Leadership in Implementing School-wide PBIS

February 27

Rob HornerUniversity of OregonOSEP TA-Center on PBISwww.pbis.org

Goals

• Goals• Define current status of SWPBIS implementation• Define lessons learned about effective leadership in

implementation of SWPBIS.• Define role of the Implementation Blueprint• Detail how the collection and use of data affects implementation

of SWPBIS• Provide opportunity for questions.

Themes Affecting Education:Multi-tiered Systems, Evidence-based Practices, Implementation Science

Performance Assessment (Fidelity)

Coaching

Training

Selection

Systems Intervention

Facilitative Administration

Decision Support Data System

Com

pete

ncy

Organization

Effective Implementation

Multi-tiered Systems of Support

Evidence-based Practices

Implementation Science

AdaptiveTechnical

Leadership Drivers

School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS)

• The social culture of a school matters.

• A continuum of supports that begins with the whole school and extends to intensive, wraparound support for individual students and their families.

• Effective practices with the systems needed for high fidelity and sustainability

• Multiple tiers of intensity

What is School-wide Positive Behavior Intervention and Support?

• School-wide PBIS is:• A framework for establishing the social culture and

behavioral supports needed for a school to achieve behavioral and academic outcomes for all students.

• Evidence-based features of SWPBIS• Prevention• Define and teach positive social expectations• Acknowledge positive behavior• Arrange consistent consequences for problem behavior• On-going collection and use of data for decision-making• Continuum of intensive, individual intervention supports. • Implementation of the systems that support effective

practices

Why SWPBIS?

•The fundamental purpose of SWPBIS is to make schools more effective learning environments.

Predictable

Consistent

Positive

Safe

Experimental Research on SWPBIS

Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Thornton, L.A., & Leaf, P.J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10(2), 100-115

Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Bevans, K.B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P.J. (2008). The impact of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462-473.

Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133-148.

Bradshaw, C.P., Reinke, W. M., Brown, L. D., Bevans, K.B., & Leaf, P.J. (2008). Implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1-26.

Bradshaw, C., Waasdorp, T., Leaf. P., (in press). Effects of School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems and adjustment. Pediatrics.

Horner, R., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A., & Esperanza, J., (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133-145.

Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1-14.

Ross, S. W., Endrulat, N. R., & Horner, R. H. (2012). Adult outcomes of school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions. 14(2) 118-128.Waasdorp, T., Bradshaw, C., & Leaf , P., (2012) The Impact of Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Bullying and Peer Rejection: A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial. Archive of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine. 2012;166(2):149-156

SWPBIS Experimentally Related to:1. Reduction in problem behavior2. Increased academic performance3. Increased attendance4. Improved perception of safety5. Reduction in bullying behaviors6. Improved organizational efficiency

7. Reduction in staff turnover8. Increased perception of teacher efficacy9. Improved Social Emotional competence

Summary of Research• School-wide PBIS is an evidence-based practice

• Implementation is related to improved academic and social behavior.

• Tier I SWPBIS can be implemented with fidelity by any school in the U.S. without new resources or dramatic reorganization.• Successful Schools:

• Define a clear commitment to school-wide social culture• Add data systems (fidelity and Student Outcomes)• Provide the leadership to allow effective team-based decision-

making.

• Tier II and Tier III supports will require more adaptation

Primary Prevention:School-/Classroom-Wide Systems for

All Students,Staff, & Settings

Secondary Prevention:Specialized Group

Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior

Tertiary Prevention:Specialized

IndividualizedSystems for Students

with High-Risk Behavior

~80% of Students

~15%

~5%

SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR

SUPPORT

27

Main Ideas:1. Invest in prevention first2. Multiple tiers of support

intensity3. Early/rapid access to

support

Remember that the multiple tiers of support refer to our SUPPORT not Students.

Avoid creating a new disability labeling system.

Reading

Behavior

Math

Health

Number of Schools Implementing SWPBIS since 2000

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10' 11' 12' 13'0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

19,054

Count of School Implementing SWPBIS by StateFebruary, 2013

Alab

ama

Alas

kaAr

izon

aAr

kans

as

Calif

orni

a Co

lora

do*

Conn

ectic

ut

Del

awar

eFl

orid

a*G

uam

Geo

rgia

Haw

aii

Idah

oIll

inoi

sIn

dian

aIo

wa*

Kans

as*

Kent

ucky

Loui

sian

a*M

aine

Mar

ylan

d*M

assa

chus

etts

Mic

higa

nM

inne

sota

Mis

siss

ippi

Mis

sour

i*M

onta

na*

Neb

rask

aN

evad

aN

ew H

amps

hire

New

Jers

ey*

New

Mex

ico

New

Yor

kN

orth

Car

olin

a*N

orth

Dak

ota*

Ohi

oO

klah

oma

Ore

gon*

Penn

sylv

ania

Rhod

e Is

land

Sout

h Ca

rolin

a*So

uth

Dak

ota

Tenn

esse

e Te

xas

Uta

h*Ve

rmon

tVi

rgin

ia

Was

hing

ton

Stat

eW

ashi

ngto

n D

CW

est V

irgi

nia

Wis

cons

inW

yom

ing

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Illinois14 States > 500 Schools

Arizona

Proportion of Schools Implementing SWPBIS by StateFebruary, 2013

Alab

ama

Alas

kaAr

izon

aAr

kans

as

Calif

orni

a Co

lora

do*

Conn

ectic

ut

Del

awar

eFl

orid

a*G

uam

Geo

rgia

Haw

aii

Idah

oIll

inoi

sIn

dian

aIo

wa*

Kans

as*

Kent

ucky

Loui

sian

a*M

aine

Mar

ylan

d*M

assa

chus

etts

Mic

higa

nM

inne

sota

Mis

siss

ippi

Mis

sour

i*M

onta

na*

Neb

rask

aN

evad

aN

ew H

amps

hire

New

Jers

ey*

New

Mex

ico

New

Yor

kN

orth

Car

olin

a*N

orth

Dak

ota*

Ohi

oO

klah

oma

Ore

gon*

Penn

sylv

ania

Rhod

e Is

land

Sout

h Ca

rolin

a*So

uth

Dak

ota

Tenn

esse

e Te

xas

Uta

h*Ve

rmon

tVi

rgin

ia

Was

hing

ton

Stat

eW

ashi

ngto

n D

CW

est V

irgi

nia

Wis

cons

inW

yom

ing

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

12 states over 40% of all schools implementing SWPBIS

Arizona

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

Leadership TeamActive Coordination

FundingVisibility Political

Support

Training Coaching Evaluation

Local School/District Teams/Demonstrations

BehavioralExpertise

Policy

Sugai et al., www.pbis.org

SWPBS Implementation Self-Assessment and Planning Tool

IMPLEMENTATION FEATURE IN PLACE STATUS

Yes Partial No Le

ader

ship

Tea

m

1. Capacity to address multi-school (district) and/or multi-district (region, state) leadership and coordination.

2. Leadership Team with representation from appropriate range of stakeholders (e.g., special education, general education, families, mental health, administration, higher education, professional development, evaluation & accountability).

3. Completion of SWPBS Implementation Blueprint self-assessment at least annually.

4. 3-5 year prevention-based action plan that delineates actions linked to each feature of the Implementation Blueprint.

5. Regular meeting schedule (at least quarterly) & meeting process (agenda, minutes, dissemination).

GOAL: District and/or state level capacity to establish, sustain, and scale-up of accurate implementation of a continuum (multi-tiered) of SWPBS across multiple schools.

Month

Activity/Action (Person/s)

Leadership/ Coordination

Coaching/ Facilitation Training Evaluation Behavioral

Expertise Funding Visibility Political Support Policy

Jul                 

Aug                 

Sep                 

Oct                 

Nov                 

Dec                 

Jan                 

Feb                 

Mar                 

Apr                 

May                 

Jun                 

Jul                 

Aug                 

Sep                 

Oct                 

Dec                 

Jan                 

                  

                  

                  

Action Planning:For Items not Implemented:

1. Select next action/activity (and for each action define who will perform, and when action will be accomplished). 2. The active actions become items for weekly/monthly meetings

Implementation Takes

Time: 2 – 4 Years

Explorati

on

Installa

tion

Initial

Implementation

Full

Implementati

on

Stages of Implementation

Stages of ImplementationFocus Stage Description

Exploration/ Adoption

Decision regarding commitment to adopting the program/practices and supporting successful implementation.

Installation Set up infrastructure so that successful implementation can take place and be supported. Establish team and data systems, conduct audit, develop plan.

Initial Implementation

Try out the practices, work out details, learn and improve before expanding to other contexts.

Full Implementation

Expand the program/practices to other locations, individuals, times- adjust from learning in initial implementation.

Continuous Improvement/ Regeneration

Make it easier, more efficient. Embed within current practices.

Work to do it right!

Work to do it

better!

Should we do it!

Steve Goodman

Scaling up School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports:The Experiences of Seven States with Documented SuccessRob Horner, Don Kincaid, George Sugai, Tim Lewis, Lucille Eber, Susan Barrett, Celeste Rossetto Dickey, Mary Richter, Erin Sullivan, Cyndi Boezio, Nancy Johnson

Exploration Installation Initial Imp Full Imp Innovation Sustainability

Leadership TeamFunding

Visibility

Political SupportPolicy

Training

Coaching

Expertise

Evaluation

Demos

Exploration and Adoption

Installation Initial Implementation

Full Implementation

Innovation and sustainability

Leadership Team

(coordination)

Do you have a state leadership team?

If you do, how was your first leadership team developed?

Who were members?

Who supported/lead the team through the exploration process?

Was any sort of self-assessment completed (e.g. the PBIS Implementation Blueprint Assessment)?

What was the role of State agency personnel in the exploration phase?

What were critical issues that confronted the team as it began to install systems changes?

What were specific activities the team did to ensure success of the initial implementation efforts?

Did the team change personnel or functioning as the # of schools/districts increased?

What has the Leadership team done to insure sustainability?

In what areas is the State “innovating” and contributing to the research and practice of PBIS (e.g. linking PBIS with literacy or math)?

Descriptive Summary: Oregon

1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-100

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp /Full Imp & Innovate

Descriptive Summary: Missouri

97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-110

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Exploration / Installation /Initial Imp / Full Imp & Innovate

Descriptive Summary: North Carolina

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-100

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Exploration / Installation / Initial & Full Imp / Innovate

Descriptive Summary: Colorado

02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-110

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Exploration / Installation / Initial & Full Imp / Innovate

Descriptive Summary: Florida

01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-100

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Exploration/ Installation/ Initial Imp / Full Imp / Innovate

Descriptive Summary: Maryland

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20100

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp / Full Imp / Innovate

Descriptive Summary: Illinois

98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-110

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Exploration / Installation / Initial Imp /Full Imp & Innovate

Lessons Learned• Multiple approaches to achieving scaled implementation

• Colorado: Started with Leadership Team• Illinois: Started with Leadership Advocates and built team only after

implementation expanded.• Missouri: Strong initial demonstrations led to strong state support

• All states began with small “demonstrations” that documented the feasibility and impact of SWPBIS.

• Only when states reached 100-200 demonstrations did scaling occur. Four core features needed for scaling:

• Administrative Leadership / Support/ Funding• Technical capacity (Local training, coaching, evaluation and behavioral expertise)• Local Demonstrations of feasibility and impact (100-200)• Evaluation data system (to support continuous improvement)

• Essential role of Data: Fidelity data AND Outcome data

Lessons Learned• Scaling is NOT linear

• Sustained scaling requires continuous regeneration

• Threats to Scaling:• Competing initiatives• The seductive lure of the “new idea”• Leadership turnover• Legislative mandates• Fiscal constraint

Regular Dissemination of

Fidelity and Impact data is the best

“protective factor” for threats to

scaling

Lessons Learned• Scaling requires planned efficiency

• The unit cost of implementation must decrease as the number of adoptions increases.

• Shift from external trainers to within state/district trainers• Use local demonstrations as exemplars • Increased coaching capacity can decrease investment in training• Improved “selection” of personnel decreases turnover and

development costs• Use existing professional development and evaluation resources

differently

• Basic Message: The implementation practices that are needed to establish initial exemplars may be different from the practices used to establish large scale adoption.

• Jennifer Coffey, 2008

Effective PBIS Leadership• Define a five year vision:

• Number of districts/ schools• Extend that vision to incorporate at least 80% of all schools in the state

• Clarify role of Leadership Team• Active leadership and guidance. Not just “informational” or “consultative”• Meet regularly, carry tasks between meetings, use data• Need formal “coordinator” role… to ensure that things get done

• Establish Workgroups• Policy/ Funding• Training• Evaluation• Coordination/Communication

Summary• Leadership is essential for successful implementation of PBIS.

• Vision, Local Capacity, Assess, Adapt.

Lesson #7: Invest in Intensive Supports (Tier II, III)• Establish the organizational capacity to support students with

more severe problem behavior.

• The three areas of “knowledge” needed by a team.• Bennazi et al., (2006)

• Knowledge about student• Knowledge about context• Knowledge about behavioral theory

• The importance of understanding “function” of behavior.• Sheldon Loman and Kathleen Strickland-Cohen (2013)

• Typical school personnel can assess and manage “Basic” individual behavior challenges.

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

intense needs

Behavior Support Elements

Problem Behavior

Functional Assessment

Intervention & Support Plan

Fidelity of Implementation

Impact on Behavior & Lifestyle

*Response class*Routine analysis*Hypothesis statement*Supporting data *Alternative behaviors

*Competing behavior analysis *Indicated, evidence-based interventions*Contextual fit*Strengths, preferences, & lifestyle outcomes

*Implementation support*Data plan

*Continuous improvement*Sustainability plan

• Team-based• Behavior competence

Lesson #8: Collect and use Data for Active Decision-Making• Give each team concrete measures that they can use to

determine if they are successful.

• Measure use of practices: www.pbisassessment.org • Are we doing what we want to be doing?

• Team Checklist• Benchmark of Quality• EBS Survey• SET

• Measure impact on valued outcomes• Office discipline referrals• Attendance• Suspension/Expulsion rates• Student academic achievement• Student Individual Intensive Supports