S100i: Building a Tier 2/Secondary System –

Creating a Seamless System of

Support

Tier 2/Secondary Series Training

Version 3.0, Rev. 10.3.2011 This is a presentation of the Illinois PBIS Network. All rights reserved.

Training Behavioral ExpectationsEXPECTATION TRAINING SITE

BE RESPONSIBLE Make yourself comfortable & take care of your needs

Address question/activity in group time before discussing “other” topics

Ask questions

BE RESPECTFUL Turn cell phones, beepers, and pagers “off” or to “vibrate”

Contribute where possible

Save talking with your neighbor/s until team time.

BE PREPARED Follow up on tasks for next training day

Take (and Pass) notes (use Action Plan throughout day)

PBIS Supports the Illinois Professional Teaching Standards

1. Content Knowledge 2. Human Development and

Learning 3. Diversity 4. Planning for Instruction 5. Learning Environment 6. Instructional Delivery

7. Communication 8. Assessment 9. Collaborative

Relationships 10. Reflection and

Professional Growth11. Professional Conduct

http://www.isbe.net/profprep/PDFs/ipts.pdf

S100i Objectives

1. Create a Tier 2/Secondary System Tier 2 System Team Team members' roles and responsibilities

2. Using Data for decision making and on-going progress monitoring

3. Applying the Critical Features of simple Tier 2 interventions with Check-In Check-Out

Action Plan: Teams will design their Tier 2 System and begin creating CICO

Agenda8:30-10:00 Secondary Systems introduction and key features

10:00-10:15 Break

10:15-11:00 Data-based decision-making

11:00-11:30 Team members' roles, responsibilities & communication

11:30-12:15 Lunch

12:15-12:45 Data continued12:45-1:45 Introduction: Check-In/Check-Out

Creating your Check-In/Check-Out intervention

1:45-2:00 Break

2:00-2:30 Guiding Questions: Check-In/Check-Out2:30-2:45 Action Plan review, report out on progress & next steps2:45-3:00 Questions/concerns/technical assistance

Grounding

• Procedures:• In groups of 4 or 5

Members take turns talking When one member talks, all others are silent Full nonverbal attention is given to the speaker After everyone has talked, the speaker will

summarize/synthesize what was said Each table will do a quick report out of their

synthesis

Grounding Activity

1. Introduce yourself2. What is something you are excited about in

your school?3. What to you hope to get from today?4. Slap the table and announce “I’m in”. Purpose: to make sure everyone is now

“present” and centered to do today’s work.

Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions 1-5%•Individual students•Assessment-based•High intensity

1-5% Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions•Individual students•Assessment-based•Intense, durable procedures

Tier 2/Secondary Interventions 5-15%•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response•Small group interventions• Some individualizing

5-15% Tier 2/Secondary Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response•Small group interventions•Some individualizing

Tier 1/Universal Interventions 80-90%•All students•Preventive, proactive

80-90% Tier 1/Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive

School-Wide Systems for Student Success: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model

Academic Systems Behavioral Systems

Illinois PBIS Network, Revised May 15, 2008. Adapted from “What is school-wide PBS?” OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Accessed at http://pbis.org/schoolwide.htm

“Shout Out” Activity3 Points from 3 Tiers

Audience volunteers to share three important points from:

• Tier 1

• Tier 2

• Tier 3

Module One: Tier 2 Systems

SupportingStaff Behavior

SupportingDecisionMaking

SupportingStudent Behavior

PositiveBehaviorSupport

SYST

EMS

PRACTICES

DATA

OUTCOMES

Social Competence &Academic Achievement ٭

Adapted from “What is a systems Approach in school-wide PBS?”OSEP Technical Assistance on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Accessed at http://www.Pbis.org/schoolwide.htm

Table Talk: Systems, Data, Practices Conversation (10 mins)

• As a team discuss what is meant at Tier 2 of PBIS in regards to: Systems Data Practices

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:

What is meant by “layering”

interventions?

Module 2: Tier 2 Teaming

3-Tiered System of Support

Necessary Conversations (Teams)

CICO

SAIG

Group w. individual

feature

Complex

FBA/BIP

Problem Solving Team

Tertiary Systems Team

Brief

FBA/BIP

Brief FBA/BIP

WRAP

Secondary Systems Team

Plans SW & Class-wide supports

Uses Process data; determines overall

intervention effectiveness

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

Uses Process data; determines overall

intervention effectiveness

Sept. 1, 2009

UniversalTeam

Universal Support

Tier 1/Universal School-Wide Assessment

School-Wide Prevention Systems

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

Check-in/ Check-out

Individualized Check-In/Check-Out, Groups & Mentoring (ex. CnC)

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

Complex FBA/BIP

Wraparound

ODRs, 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

Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports:A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model

Illinois PBIS Network, Revised August 2009Adapted from T. Scott, 2004

Tier 2/Secondary

Tier 3/Tertiary

Inte

rven

tio

nAssessm

en

t

Teaming at Tier 2

• Secondary 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

Tier 2 Systems Teaming Conversation (5 mins)

• At your table, discuss the differences between Systems Teams and Problem Solving Teams

• How does this fit in your building?

Secondary Systems Team Roles

• Team Leader: responsible for agenda & facilitation of meeting

• Intervention Coordinators (CICO, S/AIG community agencies who may be providing or facilitating interventions, etc.): report out on aggregate student data from interventions they facilitate (ex. “50 youth in CICO, 40 are responding”)

• Action Plan Recorder: a.k.a. note taker• Time Keeper: • Family Representative: • CICO Facilitator: adult who checks students in and

out in the morning and afternoon

Community-based Service Agencies: How can they contribute?

• Participate as member of systems team and/or problem solving teams.

• Contribute to Social/Academic Instructional Groups development and/or facilitate S/AIG’s. (ex: DPR and classroom generalization techniques.)

• Useful resource for community-based service linkage and referrals.

• Skill-based clinicians can contribute to BIP techniques.• Provide trainings and individual teacher support. (ex:

homelessness, trauma, communication techniques, classroom management, etc..)

VIDEO: The Behavior Education Program: a Check-in/Check-out Intervention for Students at Risk

Please note:•“Student Identification” chapter provides more of a problem-solving teaming example as opposed to a Systems Team Meeting

• Other message that differs from ours - the dvd recommends the intervention begin within one week, we recommend 2-3 days.

•“Using Data” chapter, the team meeting example shown is also a problem-solving team example as opposed to the recommended Systems Team Meeting.

Break

Guiding Questions Activity: Time - 30 mins

Guiding Question Document Questions 1-3 only

Module 3:Data-Based Decision-Making

1) Student outcome data is used to:

Data-Based Decision-Making

2) Intervention Integrity or Process Data is used:

Shoulder Partner Activity (3-5 min)

• Turn to your shoulder partner and describe the differences between individual student data and intervention process data.

Data-Based Decision MakingNumbers to Keep in Mind

• 7-15%: Percent of total population expected to need and be supported by Tier 2 interventions

• 1-5%: Percent of total population expected to need and be supported by Tier 3 interventions

• 70%: Percent of youth (receiving intervention “X”) that should be responding to intervention

• Data-based Decision-Rules for ‘determining response’ must be defined Data sources defining response are efficient

• Ex. Daily Progress Report (DPR) cards: Student maintains an 80% average on DPR for 4 weeks

Tier 2/Tier 3 Interventions Tracking Tool Activity (20 mins)

1) What is your total building population?

2) What would 5% of your building population be? What would 15% be? Consider these two numbers for a range of students who should be receiving Secondary Interventions

3) What would 1% of your building population be? 5%? Consider these two numbers for a range of students who should be receiving Tertiary Interventions.

4) Using these calculations, what are the potential number of students your building could be serving at each Tier 2 and Tier 3 intervention?

5) What are some steps can your building take to prepare to serve these students?

• We are here for support as you build Tier 2!

Review Tier 2 Systems Team Agenda (10 mins)

• See your folder for the Sample Tier 2 Systems Team Agenda

Data Used to Identify Students in Need of a Simple Secondary Intervention

Student outcome data: Office Discipline Referrals Suspensions Attendance Tardies

• Universal Screeners (SSBD, BESS etc.)• Requests for Assistance made by teachers,

family members and/or students

Referrals per Student

0

10

20

Num

ber

of R

efe

rrals

per

Stu

dent

Students

Universal Screening Implementation Summary

Illinois PBIS NetworkJuly 29, 2011

Purpose of Universal Screening for Behavior

• Universal screening for behavior is integral to the Response to Intervention (RtI) model Emphasis on prevention versus intervention

• Use an evidence-based instrument to identify:– Risk factors for emotional/behavioral difficulties– Social-emotional strengths and needs

» Casts a ‘wider net’ than just using office discipline data (Identify students who don’t typically receive referrals)

Universal Screening: Illinois PBIS Implementation Summary

• Key outcomes from four years of implementation in Illinois schools: On average within PBIS schools less than 10%

of students, enrolled in grades screened, met criteria for needing additional supports

Over time, fewer students were identified via universal screening process

*Enrollment based on ISBE 2010 Fall Housing Report for grades screened

Universal Screening for Behavior Results

Universal Screening: Illinois PBIS Network Model

• Illinois PBIS Network model consists of the following features: Gated approach Evidence based tool Screening on both dimensions

(internalizing/externalizing) Youth are supported by an evidence-based

intervention within 72 hours of parental consent

Universal Screening Process

• The Illinois PBIS Network recommends a ‘multi-gate’ process for implementing universal screening for behavior Efficient:

• Takes no more than 90 minutes per classroom to complete process

• Less expensive and more timely than special education referral process

Fair:• All students receive consideration for additional supports

(gate one)• Reduces bias by using evidence-based instrument containing

consistent, criteria to identify students (gate two)

Universal Screening: Instrument Selection Criteria

• Screening tool meets established psychometric criteria The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing published

by American Educational Research Association (AERA) & American Psychological Association (APA) is gold-standard for instrument selection guidelines

• Identifies risk factors associated with externalizing (‘acting out’) and internalizing (‘overly shy/withdrawn’) behavioral problems, or social-emotional strengths and weaknesses

• It can be administered quickly (takes less than an hour to screen an entire class)

• It is cost-efficient Easy to score Does not require specialized training to administer Can function as a progress-monitoring tool

UNIVERSAL SCREENING INSTRUMENTS ARE NOTDIAGNOSTIC TOOLS

Universal Screening: Illinois PBIS Network Current Screening Instruments

Screener Pros ConsSystematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 1990)http://store.cambiumlearning.com

• Well-validated (Endorsed in 1990 by the Program Effectiveness Panel of the U.S. Department of Education)

• Efficient (Screening process can be completed within 45 minutes to 1 hour)

• Most effective instrument for identifying internalizers (Lane et al., 2009)

• Meets AERA/APA instrument selection criteria

• Inexpensive (Manual= $ 131.49; includes reproducible screening forms)

• Normed for grades 1-6 • Dated norms (normed in 1990)• Normative sample skewed to western U.S.

region

BASC-2/BESS (Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007)http://www.pearsonassessments.com

• Measures behaviors associated with internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors and academic competence

• Meets AERA/APA instrument selection criteria

• Incorporates three validity measures to rule out response bias

• Utilizes large (N= 12,350 children & youth), nationally-representative sample

• Web-based screening capacity available via AIMSewb

• Can be expensive for districts/schools that don’t have access to a scantron machine

• $1.00 per paper protocol• Online access via AIMSweb: Additional

$1.00 per student for subscribers and $4.00 per student for non-subscribers)

• Hand-scoring is time-consuming and reduces access to validity measures

• Computer software is expensive ($600)

Universal Screening: Illinois PBIS Network Additional Evidence-Based Screening Instruments

Screener Pros ConsStrengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 2001)

• Measures internalizing/externalizing behaviors

• Free• Option of completing pencil and paper, or

online version• Can be scored online• Technically sound: Large, representative

normative group

• Perceived length of administration time• Items skewed toward externalizing

behaviors

Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1993)

• Measures internalizing/externalizing behaviors

• Free• Quick to administer (less than 5 minutes

per student; 15 minutes for entire class, depending upon number of students)

• Easy to understand and interpret score results

• Technically-adequate

• Not as accurate as the SSBD regarding identification of internalizers

Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS; Gresham & Elliott, 2008)

• Measures problem behaviors, social and academic competence

• Computer and web-based (AIMSweb) administration and scoring available

• Expensive: Technical manual=$101; Rating forms= $1.60-$2.10 per student; scoring software= $250.00; Scanning software= $600

• AIMSweb costs: $4.00 per student for non-subscribers/subset of students ($1.00 per student for current subscribers)

Implementation Process Summary:Multiple Gating Procedure (Adapted from Severson et al. 2007)

Teachers Rank Order then Select Top 3 Students

on Each Dimension (Externalizing &

Internalizing)

Teachers Rate Top 3 Students in Each Dimension (Externalizing & Internalizing)Using a Research-Validated

Tool (e.g., SSBD, BASC-2/BESS, SDQ)

Gate 1

Gate 2

Pass Gate 1

Pass Gate 2Tier 2

Intervention

Request for Assistance Tools

Team Activity 15 mins:1. Review examples2. Discuss3. Plan to modify if needed

Activity: Time - 20 minsIdentifying Your Youth

• Using your data (Universal screener and/or ODRs) make a list of youth that are not responding to Universal interventions who may need Secondary support

• Remember: to do this you need a ‘data-based decision-rule’ for ODRS • Ex: “Students with 2 ODRs during the last 30

days”

Eye Contact Partner

• Find someone not at your table and make eye contact with them.

• Share something with this person that you have learned this morning.

Tertiary Demo School Reduces ODRs & Increases Simple Secondary Interventions

*CICO = Check-in/Check-out

IL Tertiary Demo

Year 1

Module 4: Critical Features of Tier 2 Interventions

Critical Features of Tier 2 Interventions

1. Intervention linked directly to school wide expectations and/or academic goals.

2. Intervention continuously available for student participation.

3. Intervention is implemented within 3 school days of determining the student is in need of the intervention

4. Intervention can be modified based on assessment and/or outcome data

Critical Features continued5. Intervention includes structured prompts

for what to do in relevant situations.6. Intervention results in students receiving

positive and/or corrective feedback from staff.

7. Intervention includes a school-home communication exchange system at least weekly.

Critical Features continued

8. Orientation process and introduction to materials is provided for students as they begin the intervention

9. Orientation to and materials provided for staff/sub’s/volunteers who have students using the intervention. Ongoing information shared with staff.

10. Opportunities to practice new skills are provided daily.

Critical Features Applied to Families

• CICO available within 3 days• Families notified about how CICO works• More support will be given if needs are

identified through data.• Structured prompts are given at school AND

can be given at home.• How can families support child if the day is

good or if the day is not so good?

Module 5:Check-in/Check-out (CICO)

Check-in/Check-out Relatively easy & quick to implement for up to 5-15% of all students.

Description:• Each adult volunteer checks in and out

with 8 to 10 students• The intervention is the same for all youth • Same check in and out time• School-wide behavioral expectations as

goals• Goals are same for all students• Rating is the same for all students• Same Daily Progress Report (DPR)

Targeted Groups for CICO

• New students entering building mid-year (like orientation to the building)

• Children with low-level problem behavior (identified by # of ODRs etc.)

• As part of a more complex/individualized plan for a youth (as one layer of intervention)

CICO Daily Cycle (March & Horner, 1998)

1. Check-in with assigned adult upon arrival to school* Adult positively greets student* Review School-wide expectations (daily goals) * Students pick up new Daily Progress Report card* Provide materials (pencil etc.) if needed* Turn in previous day’s signed form (optional)* Provide reinforcer for check-in (optional)

CICO Daily Cycle continued…2. At each class:

* Teacher provides positive and/or corrective behavioral feedback

* Teacher completes DPR or* Student completes self-monitoring DPR/teacher checks and initials card (self-monitoring normally happens as students begin to successfully exit the intervention)

3. Check-out at end of day:* Review points & goals* Reinforce youth for checking-out (token/recognition optional, think beyond school-wide token)* Receive reinforcer if goal met (optional, but good idea)* Take DPR card home (optional)

CICO Daily Cycle continued…4. Give DPR to parent (optional)

* Receive reinforcer from parent* Have parent sign card* Students are not “punished” if their

parents don’t cooperate

5. Return signed card next day – celebrate (if not returned, simply go on)

Types of Student Outcome Data used to progress monitoring and assess for transition…

• Points earned on Daily Progress Report (DPR)• Reduction in ODRs• Attendance improvement• Reduction in In School Suspensions• Reduction in Out of School Suspensions• Improvement in grades• Reduction of tardies

Daily Progress Reports

Note: Schools have NAMED CICO

Grant Middle School STAR CLUB(Students tracking Awesome Results)

Daily Progress ReportNAME:______________________ DATE:__________________

Teachers please indicate YES (2), SO-SO (1), or NO (0) regarding the student’s achievement to the following goals.

EXPECTATIONS1st block 2nd block 3rd block 4th 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

BEP Daily Goal _32___/_40___ BEP daily score _____/______ Percentage_________

In training _____ BEP Member _____ Student Signature______________________________

Teacher comments: Please state briefly any specific behaviors or achievements that demonstrate the students progress (if additional space is required, please staple a note and indicate so below)

Goals Am to Midmorning

Midmorning to Lunch

Lunch PM    

Be Safe  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Be Kind  

 

 

 

 

 

 Be Responsible

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Points

           

Teacher Initials

           

 Daily Goal _____/______ Daily Score _____/_____ Teacher Comments: Please state briefly any specific behaviors or achievements that demonstrate Josh’s progress. AM to Midmorning ___________________________________________ Midmorning to Lunch _________________________________________ 

Lunch ____________________________________________________ ETC

CICO Card (PALS Point Sheet)

Key2= Great Job1= Did OK0= Tough

RESPECTProperty

RESPECTAll Others

RESPECTLearning

RESPECTSelf

Homeroom 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

LanguageArts

2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

Mathematics 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

Social StudiesScience

2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

Exploratory 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

PE 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

Lunch 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0

Daily Goal: _______/56 Daily Score: ________/56 Comments: State briefly any achievements that demonstrate progress.Parent Signature: _________________________________________________

Name: _________________________________ Date: ___________

Homeroom Teacher: _____________________________________

Intervention Integrity or Process Data Average Daily Points – CICO

Individual Student Graph

Development of Data-Based Decision Rules

All staff need to know how students are eligible for the intervention.

All staff need to know how progress is monitored.

All staff need to know how students exit the intervention.

Data-Based Decision-Rules: Sample to Consider

a) Identification for CICO: Youth is identified by Universal Screener or has 2 or

more ODRs.b) Progress-monitoring:

DPR data is collected daily & reviewed every other week. Data is collected for 4-6 weeks (individual buildings decide whether 4 or 6 weeks will be better for their students).

c) Exiting/transitioning: Youth received a total of 80% of DPR points averaged

per day/week for 4 weeks and has had no new ODRs. Youth will be transitioned into being a CICO student mentor.

Recommended Time-Frames for Data Review

CICO, S/AIG, mentoring & Brief FBA/BIP:

• Student outcome data (student effectiveness): Intervention facilitator to review individual student data at

least every 2 weeks

• Intervention Integrity data (Intervention effectiveness): Student aggregate data should be reviewed at least once a

month by Secondary Systems Team

Activity: Time - 20 mins Using the Guiding Questions

Plan for your CICO intervention•Name your buildings CICO

•Develop your data-based decision-making rules

Staff Training and Overview• Tier 2 Systems and CICO Training for ALL staff• Comprehensive understanding for all• Leanne Hawken video great resource• Video alone is not enough…• Building must add their own description of how the

Tier 2 system will operate Data used to identify students Referral/Request for Assistance Reverse Request for Assistance

• Must also introduce your CICO DPR and detailed explanation of how the intervention will work Precorrect: what to do when a student is unhappy with

their score (corrective vs. negative feedback and other prompts for teachers based on common student reactions…)

Student Orientation

• for all youth about intervention...'some kids may have a card sometimes'

• for kids on intervention Who, what, when, where Precorrect: Teach students what to do when they

disagree with a score

• for youth who become CICO mentors/facilitators

Family Orientation

• all families...what is CICO Inform during registration process Address at open house, through newsletters,

newspaper and other…• families of kids on CICO...process for

explaining/consent Best if phone call is made directly to family Followed by letter Consent: check with your district’s decision

makers

Systems for Reinforcing Students

• will youth receive 'token‘ or other type of reinforcement for checking in/out? Daily? Weekly?

• Unexpected or Intermittent reinforcement for “being brave” and handing in a DPR with low scores

• intermittent reinforcement for checking out with DPR ('catch kids' doing the right thing, look for other opportunities to provide intermittent reinforcement)

Reinforce Staff

• How will you acknowledge staff for participating in CICO?

• What intermittent unexpected reinforcement will be offered to staff?

CICO Coaching Tips

• CICO requires building level commitment Staff Training: Overview and beyond Real IL School Examples of staff training

Lakewood Scoring Example

MacArthur Tier 2 Jeopardy Example

…more CICO Coaching Tips

• Tier 2 Systems information and should be shared with and understood well by all staff

• All staff should be informed on a regular basis of Tier 2 systems Intervention Integrity Data

• The Guiding Questions becomes, over time as it is completed, a program description for Tier 2 systems and interventions for each building

• Tier 2 Systems Team makes sure there is ongoing communication with Universal Team and vice versa

...final points, CICO Coaching Tips

• Most teams struggle with implementing a generic intervention (want to individualize) CICO can be individualized but as a

higher level intervention (would be more like mentoring)

• Remember: Secondary Systems Team evaluates intervention not individual students

• Teams need to establish data-based decision rules

Activity Time – 15 mins

• Using the MAP, begin a training plan for sharing what you’ve learned with your entire staff

• Who will present the info?• When?• Where?• How will it be presented? (See examples of

Lakewood and MacArthur Tier 2 Jeopardy PowerPoints)

Report Out Progress & Next Steps

Whip Around

• Each person think of one word to summarize the day

• We will whip around the room with the responses.

S100i ResourcesCrone, D.A. & Horner, R.H. (2003). Building positive behavior support systems in schools: Functional behavioral assessment. New York: Guilford.

Crone, D.A., Horner, R.H. & Hawken, L.S. (2004). Responding to problem behavior in schools: The behavior education program. New York: Guilford.

Horner, R.H., & Carr, E.G. (1997). Behavior support for students with severe disabilities: Functional assessment

and comprehensive intervention. The Journal of Special Education,31, 84-104.

Horner, R.H., Hawken, L., & March, R. (n.d.). Targeted interventions. Retrieved July 24, 2007, from OSEP Technical Assistance on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Web site: http://www.pbis.org.

Jolivette, K., Barton-Arwood, S., & Scott, T.M. (2000). Functional behavioral assessment as a collaborative process among professionals. Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 298-313.

Scott, T.M., & Caron, D.B. (2005). Conceptualizing functional behavior assessment as prevention practice within positive behavior support systems, Preventing School Failure, 50, 13-20.

Scott, T.M., Nelson, C.M., & Zabala, J. (2003). Functional behavior assessment training in public schools: Facilitating systemic change. Journal of Positive Behavior Intervention, 5, 216-224.

Sugai, G., Horner, R.H., Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Nelson, C.H., Scott, T., et al. (2000). Applying positive behavior support and functional behavioral assessment in schools. Journal of Positive Behavior

Change, 2, 131-143.

Evaluation and CPDU ProcessFor individuals who registered through Cvent

1. All registrants will receive an email two days after the training asking them to complete an evaluation using the link provided.

2. By clicking on the link, registrants are to complete the evaluation by following the prompts.

3. Once the evaluation is completed, an additional email will automatically be generated thanking the registrant for their time and offering the CPDU link for the session they just attended.

4. When registrant clicks on the CPDU link, the form shows up on the screen in PDF format and is printable.

Evaluation and CPDU Process For individuals who did not register prior to the training

1. The attendee contact information will be entered into Cvent and then the evaluation email will be sent two days after the training asking them to complete an evaluation using the link provided.

2. Attendee’s follow the same process for completing the evaluation and obtaining CPDUs as those individuals who registered through Cvent.