SW-PBS is not a specific "model" but a compilation of effective practices, interventions, and systems change strategies that have a long history of empirical support and development and individually have been demonstrated to be empirically effective and efficient. In addition, SW-PBS has relevant applications to educating all students in schools, not just students with disabilities.

SW-PBS is the integration of four elements

  • Operationally defined and valued outcomes,
  • Behavioral and biomedical science,
  • Research-validated practices, and
  • Systems change to both enhance the broad quality with which all students are living/learning and reduce problem behaviors.

First, SW-PBS emphasizes operationally defined and valued outcomes for all students. Specified academic and social behavior outcome indicators are linked to annual school improvement objectives, local and state initiative priorities, and individual academic goals and objectives. Data are used to describe, choose, and evaluate goals/outcomes. Valued outcomes include increases in quality of life as defined by a school’s and/or individual student's unique preferences and needs and by positive lifestyle changes that increase social belonging.

Second, SW-PBS is based on a clearly established behavioral and biomedical sciences that can be applied to address problem behavior in schools. The approach is based on conceptual principles from behavioral and biomedical research.

  • Behavior is learned and can be taught.
  • Behavior is lawful and predictable.
  • Behavior occurrences are affected by environmental factors that interact with biophysical characteristics of the individual.
  • Understanding the relation between physiology factors and environmental variables is a critical feature when supporting students with behavioral, social, emotional, and mental health issues.
  • Assessing and manipulating environmental factors can predictably affect occurrences of behavior.
  • Data collection and use for active decision-making are important for continuous intervention, program, and system improvement.

Third, SW-PBS emphasizes research-validated practices, interventions, strategies, curriculum, etc. to achieve goals and outcomes. Data are used to guide which practices should be selected and/or adapted to achieve goals/outcomes. The selection and use of evidence-based practices are given priority.

Fourth, SW-PBS gives priority to systems change considerations that support the effective and efficient selection and implementation of practices by school personnel (e.g., teachers, school psychologists, administrators). These organizational working considerations operationalize policies and guiding principles, operating routines, resource supports, and administrative leadership. Internal behavioral expertise and capacity are developed, and data-based decision making is emphasized to improve the selection, adoption, outcomes, and durability of practices.

Together these four elements provide schools with the opportunity to efficiently organize scarce resources and support the adoption of effective practices. Implementation of a school-wide approach to SW-PBS requires investments in the features represented in the following figure:

This graphic depicts the six features in which a school-wide approach to PBS requires investment.  The graphic is composed of six ovals linked together in a circle.  In the middle of the circle are the words, 'PBS Features.'  The oval at the top says 'Local Context and Culture,' and is linked clockwise to a series of ovals reading 'Prevention Logic for All,' 'Evidence-Based Practices,' 'Natural Implementers,' 'Systems Change and Durability,' and 'Science of Human Behavior,' which links back to the first oval.

Why Develop This Blueprint on School-wide Positive Behavior Support?

Conceptually, SW-PBS is appealing, and a growing research base supports SW-PBS application at the individual student and school-wide levels. The first real task is identifying what is required to enable schools to develop, expand, and sustain their SW-PBS efforts.

This blueprint is intended to serve as a catalyst for prompting and promoting the durable and expanded use of SWPBS for all students at the individual student, classroom, school-wide, district, regional, county, and state levels. In particular, this blueprint has been designed to address seven important assumptions and solutions about "going-to-scale" with SW-PBS:

  • Effective SWPBS must be implemented with high accuracy if maximum effects are to be realized.
  • Effective SW-PBS practices and systems must be durable if meaningful change and improvement are to be realized.
  • Effective practices and systems of SW-PBS must be sustained (i.e., in place for 5-10 years) if schools are to expand their efforts and maximize their effectiveness.
  • Implementation must be delivered by "typical intervention agents."
  • Data on child outcomes must be used to make decisions for continued adaptation and sustained implementation.
  • Implementation of effective practices at the local level will require modification of procedures to "fit" the culture, structure, and needs of the local setting; the same practices will look slightly different in different schools and communities.
  • Establish "systems" that support functional, doable, and durable implementation of effective practices.

What is a Systems Approach to the Implementation of School-wide Positive Behavior Support?

Commonly, when schools encounter a problem that cannot be solved by existing strategies and resources, an expert, typically from the "outside," is approached to provide technical assistance and training. An event is created to allow the expert to share and teach about ways to address the problem. The expert leaves, and the school is expected to implement the strategy. Borrowing a concept from Stokes and Baer (1977), this approach basically relies on a "train-and-hope" perspective:

  • Difficult-to-solve problem is encountered.
  • Expert is identified to provide a solution.
  • Expert provides or trains the solution.
  • Expert leaves and expects school to implement the solution.
  • Lacking supports and capacity, solution is not implemented effectively.
  • School waits for next problem to occur ("expert model" reinforced).

This approach to problem solving is likely to fail because attention is not focused on what system supports (e.g., resources, training, policies) are needed to enable the initial accurate use of the practice, continued use of the practice over time, expanded use of the practice to other contexts, and modification of the practice to maximize outcomes and increase efficiency.

A systems approach considers the school as the basic "unit of analysis" or "point of influence or action" and how the collective actions of individuals within the school contribute to how the school is characterized. Although important, individual students, parents, or adults are not the primary context for systems change. Horner (2003) indicates that

  • The organization does not behave, individuals within the organization engage in behaviors.
  • An organization is a group of individuals who behave together to achieve a common goal.
  • Systems are needed to support the collective use of best practices by individuals within the organization.

Thus, the SW-PBS approach gives priority to the establishment of systems that support the adoption and durable implementation of evidence-based practices and procedures, and fit with and be part of on-going school reform efforts. This approach focuses on the interactive and self-checking process of organizational correction and improvement around four key elements:

  • Outcomes: academic and behavior targets that are endorsed and emphasized by students, families, and educators.
  • Practices: interventions and strategies that are evidence based.
  • Data: information that is used to identify status, need for change, and effects of interventions.
  • Systems: supports that are needed to enable the accurate and durable implementation of the practices of PBS.

This graphic depicts a systems approach to school-wide positive behavior support that considers multiple points of support.  In the center of the graphic is a large circle with the word, outcomes at the top.  Below outcomes are three interlocking circles, each in a different color, that overlap like a Venn diagram.  The circle at the top left is light blue and reads systems.  The circle at the top right is pink and reads data.  The circle at the center bottom is green and reads practices.  Outside of the large circle are phrases, located at the top, right, bottom, and left of the circle.  Beginning at the top and moving clockwise, these phrases read, Social Competence and Academic Achievement, Supported Decision Making, Supporting Student Behavior, and Supporting Staff Behavior.

A systems approach to SW-PBS considers multiple points of support:

  • Individual Student: intensive and individualized behavior intervention planning based on function-based behavior assessments and implementation for students who are unresponsive to school-wide (primary) interventions.
  • Classroom: expectations, routines, structures, and practices for presenting curriculum, designing instruction, and managing social climate of classroom environments that serves as the basis for individual student behavior support planning.
  • School-wide: behavioral expectations and supports (i.e., proactive discipline) for all students and staff, across all school settings that together serve as the foundation for classroom and individual student behavior support.
  • District: specialized behavioral supports, organizational leadership, and implementation resources that as a unity serves as the foundation for effective implementation.
  • Community: collaborative intervention and support efforts for students and families that involve mental health, public health, juvenile justice, and other community agencies and resources.
  • State: behavior support policy, organizational leadership, and resource management that collectively serve as the foundation for district and school-wide implementation of PBS.

This graphic depicts the multiple points of support for implementation of PBS.  It is a series of five concentric ovals that get progressively larger.  Each oval contains one word.  Beginning with the smallest oval at the center, these words are:  student, classroom, school, district, state.  There is a large arrow leading from state up to student and another large arrow leading down from student to state.

At all levels of implementation of SW-PBS, four perspectives are emphasized:

  1. Three-tiered Approach to Prevention (Lewis & Sugai, 1999; Sugai et al., 2000; Walker et al., 1996).
    • Primary prevention focuses on preventing the development of new cases of problem behaviors by focusing on all students and staff, across all settings (i.e., school-wide, classroom, and nonclassroom/noninstructional settings).
    • Secondary prevention focuses on reducing the number of existing cases of problem behaviors by establishing efficient and rapid responses to problem behavior.
    • Tertiary prevention focuses on reducing the intensity and/or complexity of existing cases of problem behavior that are resistant to primary and secondary prevention efforts.

Graphic of triangle depicting a three-tier model.  The triangle is divided into three sections.  The bottom section is green and represents primary interventions used for eighty percent of students.  The middle section is yellow and represents secondary interventions used for fifteen percent of students.  The top section is red and represents tertiary interventions used for five percent of students.

A preventive approach focuses on

  • Removing antecedent or preceding factors that prompt, trigger, or occasion problem behavior in children and undesirable intervention practices.
  • Adding antecedent or preceding factors that prompt, trigger, or occasion appropriate behavior and desirable intervention practices.
  • Removing consequence or following factors that maintain and strengthen occurrences of problem behavior and undesirable intervention practices.
  • Adding consequence or following factors that maintain and strengthen occurrences of appropriate behaviors and desirable intervention practices.
  • Arranging environments so opportunities are maximized to teach and practice appropriate behavior and desirable intervention practices.
  • Teaching social skills and adopting intervention strategies that are more effective, efficient, and relevant than problem behaviors and undesirable intervention practices.
  • Removing consequence or following factors that inhibit or prevent occurrences of appropriate behaviors and use of desirable intervention practices.
  1. Instructional Emphasis (Colvin, Sugai, & Patching, 1993; Kame’enui & Darch, 2004; Kerr & Nelson, 2002; Sugai, 1992) in which social skills are taught in the same way as academic skills, and the reduction of problem behaviors is addressed by teaching functional replacement behaviors.
    • At the school-wide level, schools focus on defining, teaching, and encouraging school-wide expectations.
    • For students who are at-risk of social failure, instruction is active and focused on "core" skills, often within pre-defined curricula.
    • For students who are high risk for social failure, specific social skills are taught based on functional behavioral assessment of problem behaviors.
  2. Functional Perspective (Horner, 1994; O’Neill et al., 1997; Sugai, Lewis-Palmer, & Hagan-Burke, 1999-2000) in which the factors that maintain observed problem behaviors (positive and negative reinforcement) are used directly and primarily to build effective, efficient, and relevant behavior intervention plans.

    A function-based approach has the following features:

    • Foundations in behavioral theory, applied behavior analysis, and positive behavior support.
    • Attention to environmental context.
    • Emphasis on "purpose" or function of behavior.
    • Focus on teaching behaviors.
    • Attention to implementers (adult behaviors) & redesign of teaching & learning environments.

The notion of "function" is based on the behavioral principle of "reinforcement," specifically, positive and negative reinforcement (Crone & Horner, 2003; O’Neill et al., 1997). Positive reinforcement is defined as the increased probability of a behavioral occurrence that is associated with the contingent presentation of a consequence stimulus (reinforcing). Negative reinforcement is defined as the increased probability of a behavioral occurrence that is associated with the contingent removal or withholding of a consequence stimulus (aversive). The following flowchart depicts how these two behavioral principles are operationalized from a function-based perspective:

This graphic is a flow chart depicting the way in which positive and negative reinforcement are operationalized from a function-based perspective.  At the top of the flow chart is a box with the words, 'Problem Behavior,' which leads to two more boxes, 'Obtain/Get Something' on the left, and 'Escape/Avoid Something' on the right.  From these two boxes come three more boxes, 'Stimulation/Sensory' on the left, 'Social' in the middle, and 'Tangible/Activity' on the right.  From the middle box that reads 'Social' come two final boxes, 'Adult' on the left and 'Peer' on the right.  A green arrow indicating positive reinforcement points to the box that reads 'Obtain/Get Something,' and a green arrow indicating negative reinforcement points to the box reading 'Escape/Avoid Something.'

A function-based approach is incorporated into behavioral intervention planning at the individual student level (Crone & Horner, 2003). The steps and elements that comprise this approach are illustrated in the following figure:

This graphic has several parts and depicts the steps and elements that comprise a function based approach.  The bottom left section of the graphic is composed of a large blue triangle containing two bullets, 'Team-Based' and 'Behavior Competence.'  Going down, parallel to the long end of the triangle are a series of phrases connected to each other by green arrows.  These phrases are:  'problem behavior,' 'functional assessment,' 'intervention and support plan,' 'fidelity of implementation,' and 'impact on behavior and lifestyle.'  The next row of the graphic contains a series of green boxes with arrows pointing to the phrases just listed.  Pointing to 'functional assessment' is a box containing the bullets, 'response class,' 'routine analysis,' and 'hypothesis statement.'  Pointing to 'intervention and support plan' is a box containing the bullets, 'alternative behaviors,' 'competing behavior anlaysis,' ' contextual fit,' 'strengths, preferences, & lifestyle outcomes,' and 'evidence-based interventions.'  Pointing to 'fidelity of implementation' is a box containing the bullets, 'implementation support' and 'data plan.'  Pointing to 'impact on behavior and lifestyle' is a box containing the bullets, 'continuous improvement' and 'sustainability plan.'

  1. Sustainability Priority (Latham, 1988; Sugai et al., 2000; Zins & Ponte, 1990) which emphasizes
    • Practical applications in which implementation is based on the smallest change that will result in the largest impact.
    • Multiple approaches to ensure the correct approach for the defined problem.
    • On-going collection and use of data because conditions continuously change and affect the status and best use of resources.

The outcome of an effective systems approach is an organization (school, district, state education agency) that has three basic features (Gilbert, 1978; Horner, 2003):

  • A Common Vision: The organization has a mission, purpose, or goal that is embraced by the majority of members of the organization and serves as the basis for decision making and action planning.
  • A Common Language: The organization establishes a means of describing its vision, actions, and operations so that communications are informative, efficient, effective, and relevant to members of the organization.
  • A Common Experience: The organization is defined by a set of actions, routines, procedures, or operations that is universally practiced and experienced by all members of the organization and that also includes a data feedback system to link activities to outcomes.

Thus, instead of engaging in "train-n-hope" efforts, the SW-PBS approach gives priority to problem solving and action planning that emphasizes accurate, durable, and expanded implementation:

  1. Establish a visible, effective, efficient, and functional leadership team.
  2. Review existing information/data.
  3. Analyze, describe, and prioritize issue within context.
  4. Specify measurable outcome that is related directly to issue and context.
  5. Select evidence-based practice to achieve specified outcome.
  6. Provide supports for accurate sustained adoption and implementation of practice.
  7. Monitor practice implementation and progress toward outcome.
  8. Modify practice implementation based on analysis of progress data.

The following figure illustrates the working or operational relationship among these implementation elements:

This graphic depicts the working relationship among implementation elements.  There is a yellow circle representing leadership team, which sits inside a larger blue circle representing school-wide.  Under the leadership team label is a series of seven ovals.  The first four ovals are smaller, green, and connected to each other.  They read, clockwise from the top, 'build data system,' 'collect, analyze, and prioritize data,' 'select evidence-based practice,' and 'establish measurable outcome.'  The bottom three ovals are connected to each other and to the set of four ovals just described.  The bottom three ovals are larger, pink, and read, from right to left, 'ensure efficient, accurate, and durable implementation,' 'implement,' and 'monitor implementation and progress.'

Section II: Implementing a Systems Approach to School-Wide Positive Behavior Support

Context Considerations

In this section of the blueprint, the features and processes for implementing a systems approach to school-wide positive behavior support are described. Although number of participating schools (e.g., 10, 50, 250, 500, 1000) within an effort may vary, typically, three general organizational levels of implementation are considered.

  • School-wide: individual school organization characterized typically by a group of teachers and support staff who are administered by a single administrative team or principal
  • District-wide: a single group of multiple schools defined by a common geographic, political, and/or fiscal vision and organizational structure
  • State-wide: multiple groups of multiple schools organized under a common geographical, political, and/or fiscal vision and organizational structure

In general, implementation of PBS at the school-, district-, and state-wide levels share a common set of features. The actual details of each feature are likely to vary depending upon contextual characteristics of the school, district, or state. The actual PBS implementation activities and structures will vary depending upon a number of factors and influences, including, but not limited to the following:

  • Size or Number: 35 versus 2100 students, 4 versus 450 staff members, 3 schools versus 250 schools.
  • Location: urban versus rural versus suburban.
  • Community or Neighborhood : low versus high social economic status.

To the greatest extent possible, content is presented in outline and list formats to organize and facilitate access. Checklists are provided to enable self-assessment and/or self-monitoring of implementation. Finally, where appropriate, resources for obtaining further information are noted.

Goal and Capacity Building

The goal of systemic SW-PBS implementation efforts is to achieve effective school-wide behavior support for all members of a school community. This goal is realized by considering the whole school as the main implementation unit. In particular, all students and all staff are involved across all settings of the school.

Accomplishing accurate, durable, and adaptable SW-PBS in a school requires systemic support that extends beyond an individual school. The real consideration is organizing multiple schools (e.g., cluster, complex, dis trict, county, state) so that a common vision, language, and experience are established. By achieving this consistency, the efficiency of resource use, implementation efforts, and organizational management can be improved. An expanded infras tructure also enhances the dis trict and state level support (e.g., policy, resources, competence) that provides a supportive context for implementation at the local level.

To achieve the goal and this efficiency, a leadership team or structure is needed to lead and increase the working capacity of the system. This team has the primary objective of increasing the system’s capacity in four primary areas:

  1. Training Capacity refers to the system’s ability to self-assess for specific programmatic and staff development needs and objectives, develop a training action plan, invest in increasing local training capacity, and implement effective and efficient training activities.
  2. Coaching Capacity refers to the system’s ability to organize personnel and resources for facilitating, assisting, maintaining, and adapting local school training implementation efforts for both initial training and on-going implementation support.
  3. Evaluation Capacity refers to the system’s ability to establish measurable outcomes, methods for evaluating progress toward these measurable outcomes, and modified or adapted action plans based on these evaluations.
  4. Coordination Capacity refers to the system’s ability to establish an operational organization and "rhythm" that enables effective and efficient utilization of materials, time, and personnel. in the implementation of an action plan.

To enable and support the leadership team’s efforts, the PBS implementation must have (a) adequate and sustained funding support; (b) regular, wide, and meaningful visibility; and (c) relevant and effective political support.

The following figure provides an overview of the PBS Organizational Logic.

This graphic provides an overview of the PBS organizational logic.  At the top are three blue connected circles, which read, from left to right, 'funding,' 'visibility,' and 'political support.'  Below those circles is a large aqua colored oval containing the words 'leadership team.'  The oval has four arrows connecting it to four green boxes below the oval.  These boxes read, from left to right, 'training,' 'coaching,' 'evaluation,' and 'coordination.'  Below the green boxes is a large pink rectangle that stretches the length of the graphic and reads 'local/school district implementations.'

The effectiveness of the SW-PBS implementation is related to the extent that a common vision and a set of principles are used to guide decision-making and implementation efforts. The goals and capacity building elements of a SW-PBS approach are founded on five major constructs or foundational concepts:

  1. Prevention refers to organizing learning and teaching environments to prevent the (a) development of new problem behaviors, (b) worsening of existing problem behaviors, and (c) triggering of problem behavior. Prevention is characterized by an emphasis on directly teaching, actively monitoring, and positively reinforcing prosocial or adapted behaviors.
  2. Whole school refers to addressing the behavior support needs of all members (e.g., students, staff, family members, classified staff) and all settings of a school community.
  3. Evidence-based practices refers to interventions, strategies, and techniques that have empirical evidence of their effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, and durability. See below.
  4. Teaming refers to working as a cohesive, integrated, and representative collection of individuals who lead the systems change and implementation process.
  5. Evaluation refers to the regular and systematic self-assessment of strengths and needs, and the continuous self-improvement action planning process.

"Evidence-based practices" refers to strategies, processes, and curricula for which information exists to support adoption and sustained use. Different levels of evidence should be considered:

  • Scientific evidence is derived from studies that (a) carefully identify and con trol for variables that are and are not associated with the practice or curricula and (b) demons trate the level of confidence with which outcomes and results can be associated with those variables (e.g., random selection of subjects, con trol and experimental group studies, pre/post group designs, single subject research studies).
  • Program evaluation evidence is derived from the careful study of implementation efforts and their outcomes, but without the con trol comparisons used in empirical research (e.g., nonrandom assignment, small participant numbers, no con trol group, no systematic replication of effects).
  • Case study and testimonial evidence (social validation) is derived from individuals or organizations who report their outcomes and experiences with a given practice, but without validation or testing information or methods.

Practices derived from studies that have supporting data but do not demonstrate experimentally that a functional relationship exists are "promising practices" for which adoption and use should proceed with caution. Initially, pilot implementation should be conducted with careful data collection and on-going evaluation.

When no evidence is available, conservative use of a practice should be applied to avoid unforeseen negative side effects, extreme costs, an inefficient use of resources and time. At a minimum, new or innovative practices should be pilot-tested, measured frequently for the extent to which desired and undesired effects are experienced, and evaluated for their costs and benefits. Equally important, innovative practices must be based on sound theory.

Regardless of the evidence available for a practice, consideration for adoption should be based on a documented need, and the application of three main evaluation criteria:

  1. Is the practice effective?

    What is the likelihood that the desired effects or outcomes will be achieved with the practice?
     

  2. Is the practice efficient?

    What are the costs/benefits of adopting and sustaining the practice?
     

  3. Is the practice relevant?

    Does a contextual fit exist among the practice, the individuals who will use the practice, and setting or culture in which the practice will be used?

PBS Implementation and Planning Self-assessment

A general template or protocol for self-assessment is found in Appendix A (PBS Implementation and Planning Self-Assessment), and has been designed to serve as a multi-level guide for (a) appraising the status of positive behavior support (PBS) organizational systems, and (b) developing and evaluating PBS action plans.

The following table summarizes the features that are associated with each section in relation to the elements associated with the PBS organizational logic presented in the previous figure.

FEATURE
Leadership Team
  • Team is developed with representation from appropriate range of stakeholders (special education, regular education, families, mental health, administration).
  • Team determines how many schools are to be involved in the effort.
  • Team completes self-assessment.
  • Team completes a 3-5 year prevention-based action plan.
  • Team defines regular meeting schedule & meeting process (agenda, minutes).
Coordination
  • Coordinator(s) is identified who has adequate & designated time to manage day-to-day operations.
Funding
  • Funding sources to cover activities for at least three years can be identified.
Visibility
  • Dissemination strategies are identified & implemented to ensure that stakeholders are kept aware of activities & accomplishments (e.g., website, newsletter, conferences, TV).
Political Support
  • Student social behavior is one of the top five goals for the political unit (state, district).
  • Leadership team reports to the political unit at least annually on the activities & outcomes related to student behavior goal.
  • PBS policy statement developed & endorsed.
  • Participation & support by administrator from political unit.
Training Capacity
  • Leadership team has established trainers to build & sustain SW-PBS practices.
Coaching Capacity
  • Leadership team has developed a coaching network that builds & sustains SW-PBS
  • A coach is available to meet at least monthly with each emerging school team (emerging teams are teams that have not met the implementation criteria), and at least quarterly with established teams.
Demonstrations At least 10 schools have adopted SW-PBS, & can be used as local demonstrations of process & outcomes.
Evaluation
  • Leadership has developed evaluation process for assessing (a) extent to which teams are using SW-PBS (b) impact of SW-PBS on student outcomes, & (c) extent to which the leadership team’s action plan is implemented.
  • School-based information systems (e.g., data collection tools & evaluation processes) are in place.
  • At least quarterly dissemination, celebration & acknowledgement of outcomes & accomplishments

To use the PBS Planning and Implementation Self-assessment, the following general guidelines should be considered:

  • Form team that is representative to the affected organization or community.
  • Specify a question or need which assessment data will help to answer or address.
  • Identify existing behavior-related data (e.g., suspension/expulsions, behavior incidents, discipline referrals, attendance, achievement scores, dropout rates).
  • Specify how self-assessment and other information will be collected, summarized, and used in decision making and action planning.
  • Analyze and summarize data relative to evaluation question or need.
  • Specify desired outcome or objective based on analysis of data.
  • Consider and integrate with existing behavior-related efforts, initiatives, and/or programs that might have similar desired outcomes or objectives.
  • Select evidence-based practice that is likely to produce desired outcome and achieve objective.
  • Prepare site (e.g., people, resources) for accurate and sustained implementation of the practice.
  • Implement practice and monitor accuracy or fidelity of implementation.
  • Collect data continuously to evaluate progress toward objective or outcome.
  • Make adjustments to maximize outcome and/or increase efficiency of practice.

Each PBS implementation feature is described briefly in the following sectgions,

Leadership Team
  1. Team is developed with representation from appropriate range of stakeholders (special education, regular education, families, mental health, administration).

    A PBS leadership team should have the capacity to represent any stakeholder who has a concern related to the prevention of problem behavior and the teaching and encouraging of prosocial behavior. By s triving toward representation from appropriate stakeholders, political, policy, management, and fiscal communications can occur. The goal is to increase the efficiency with which common behavior support goals and objectives are achieved and supported.

    The overriding mission or purpose of this team is to provide overall leadership related to assessing, developing, implementing, managing, and evaluating a state, regional, and/or dis trict-level comprehensive system of SW-PBS for all students. This team is responsible for the coordination of training, coaching, and evaluation activities related to SW-PBS implementation.

    To the greatest extent possible, leadership should s trive toward integration of teams and committees that have a common behavior-related mission. Giving priority to any one initiative or integrating politically distinct groups can be a difficult task. T he following questions should be considered:

    • What committees/work groups can we eliminate?
    • What committees/work groups can we combine?
    • What committees/work groups need to be supported for improved outcomes and sustained functioning?
    • What would an organizational chart look like that shows the relationship between each of our recommended committees/work groups?

    Membership of this team should be based on individuals whose roles, responsibilities, and activities are associated with the (a) prevention of the development and occurrence of problem behavior, (b) development and maintenance of general and specialized behavioral capacity or competence, and (c) management and evaluation of resources related to the provision of behavioral supports. Typically, the following emphases are represented:

    • Ins truction and Curriculum
    • Safe and Drug Free Schools
    • Special Education
    • School Psychology and Counseling
    • Title or Other Related Initiatives
    • Student Health
    • School-Wide Discipline
    • Dropout Prevention
    • Character Education
    • Alternative Programming
    • Data or Information Management
    • Multiculturalism and Affirmative Action
  2. Team determines how many schools are to be involved in the effort.

    One of the major activities of the PBS Leadership Team is to develop an action plan that systematically and formally implements and coordinates SW-PBS. The number of schools that are involved in the initial implementation should reflect the following criteria: (a) high agreement and commitment to involvement in 2-3 years of training and implementation, (b) active adminis trative support and participation, and (c) dis trict/regional support and commitment.

    The goal is to create school demons trations that serve as examples of what is possible and as a basis for building training capacity, expansion, and sustainability.

  3. Team completes self-assessment.

    To enhance the efficiency and relevance of action planning, the PBS Leadership Team engages in self-assessments to evaluate what organizational s tructures, resources, and/or initiatives are in place and need to be enhanced. The PBS Self-assessment Survey (See Appendix A) should be used to organize the development and implementation of PBS Leadership Team action plan. The following guidelines should be considered when using the PBS Self-assessment Survey:

      1. Complete on a regular schedule (e.g., quarterly, semi-annually)
      2. Develop, review, and update annual action plan based on analysis of results from PBS Self-Assessment Survey.
      3. Use as a guide to establish specific action plan activities that are contextually appropriate.

         

  4. Team completes a 3-5 year prevention-based action plan.

    Establishing effective, efficient, and relevant school-wide positive behavior support requires action plan implementation that is sustained, formally invested, and high priority for 3-5 years. This action plan should emphasize coordination and capacity building related to establishing (a) school demons trations, (b) coaching/facilitation, (c) training, (d) evaluation, (e) recurring funding, (f) guiding policy development and enactment, (g) dissemination, and (h) visible public relations. Each of these areas will include by-month specification of activities and persons responsible. See Appendix B for example.

  5. Team defines regular meeting schedule and meeting process (agenda, minutes).

    The PBS Leadership Team should establish a routine that enhances predictability, organizational efficiency, adminis trative status, and coordination capacity. Teams should meet at least monthly, and maintain a record of planning, policy, and decisions that would establish an institutional memory for sustained and expanded implementation.

Coordination
  1. Coordinator(s) is identified who has adequate FTE to manage day-to-day operations.

    An individual(s) is needed to provide coordination and leadership for team and action plan implementation. At minimum, the coordinator should have fluency with knowledge and implementation of (a) SW-PBS practices and systems; (b) organizational change s trategies; (c) assessment-based action planning approach; (d) coordination, coaching/facilitation, and training; and (e) regular program evaluation s trategies.

Funding
  1. Funding sources to cover activities for at least three years can be identified.

    Establishing accurate and durable implementation of systems level change efforts can require as much as three to five years. Stable funding should be secured to support the PBS coordinator and the activities specified in the annual action plan. The following guidelines should be considered when securing funding:

      1. To the greatest extent possible, secure recurring support from the general fund. Although grant support can be a useful source of start-up funding, this type of funding may not be sustainable.
      2. Blend support from related behavior initiatives (e.g., Character Education, Safe/Drug-Free, Title, Special Education).
Visibility
  1. Dissemination s trategies are identified and implemented to ensure that stakeholders are kept aware of activities and accomplishments. (e.g., website, newsletter, conferences, TV).

    Keeping stakeholders (e.g., dis trict/state adminis trators, school board members, local politicians, parent groups) informed about the implementation efforts and accomplishments is important for a number of reasons, for example, (a) communication, (b) accountability, (c) funding and resource justification, (d) promotion of sustained and/or expanded implementation, and (e) acknowledgements.

    Visibility can be accomplished in a variety of ways (e.g., websites, newsletters, presentations, media coverage). The goal is to schedule regular (e.g., quarterly, semi-annual, annual) events in which current activities and accomplishments and future events are highlighted. In addition, exemplar schools, classes, grade levels, students, and/or communities can be showcased. To the greatest extent possible, outcomes should be highlighted through the collection and display of data. These data should be linked to the activities of the initiative and to the costs and benefits of the effort.

Political Support
  1. Student social behavior is one of the top five goals for the political unit.

    The improvement of social behavior of all students must be a high priority at the organizational level (i.e., dis trict, region, state) to maximize accuracy, consistency, and durability of implementation and to enable long term investments and expansions. Without high priority, supports for coordination, funding, coaching, training, and evaluation activities are affected.

    High priority can be accomplished by (a) integrating initiatives that have similar goals, activities, and outcomes; (b) demons trating a link to important and desired system level goals, priorities, and needs; (c) providing clear evidence of the effectiveness, efficiency, and relevance of activities and their outcomes; and (d) advocating for the need and importance of an agenda of prevention and positive behavior support. Establishing priority can be supported by demons trating how the SW-PBS effort will con tribute substantially to implementing the activities and achieving the goals of other high priority initiatives, for example, No Child Left Behind, Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Reading First, and Character Education.

  2. Leadership team reports to the political unit at least annually on the activities and outcomes related to student behavior goal.

    Regular reports and presentations to organizational leaders and community stakeholders increase visibility, accountability, public relations, and future planning and support. Events should be conducted at least annually to create a rhythm or routine for others to learn about current activities and their outcomes, and directly reflect achievement and progress toward improving the student behavior goal.

  3. PBS policy statement developed and endorsed.

    To guide and focus the SW-PBS initiative, a policy statement should be developed and endorsed by the leadership team and organizational leaders. This policy statement should be focused on the improvement and support of student behavior, positively stated, and considerate of evidence-based practices and supporting systems.

    This policy statement should include descriptions of (a) need and rationale, (b) purpose and benefits, (c) measurable outcome objectives, (d) activities and operations for achieving these objectives, and (e) evaluation s trategy. This statement will assist in enhancing visibility, funding, political support, and commitments.

  4. Participation and support by adminis trators from the political unit.

    To the greatest extent, adminis trative leaders of the dis trict and/or state political unit should be included as active members of the PBS Leadership Team to enhance (a) political support and influence, (b) decision making, (c) resource management, (d) relevant action planning, and (e) durable and expanded implementation. These adminis trators might include, for example, superintendents, school board members, program heads, and directors of other initiatives. In addition, community members also might be included, for example, political leaders (e.g., mayor, city council members), business owners or managers, local community program directors. If full membership on the team is not possible, adminis trators should be invited to attend and participate in initiative activities.

Training Capacity
  1. Leadership team has established trainers to build and sustain SW-PBS practices.

    To decrease reliance on outside training expertise, the leadership team should invest in building the capacity to provide training within its own district, region, or state. Individuals who move into the training role have the following characteristics:

      1. Demonstrated fluency with key concepts/features, practices, and systems of SW-PBS
      2. Participated in full training sequence for school leadership teams, which was led by a competent and experienced PBS trainer
      3. Provided successful training workshops to adult learners
      4. Experience with examples of implementation of SW-PBS practices and systems in multiple schools
Coaching Capacity
  1. Leadership team has developed a coaching network that builds and sustains SW-PBS

    To support school team implementation of SW-PBS, an overt and maintained link is needed between training experiences and actual use the PBS systems and practices. Coaching, or facilitation, capacity refers to the system’s ability to organize personnel and resources for facilitating, assisting, maintaining, and adapting local school training implementation efforts.

    Although some individuals refer to themselves as PBIS "coaches" or "facilitators," most implementation efforts emphasize the roles, responsibilities, and activities of coaching. Given this emphasis, efficiencies are developed by integrating the coaching functions into job descriptions of existing school personnel (e.g., school psychologist, behavior specialist, social worker, school counselor, cluster/complex adminis trator).

    The following guiding principles are considered when establishing coaching capacity:

      1. Each school team should have access to coaching support.
      2. On-going district support is needed to maintain coaching activities.
      3. Coaches must have experience with school team implementation and problem solving.
      4. Coaches training and experiences must be linked with school team training and implementation.
  2. Coaching support is available at least monthly with each emerging school team, and at least quarterly with established teams.

    "Emerging" teams are in process of establishing major systems elements, for example, securing staff agreements, conducting self-assessments and data reviews, developing school-wide action plans. These teams need on-going coaching support to ensure accurate, continuous, and effective implementation. At least monthly, coaches, for example, (a) attend team meetings, (b) make contact (e.g., email, telephone) with team leader and/or administrator, (c) review and report school data, (d) complete and/or check team progress on Team Implementation Checklist, (e) acknowledge team progress and outcomes, and (f) report school progress to district and state leadership.

    "Established" teams have established above systems elements, and are implementing their school action plan. At this level, coaching support consists of similar quarterly interactions; however, emphasis is, for example, on (a) monitoring accuracy and consistency of implementation (Team Implementation Checklist), (b) maximizing targeted outcomes, (c) increasing implementation efficiency, (d) acknowledging progress and outcomes, (e) communicating progress to district and state leadership, and (f) facilitating review of data and action plan enhancement.

Demonstrations
  1. At least 10 schools have adopted SW-PBS, and can be used as local demons trations of process and outcomes.

    Initial implementation in a small number of schools (10 or more) is recommended to (a) maximize early success, (b) identify enhancements that would increase the effectiveness and efficiency of future implementations, and (c) establish demonstrations or examples of implementation. These demonstrations would reinforce the rationale for local implementation and serve as training resources and models for future teams.

Evaluation
  1. Leadership has developed evaluation process for assessing (a) extent to which teams are using SW-PBS, (b) impact of SW-PBS on student outcomes, and (c) extent to which the leadership team’s action plan is implemented.

    Leadership teams conduct assessments for three main reasons. First, assessment information is used to examine the extent to which teams are accurately selecting and implementing the PBS systems and practices. PBS practices and systems are grounded in behavioral theory and research evidence. Second, assessment information allows teams to determine the extent to which targeted student outcomes are being and/or likely to be achieved. Initial specification of these outcomes should be linked to reviews of existing data. Third, assessments are conducted to determine if teams are accurately and consistently implementing activities and practices specified in their individualized action plan.

    When developing an evaluation process or plan, the following guidelines should be considered:

      1. Use a team to lead the assessment and evaluation process.
      2. Develop general and specific evaluation questions that reflect measurable outcomes.
      3. Identify a range or variety of data sources that could be used to answer evaluation questions.
      4. Review existing data, and if needed, collect additional data to determine what is in place, what might need to be changed/improved, etc.
      5. Based on data analysis, develop an action plan that specifies practices that have been shown to be effective in achieving the desired outcomes.
      6. Implement practices and monitor progress toward achieving outcomes.

         

  2. School-based information systems (e.g., data collection tools & evaluation processes) are in place.

    To guide decisions, efficient, effective, and relevant school-wide information systems are needed. These systems should meet the following guidelines:

      1. Specify a comprehensive set of behaviors that are of concern and interest to the school in decision making.
      2. Define each behavior in terms that are measurable, distinctive, and mutually exclusive (i.e., not overlapping).
      3. Develop procedures that take a minimal amount of time and resources to collect, store/enter, summarize, retrieve, and display the data.
      4. Operate team-based processes by which school leadership teams regularly review and act on their data.

    One of the most commonly available sources of data that can reflect the status of the school discipline and social climate is office discipline and referral information. Processes and records of behavioral incidents and minor and/or major rule violations are maintained in most schools. To be useful, school discipline data must have a comprehensive list of rule-violating behaviors that are defined in measurable and mutually exclusive terms. A system for entering, storing, summarizing, and displaying discipline data must be easy to use and consume no more than 1% of staff time. At minimum and at least quarterly, school teams should review graphs of the following five data displays: (a) number of office discipline referrals per day per month, (b) number of office referrals by type of problem behavior, (c) number of office discipline referrals by school location, (d), number of office discipline referrals by student, and (e) number of office discipline referrals by staff member.

  3. At least quarterly dissemination, celebration, and acknowledgement of outcomes and accomplishments

    Leadership teams should regularly (at least quarterly) engage in activities that (a) build public relations, (b) provide information about implementation efforts and outcomes, (c) reinforce implementation efforts, and (d) provide support for future funding and implementation planning. Activities include, for example, publications (e.g., websites, newsletters), presentations (e.g., conferences, school boards, community groups), public relations events (e.g., radio/television spots, newspaper articles), and individual (person, school, district) acknowledgements (e.g., certificates of recognition, public recognition).

Appendix A: PBS Self-Assessment Checklist

PBS IMPLEMENTATION AND PLANNING SELF-ASSESSMENT4, 5

Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

September 25, 2002

Purposes: This self-assessment has been designed to serve as a multi-level guide for (a) appraising the status of positive behavior support (PBS) organizational systems, and (b) developing and evaluating PBS action plans.

Guidelines for Use6:

  • Form team to complete self-assessment
  • Specify how self-assessment information will be used
  • Consider existing behavior-related efforts, initiatives, and/or programs.
  • Review existing behavior-related data (e.g., suspension/expulsions, behavior incidents, discipline referrals, attendance, achievement scores, dropout rates).

Date ____________________

Members of Team Completing Self-Assessment




Level of Implementation Being Considered

□ State-wide
□ Region/District-wide
□ School-wide
□ Other:____________________

 


4 The Center is supported by a grant from the Office of Special Education Programs, with additional funding from the Safe and Drug Free Schools Program, US Department of Education (H326S980003). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the US Department of Education, and such endorsements should not be inferred. Contact Rob Horner (Robh@uoregon.edu or George Sugai (Sugai@ uoregon.edu) for more use of this self-assessment or more information.

5 © 2002 Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, University of Oregon.

6 See PBS Implementers’ Blueprint for supporting definitions, descriptions, and guidelines.

PBS Implementation Self-Assessment and Planning Tool

FEATURE
IN PLACE STATUS
Yes
Partial
No
Leadership Team
  • Team is developed with representation from appropriate range of stakeholders (special education, regular education, families, mental health, etc).
     
  • Team determines how many schools are to be involved in the effort.
     
  • Team completes self-assessment.
     
  • Team completes a 3-5 year prevention-based action plan.
     
  • Team defines regular meeting schedule & meeting process (agenda, minutes, etc).
     
Coordination
  • Coordinator(s) is identified who has adequate FTE to manage day-to-day operations.
     
Funding
  • Funding sources to cover activities for at least three years can be identified.
     
Visibility
  • Dissemination strategies are identified & implemented to ensure that stakeholders are kept aware of activities & accomplishments (e.g., website, newsletter, conferences, TV).
     
Political Support
  • Student social behavior is one of the top five goals for the political unit (state, district, etc).
     
  • Leadership team reports to the political unit at least annually on the activities & outcomes related to student behavior goal.
     
  • PBS policy statement developed & endorsed.
     
  • Participation & support by administrator from political unit.
     
Training Capacity
  • Leadership team has established trainers to build & sustain school-wide PBS practices.
     
Coaching Capacity
  • Leadership team has developed a coaching network that builds & sustains school-wide PBS
     
  • A coach is available to meet at least monthly with each emerging school team (emerging teams are teams that have not met the implementation criteria), and at least quarterly with established teams.
     
Demonstrations
  • At least 10 schools have adopted school-wide PBS, & can be used as local demonstrations of process & outcomes.
     
Evaluation
  • Leadership has developed evaluation process for assessing (a) extent to which teams are using school-wide PBS (b) impact of school-wide PBS on student outcomes, & (c) extent to which the leadership team’s action plan is implemented.
     
  • School-based information systems (e.g., data collection tools & evaluation processes) are in place.
     
  • At least quarterly dissemination, celebration & acknowledgement of outcomes & accomplishments
     

 

Action Plan for Completion of Start-Up Activities

 

Activity

Activity Task Analysis

Who

When

1. Foundation & Readiness

  • Leadership commitment & priority
  • 3 years of funding
  • Commitment to leadership team
  • Common approach
  • Self-assessment & report
a.    
b.    
c.    
d.    
e.    
f.    
g.    

2. Leadership Team Features

  • Stakeholder representation
  • Administrator participation
  • Coordinator
  • Quarterly meetings
a.    
b.    
c.    
d.    
e.    
f.    
g.    

3. Leadership Team Functions

  • PBS policy
  • Staff development & training capacity
  • Coaching capacity
  • Evaluation of implementation & impact
  • Annual action plan
  • Dissemination & celebration of outcomes
a.    
b.    
c.    
d.    
e.    
f.    
g.    

 

Appendix B: Sample Template For State/District Action Planning

 

Sample State/District Leadership PBS Action Planning Template

 

Month
Activity (Person/s7)
Leadership/ Coordination
Teaming
Coaching/ Facilitation
Training Capacity
Evaluation
Other
Feb Describe need/rationale

Establish leadership team

    Secure technical assistance from Center on PBIS    
Mar Conduct leadership team meeting Secure endorsement from state/district leadership

Conduct PBS Self-Assessment & develop action plan

         
Apr Conduct leadership team meeting

Conduct introductory overview to administrators

Develop application & requirements for school team participation Specify coaching roles & responsibilities Identify potential local trainers & develop staff development plan Develop evaluation protocol (questions, & outcomes)  
May Conduct leadership team meeting Distribute & collect application for team training   Develop team & coaching training curriculum    
Jun Conduct leadership team meeting Identify qualified districts & schools to participate in initial team training

School team meeting

Specify coaching assignments to school teams Develop plan for preparing trainers    
Jul Conduct leadership team meeting Conduct initial team training

Establish school-wide action plan (school team)

Conduct coaching training   Collect Team Implementation Checklist (coaches)  
Aug Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)

Establish discipline data management system (school team)

       
Sep Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)     Conduct School-wide Evaluation Tool  
Oct Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Nov Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Dec Conduct leadership team meeting Conduct team follow-up Conduct coaching
follow-up
Give new trainers opportunity to present part of training (trainers) Complete Team Implementation Checklist (coaches)

Summarize & present progress data to date

 
Jan Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Feb Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Mar Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Apr Conduct leadership team meeting Conduct team training
follow-up
Conduct coaching
follow-up
Give new trainers opportunity to present part of training (new trainers) Complete Team Implementation Checklist (coaches)

Summarize & present progress data to date

 
May Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)     Conduct School-wide Evaluation Tool (state team)  
Jun Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)

Specify districts & schools for next cohort school team training & distribute applications

       
Jul Conduct leadership team meeting Select schools for next cohort of school & coaching training Specify coaching assignments to school teams   Prepare annual evaluation report  
Aug Conduct leadership team meeting Conduct new team & coaching training Conduct new coaching training Give new trainers opportunity to present part of training (new trainers)    
Sep Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Oct Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)

Conduct team & coaching follow-up

Conduct coaching
follow-up
Give new trainers opportunity to present part of training (new trainers) Summarize & present progress data to date  
Dec Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Jan Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)

Conduct team & coaching follow-up

Conduct coaching
follow-up
Give new trainers opportunity to present most of training (new trainers) Summarize & present progress data to date  
Feb Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Mar Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Apr Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)

Conduct team & coaching follow-up

Conduct coaching follow-up Give new trainers opportunity to present most of training (new trainers) Summarize & present progress data to date  
May Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)        
Jun Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting (school team)

Specify districts & schools for next cohort school team training & distribute applications

       
Jul Conduct leadership team meeting Select schools for next cohort of school & coaching training Specify coaching assignments to school teams   Prepare annual evaluation report  
Aug Conduct leadership team meeting          
Sep Conduct leadership team meeting School team meeting        

7 State Leadership Team unless otherwise indicated

Appendix C: School Team Implementation Checklist

Effective Behavior Support Team Implementation Checklists (Quarterly)

School  
Date of Report  
District  
County/State  

INSTRUCTIONS: The EBS team should complete both checklists quarterly to monitor activities for implementation of EBS in the school.

EBS Team Members




Person(s) Completing Report


Checklist #1: Start-Up Activity

Complete & submit Quarterly.

Status: Achieved, In Progress, Not Started

Date:
(MM/DD/YY)

Oct.

Dec.

Mar.

May

Establish Commitment
1. Administrator’s support & active involvement.
Status:        
2. Faculty/Staff support (One of top 3 goals, 80% of faculty document support, 3 year timeline). Status:        
Establish & Maintain Team
3. Team established (representative).
Status:        
4. Team has regular meeting schedule, effective operating procedures. Status:        
5. Audit is completed for efficient integration of team with other teams/initiatives addressing behavior support. Status:        
Self-Assessment
6. Team/faculty completes EBS self-assessment survey.
Status:        
7. Team summarizes existing school discipline data. Status:        
8. Strengths, areas of immediate focus & action plan are identified. Status:        
Establish School-wide Expectations
9. 3-5 school-wide behavior expectations are defined.
Status:        
10. School-wide teaching matrix developed. Status:        
11. Teaching plans for school-wide expectations are developed. Status:        
12. School-wide behavioral expectations taught directly & formally. Status:        
13. System in place to acknowledge/reward school-wide expectations. Status:        
14. Clearly defined & consistent consequences and procedures for undesirable behaviors are developed. Status:        
Establish Information System
15. Discipline data are gathered, summarized, & reported.
Status:        
Build Capacity for Function-based Support
16. Personnel with behavioral expertise are identified & involved.
Status:        
17. Plan developed to identify and establish systems for teacher support, functional assessment & support plan development & implementation. Status:        

 

Checklist #2: On-going Activity Monitoring

 

Complete & submit Quarterly.

Status: Achieved, In Progress, Not Started

Date:
(MM/DD/YY)

Oct.

Dec.

Mar.

May

1. EBS team has met at least monthly. Status:        
2. EBS team has given status report to faculty at least monthly. Status:        
3. Activities for EBS action plan implemented. Status:        
4. Accuracy of implementation of EBS action plan assessed. Status:        
5. Effectiveness of EBS action plan implementation assessed. Status:        
6. EBS data analyzed. Status:        

Additional Observations/Comments/Questions:

 

Action Plan for Completion of Start-Up Activities

 

Activity

Activity Task Analysis

Who

When

1. Establish Commitment

  • Administrator
  • Top 3 goal
  • 80% of faculty
  • Three year timeline

a

   

b.

   

c.

   

d.

   

e.

   

2. Establish Team

  • Representative
  • Administrator
  • Effective team operating procedures
  • Audit of teams/initiatives

a.

   

b.

   

c.

   

d.

   

e.

   

3. Self-Assessment

  • EBS survey
  • Discipline data
  • Identification of strengths, focus
  • Action Plan developed
  • Action Plan presented to faculty

a.

   

b.

   

c.

   

d.

   

e.

   

4. School-wide Expectations

  • Define 3-5 school-wide behavioral expectations
  • Curriculum matrix
  • Teaching plans
  • Teach expectations
  • Define consequences for problem behavior

a.

   

b.

   

c.

   

d.

   

e.

   

5. Establish Information System

  • System for gathering useful information
  • Process for summarizing information
  • Process for using information for decision-making

a.

   

b.

   

c.

   

d.

   

e.

   

6. Build Capacity for Function-based Support

  • Personnel with behavioral expertise
  • Time and procedures for identification, assessment, & support implementation

a.

   

b.

   

c.

   

d.

   

e.

   
References

Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2001). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (6 th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Colvin, G., Sugai, G., & Patching, W. (1993). Pre-correction: An instructional strategy for managing predictable behavior problems. Intervention in School and Clinic, 28, 143-150.

Crone, D.A., & Horner, R.H. (2003). Building positive behavior support systems in schools: Functional behavioral assessment. New York: Guilford.

Gilbert, T.F. (1978). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance. New York: McGraw Hill.

Horner, R. H. (1994). Functional assessment: Contributions and future directions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 401-404.

Horner, R. H. ( March 27, 2003) Extending Positive Behavior Support to Whole Schools: Sustainable Implementation. Keynote Address. First International Conference on Positive Behavior Support. Orlando: Florida.

Kameenui, E. J., & Darch, C. B. (2004). Instructional classroom management: A proactive approach to behavior management. (2 nd edition). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Kerr, M.M. & C. M. Nelson (2002). Strategies for addressing behavior problems in the classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Latham, G. (1988). The birth and death cycles of educational innovations. Principal, 68(1), 41-43.

Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1999). Effective Behavior Support: A Systems Approach to Proactive School-wide Management.  Focus on Exceptional Children, 31(6), 1-24.

O’Neill, R. E., Horner, R. H., Albin, R. W., Sprague, J. R., Storey, K., & Newton, J. S. (1997). Functional assessment for problem behavior: A practical handbook. (2 nd edition). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.

Shores, R.E., Jack, S.L., Gunter, P.L., Ellis, D.N., DeBriere, T.J., & Wehby, J.H. (1993). Classroom interactions of children with behavior disorders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 1, 27-39.

Sugai, G. (1992). The design of instruction and the proactive management of social behaviors. Learning Disabilities Forum, 17(2), 20-23.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (1999). Discipline and behavioral support: Preferred processes and practices. Effective School Practices, 17(4), 10-22.

Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Lewis, T. J., Nelson, C. M., Scott, T., Liaupsin, C., Sailor, W., Turnbull, A. P., Turnbull III, H. R., Wickham, D., Wilcox, B., & Ruef, M. (2000). Applying positive behavior support and functional behavioral assessment in schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2(3), 131–143.

Sugai, G., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Hagan-Burke, S. (1999-2000). Overview of the functional behavioral assessment process. Exceptionality, 8, 149-160.

Sulzer-Azaroff, B. & Mayer, G. R. (1994). Achieving educational excellence: Behavior analysis for achieving classroom and schoolwide behavior change. San Marcos, CA; Westen Image.

Stokes, T. F. & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 10(2), 349-367.

Tolan, P., & Guerra, N. (1994). What works in reducing adolescent violence: An empirical review of the field. Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence. University of Colorado, Boulder.

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), 194-209.

Zins, J. E., & Ponte, C. R. (1990). Best practices in school-based consultation. In A. Thomas and J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology -- II (pp. 673-694). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

This document is provided for the user's convenience.  Inclusion does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any views, products or services offered or expressed.