Building Systems Capacity

at Tier 3

 ISTAC/IL PBIS NetworkLucille Eber, State Director

Kimberli Breen, Technical Assistance Director

Waukegan School DistrictLaurie Lee, High School Special Education Chair

About this session:

Describe the critical Tier 3 systems features at the district and building level

Session Objectives: Understand the Tier 3 teaming functions at both a

district and building levelLearn how Tier 3 interventions can be layered up

from Tier 1 and Tier 2 systems, data, and practicesUnderstand how to build coaching and technical

assistance processes that match the complexity of the interventions needed for success at Tier 3

Understand the Tier 3 teaming functions at both a district and building level

District Teaming for Tier 3• Facilitate quarterly District action planning to:

Clarify district-wide expectations for buildings Offer support and accountability for Principals & other

leaders Progress-monitor at multiple levels:

• District, school & individual youth in aggregate• Use district data to identify trends in placement• Use data to identify youth most at risk per building/district

Oversee implementation, evaluation & coaching support to buildings

Engage and partner with families and community agencies

Systems Response Tool

Building Level DataUsed by District Teams in Aggregate

Building Level Teaming to Support All Tiers

3-Tiered System of Support

Necessary Conversations (Teams)

Check-In Check-Out

Skills Groups

Group w. individual

feature

Complex

FBA/BIP

Problem Solving Team Meeting

Tertiary Systems Team Meeting

Brief

FBA/BIP

Brief FBA/BIP

Wraparound

Secondary Systems Team

Meeting

Plans schoolwide &

classroom supports

Uses process data; determines overall

intervention effectiveness

Standing team; uses FBA/BIP process for one student at a time

Uses process data; determines overall

intervention effectiveness

Rev. 11.19.2012

UniversalTeam

Meeting

Universal Support

Illinois PBIS Network

Teaming at Tier 2

Tier 2 Systems Planning ‘conversation’ Monitors effectiveness of CICO, S/AIG, Mentoring,

and Brief FBA/BIP supports Review data to make decisions on improvements

to the interventions Individual students are NOT discussed

Problem Solving Team ‘conversation’ Develops plans for one student at a time Every school has this type of meeting Teachers and family are typically invited

Teaming at Tier 3

Tertiary Systems Planning ‘conversation’ Monitors effectiveness of Complex FBA/BIP &

Wraparound supports Review data in aggregate to make decisions on

improvements to the interventions themselves Students are NOT discussed

Individual Student Teams FBA/BIP Team per student Wraparound Team per student

Student-Specific Teams

Wraparound Team: Family of child and all relevant stakeholders invited by

family. Wrap facilitators are trained to effectively engage families so that they will see that these teams are created by and for the family, and therefore will want to have a team and actively participate. School staff involved are informed that their presence is uniquely important for this youth and invited to participate.

Individual Youth FBA/BIP Team: Like the wraparound team, this team is uniquely created

for each individual child in need of comprehensive planning and the families are critical members of the team. All relevant individuals/staff are invited.

Systems Data Use at Tier 2/3

Learn how Tier 3 interventions can be layered up from Tier 1 and Tier 2 systems, data, and practices

Tier 1/Universal School-Wide Assessment

School-Wide Prevention Systems

SIMEO Tools: HSC-T, SD-T, EI-T

Check-in Check-out (CICO)

Group Intervention with Individualized Feature (e.g., CICO with ind. features and Mentoring)

Brief Functional Behavior Assessment/Behavior Intervention Planning (FBA/BIP)

Complex or Multiple-domain FBA/BIP

Person Centered Planning: Wraparound/RENEWFamily Focus

ODRs,Credits, Attendance, Tardies, Grades, DIBELS, etc.

Daily Progress Report (DPR) (Behavior and Academic Goals)

Competing Behavior Pathway, Functional Assessment Interview, Scatter Plots, etc.

Social/Academic Instructional Groups (SAIG)

Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports:A Multi-Tiered System of Support Model (MTSS)

Illinois PBIS Network, Revised Aug. 2013 Adapted from T. Scott, 2004

Tier 2/Secondary

Tier 3/Tertiary

Inte

rven

tio

nAssessm

en

t

Individual Student Information System (ISIS)

Daily Progress Report (DPR) Sample

NAME:______________________ DATE:__________________

Teachers please indicate YES (2), SO-SO (1), or NO (0) regarding the student’s achievement in relation to the following sets of expectations/behaviors.

EXPECTATIONS1 st block 2 nd block 3 rd block 4 th block

Be Safe 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

Be Respectful 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

Be Responsible 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

Total Points

Teacher Initials

Adapted from Grant Middle School STAR CLUB

Use your wordsUse deep breathing

Keep arm’s distanceUse #2 voice level

when upset

Ask for breaksSelf-monitor with

DPR

“Social & Academic

Instructional Groups”

“Individualized Student Card

After FBA/BIP"

Walk to classKeep hands to self

Use appropriate language

Raise hand to speak

Bring materials Fill out assignment

notebook

Understand how to build coaching and technical assistance processes that match the complexity of the interventions needed for success at Tier 3

Train Diverse ImplementersContinue to train clinicians Include building and district administrators in

trainings Overviews (i.e. AA1241) Intervention trainings

Include Special Education TeachersInvite General Education Teachers,

ParaProfessionals, Security and othersPartner with families & community agencies in

providing & receiving training

Tier 3 TA Purposes

Increase implementation, coaching & TA fluency for:Internal and External CoachesTier 3 Facilitators Other partners

In order to:Improve effectiveness of Tier 3 implementationImprove quality of life for children and families

Phases of CoachingPhase 1: Modeling - Coach models desired

skills & competencies: "Coach shows the facilitator how to do it"

Phase 2: Support and Feedback - As team assumes responsibility, Coach provides support & feedback: "Coach supports and provides feedback as the

facilitator does it"Phase 3: Monitoring - Coach observes as team

performs and self-monitors independently: "Coach celebrates the facilitator's ability to

perform and self-monitor"

Building Tier 3 CapacityPBIS Network

Do for Do with Cheer on

External Coach Do for Do with Cheer on

Facilitators Do for Do with Cheer on

Students & Families

As you hear the district example, consider:

1) What have been your roadblocks to effective Tier 3 implementation?

2) How does your system currently blend Special & General Education?

3) Do building/district admininstrators regularly review implementation data? (fidelity, outcomes etc.)

ExemplarLaurie Lee

Waukegan High SchoolSpecial Education Chair

From Theory to PracticeCritical Tier 3 Systems Features

Started with a District wide leadership team Involved all stakeholders including building

administration, clinicians, district level staffUse of district data for systems

development and planning for implementation

Developed data-based decision rules for renew

Systems: Use of DataCreated system for how to identify youth for

Tier 2 interventions Data-based decision-rules

Tier 3 “Systems” Committee: increasing representation, becoming more active

Revisit system for how youth are identified for RENEW/Tier 3 support

Plan for building/district admin. to review ‘usage data’ to know which facilitators are actively entering/using data for Tier 3 support

From Theory to PracticeCritical Tier 3 Systems Features

Building Buy in by administrators and staffAddressing supervisionCoaching had been in place for Tier I and

Tier II so planned continuation of coaching at RENEW sites

Moving from district vision to implementation

Working in the Trenches

CompartmentalizationImperfect intervention tiersOver reliance on Clinicians

Working in the Trenches:Previous Compartmentalization

Trainings done for just one type/group of staffLimited inclusion of administration in trainings for

facilitatorsGen. & Sp.ed. staff not sharing responsibility for

studentsSupervision of staff fell along lines of Gen.Ed. or Sp.Ed. Youth w. IEPs were treated differently and did not

have access to same systems of supports. i.e. Tier 3 support, but without the Tier 2/Tier 1 layers

included for intervention or data use CICO was general education intervention Intensive intervention were the norm rather than looking

at the value of universal and targeted interventions

Working in the Trenches:Imperfect intervention tiers

We spent a lot of time building systems but sometimes the system became the focus instead of the students. Tiers were not completely built or working well. Service providers got hung up on fixing CICO and not

moving forward.Focus needed to change

How do we serve our students and still build the systems?

How do we make this work? How can we continue building/improving systems even

if the lower levels aren’t perfect?

In the Trenches:Over reliance on Clinicians

Clinicians have historically had a huge role in interventions for students with social/emotional/behavioral needs Clinicians met with students 1:1 for counseling Problem was that often there was no improvement in functioning in the

classroom setting Talking through problems may or may not have involved skill development Any skills learned in isolation were less likely to transfer

Paradigm shifting Goal is post secondary outcomes so building skills for adulthood is critical Originally trained clinicians to accomplish the work with renew Next brought in Special Education teachers This brought the intervention closer to the classroom and to real life Currently training general education teachers, paraprofessionals, safety staff

New Focus: train/inform non-clinicians Generalize skills by expanding to all people in circle Move skills into classroom and general school environment

Finding the Stepping Stones

Reducing compartmentalization

Building Collaboration

Getting the right staff in the airplane

Finding the Stepping Stones:Reducing compartmentalization

Analyze & shift structures – Is the structure communicating separate systems? Sp.Ed. structures were separate from general

education structures Sp.Ed. problem solving teams met separately The Sp.Ed. teacher principal was an academic

chair not a house principal Moved all special education teachers into houses Supervised collaboratively by Principal and Sp.Ed.

Administrator All administrators responsible for all students with

ongoing teaming and collaboration

Finding the Stepping Stones:Reducing compartmentalization

Support the “we” instead of the “us and them” Facilitate Deep Conversations regarding the needs of all students Support moving away from being independent practitioners Youth with and without IEPs are ‘shared responsibility’ with Sp.Ed. Admin &

Building Principals Provide opportunities to team and collaborate Identify youth by grade level/team instead of by teacher (all freshman are

my responsibility, not just the ones I teach) Look at roles differently, how do we share responsibility for the work Doesn’t always have to be me/you; others can help or fill in (removes

roadblocks)• i.e. “I can’t co-teach that period…but who else can?”

Servicing youth ‘from a different house’• i.e. “whose the best person to work with that youth”

Build systems that have some exceptions; not all one or the other

Finding the Stepping Stones:Building Collaboration

Invite the right people to the table Those who question as well as those who support

Meet often Be transparent, share data Keep the loud voices in the conversation Include those who seem resistant Always include administrators Make the work “palatable” Build the stepping stones;

Break the work into the smaller (digestible) parts Can see outcomes quicker when focus small Early/small successes can be built upon/expanded

Let people move at the pace that fits them; move slower to go faster

Finding the Stepping Stones:Building Collaboration

Support participation of all stakeholdersStaff sometimes hesitate to contribute because

they don’t want to be ‘blamed’ for ideas that don’t work

Use open-ended questions to promote “deep” conversation Easiest to build systems when ask others

• “What will help the students?”• “What are the challenges?”• “Where do you fit?”,• “What would help this work better?”

Getting the right staff in the airplane:How do we build it as we are flying it?

Frame the issues differently We are building this “together” We know where we’re going, may not know

exactly what it looks like now Need feedback from everyone along the way

• i.e. “What do you WANT it to look like?” Use blueprints that have worked in the past

• Then modify as needed; based on feedback

Getting the right staff in the airplane

Always include administrators Decision-makers need to be in the conversation General Education, Special Education, Clinicians all

working/planning/implementing together Multiple layers of staff in same mtg.:

District mtgs. with clinicians, principals & district directors/superintendents

Build the system with/around those who are INTERESTED Those who understand why it’s important can help others

buy-in You CAN build system front to back or back to front

Renew can support the building of tier II systems

Reflection/Discussion

1) What questions do you have?2) How do you see this working in

your district/buildings?3) Have you already begun this

transition, if so, what roadblocks are you facing?