c. michael nelson, ed. d. university of kentucky ( emeritus) national ta center on pbis
Post on 25-Feb-2016
19 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports and Youth
Involvement in the Juvenile Justice System
Los Angeles Unified School District Local District 7 Best Practices Symposium November,
2011
C. Michael Nelson, Ed. D.University of Kentucky (emeritus)
National TA Center on PBIS
Advanced Organizer• Background—Status of SWPBIS
implementation• Characteristics & Needs of Incarcerated Youth• Responding to these needs through PBIS
– Preventing entry into the system– Improving outcomes for youth in the system
• Implementing PBIS in Secure Care Settings• Exemplar • Resources
Number of Schools Implementing SWPBIS since 2000 (Aug. 2011)
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 2010 20110
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
15,955
Alab
ama
Alas
ka
Ariz
ona
Arka
nsas
Calif
orni
a
Colo
rado
*
Conn
ectic
ut
Del
awar
e
Flor
ida*
Geo
rgia
Haw
aii
Idah
o
Illin
ois
Indi
ana
Iow
a*
Kans
as*
Kent
ucky
Loui
sian
a*
Mai
ne
Mar
ylan
d*
Mas
sach
usett
s
Mic
higa
n
Min
neso
ta
Mis
siss
ippi
Mis
sour
i*
Mon
tana
*
Neb
rask
a
Nev
ada
New
Ham
pshi
re
New
Jers
ey*
New
Mex
ico
New
Yor
k
Nor
th C
arol
ina*
Nor
th D
akot
a*
Ohi
o
Okl
ahom
a
Ore
gon*
Penn
sylv
ania
Rhod
e Is
land
Sout
h Ca
rolin
a*
Sout
h D
akot
a
Tenn
esse
e
Texa
s
Uta
h*
Verm
ont
Virg
inia
Was
hing
ton
Stat
e
Was
hing
ton
DC
Wes
t Vir
gini
a
Wis
cons
in
Wyo
min
g
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Schools Implementing SWPBIS by StateAugust, 2011
Proportion of School Implementing SWPBIS by State
August, 2011Al
abam
a
Alas
ka
Ariz
ona
Arka
nsas
Calif
orni
a
Colo
rado
*
Conn
ectic
ut
Del
awar
e
Flor
ida*
Geo
rgia
Haw
aii
Idah
o
Illin
ois
Indi
ana
Iow
a*
Kans
as*
Kent
ucky
Loui
sian
a*
Mai
ne
Mar
ylan
d*
Mas
sach
usett
s
Mic
higa
n
Min
neso
ta
Mis
siss
ippi
Mis
sour
i*
Mon
tana
*
Neb
rask
a
Nev
ada
New
Ham
pshi
re
New
Jers
ey*
New
Mex
ico
New
Yor
k
Nor
th C
arol
ina*
Nor
th D
akot
a*
Ohi
o
Okl
ahom
a
Ore
gon*
Penn
sylv
ania
Rhod
e Is
land
Sout
h Ca
rolin
a*
Sout
h D
akot
a
Tenn
esse
e
Texa
s
Uta
h*
Verm
ont
Virg
inia
Was
hing
ton
Stat
e
Was
hing
ton
DC
Wes
t Vir
gini
a
Wis
cons
in
Wyo
min
g
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Who are we Incarcerating?Youth in Juvenile Corrections
• 2/3-3/4 of incarcerated youth have thesecharacteristics that relate to behavior:
– Special education classification– Mental disorders– Drug and alcohol abuse– History of abuse, neglect, and witnessing
violence
J. Gagnon, 2008
Questions• Why do these troubled and disabled youth
end up in the juvenile justice system?• When do their problems first emerge?• What role do social institutions (family
services, early childhood programs, schools, juvenile delinquency programs) play in either addressing or exacerbating these problems?
Risk Factors - Delinquency
Life Domains• Individual• Family • School • Community• Peer Relations
School• Weak academics • Low school
involvement• Truancy• Suspension• Expulsion• Dropout
Preventing Entry through SWPBIS
• Quality educational interventions may constitute the most effective and economical protective factors against delinquency (Center on Crime, Communities, & Culture, 1997)
• Therefore, keeping youth engaged in school is a logical prevention.
• Improving school climate and youth behavior works toward that goal.
PBIS and School Engagement• Reductions in:
– discipline referral rates by 50% to 60% (Horner, Sugai, & Todd, 2001)
– Office discipline referrals (Lane & Menzies, 2003)– fighting (McCurdy, Mannella, & Eldridge, 2003);– in-school suspension (Scott, 2001; FL PBS Project, 2009);– classroom disruption (Lohrmann & Talerico, 2004;
Newcomer & Lewis, 2004);– negative student-adult interactions (Clarke, Worcester,
Dunlap, Murray, & Bradely-Klug, 2002)• Increases in:
– academic engaged time (Putnam, Horner, & Algozzine, 2007
– academic achievement (Luiselli, Putnam, Handler, & Feinberg, 2005; Horner et al., 2009)
– perceived school safety (Horner et al., 2009)
PBIS and School –to-Prison Pipeline Reform
• PBIS is promoted by advocacy groups, specifically to address school-to-prison pipeline reform– Southern Poverty Law Center– Appleseed– American Civil Liberties Union– Public Counsel Law Center
KY Safe Schools Data Project (Kentucky Center for Instructional Discipline)
2007-08 2008-09 2009-100
2
4
6
8
10
12
10.52 10.6
9.499.22
8.36
6.9
KY AveragePBIS Districts
Suspensions per 100 Students
Why PBS in Secure Facilities?
• Effective and efficient alternative to harsh, inconsistent, and ineffective disciplinary methods in many juvenile justice facilities– punishment mentality, – inconsistency among staff
• Decisions about discipline not linked to data on youth behavior
How Juvenile Justice “Works”
• Incarceration PLUS punishment• Successful completion of “treatment” plans
require high levels of literacy skills• Release is contingent upon progress through
the treatment plan– Youth with educational disabilities, poor literacy
skills make significantly slower progress– Average literacy levels of incarcerated youth range
from 5th-9th grade• Education is an add-on
The Co$t of Incarceration Penn State or The
State Pen
It’s your money!
Recidivism for Youth with Disabilities• Recidivism: re-arrest, re-incarceration
• All incarcerated youth: > 50% (Lipsey, 2009; Snyder & Sickmund, 2006)
• 69% of youth with disabilities were reincarcerated within 1 year of release (Johnston, 2003)
• Youth with disabilities were 2.8 times more likely to return to corrections 6 months post-release and 1.8 times more likely to return at 1 year (Bullis et al., 2002)
• 34.4% of youth in juvenile detention and state corrections systems were identified as disabled (Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Leone, P. E., Osher, D., & Poirier, 2005).
Best Practices in Juvenile Delinquency Treatment
1. Assess risks & needs: – Use research-based tools to determine likelihood of re-offense and to
identify factors amenable to treatment and risk reduction. 2. Enhance Intrinsic Motivation:
– Apply specific communication techniques to identify an offender’s own reasons for change and to engage offenders as partners in their treatment.
3. Target Interventions: – Structure treatment, supervision and responses to offender behavior
based on their risk level, needs and personal characteristics. 4. Skill train With Directed practice:
– Use cognitive behavioral treatment methods to disrupt criminal thinking and provide offenders with the opportunity to practice and apply pro-social behaviors.
(US Department of Justice, 2011)
Best Practices in Juvenile Delinquency Treatment5. Increase positive reinforcement:
– Emphasize, affirm and reward compliant behavior to promote pro-social behavior change. While offenders are still sanctioned for non-compliant behavior, a greater focus is placed on recognizing and rewarding the positive.
6. Engage Ongoing Support in Natural Communities: – Connect offenders to pro-social family, friends and activities in the community
7. Measure relevant processes/practices: – Collect data on the effectiveness of your work to answer the questions:
• Are we doing evidence-based work? • Are we doing it well? • Is it leading to desired outcomes?
8. Provide Measurement Feedback: – Use data to provide feedback to systems, organizations, teams and individuals
with the goal of improving practice.
(US Department of Justice, 2011)
PBIS Best Practices
1. Early Identification– Risk / needs assessment at primary and secondary levels
2. Reinforcement system– Teach, acknowledge positive behaviors – Implement continuum of consequences
3. Continuum of supports – Supports based on level of need, student characteristics
(function of problem behavior) 4. Explicit instruction & practice in social expectations
PBIS Best Practices
5. Reinforcement system6. Climate of preventative / positive, parent involvement
– Facility-wide expectations to establish positive climate, – Involve all stakeholders
7. Data based decision-making – Are we doing what we said we’d do?– Is it making a difference?
8. Data sharing – Share data with stakeholders on valued outcomes
Best Practices Overlap
USDJ1. Assess risks & needs 2. Enhance Intrinsic Motivation3. Target Interventions4. Skill train With Directed practice5. Increase positive reinforcement6. Engage Ongoing Support in
Natural Communities 7. Measure relevant
processes/practices8. Provide Measurement Feedback
PBIS1. Early Identification2. Reinforcement system3. Continuum of supports 4. Explicit instruction & practice
in social expectations5. Reinforcement system6. Climate of preventative /
positive, parent involvement 7. Data based decision-making 8. Data sharing
PBIS Implementation in Alternative Settings
• Limited experimental studies implementing PBIS in AE, residential, or JJ settings– Unknown application in residential settings– TX legislated state-wide implementation in all secure
care facilities– AL, ID, MA, VT considering PBS for JJ– CA, IA, IL, OR, WA—PBS in at least one JJ facility– KY beginning pilot in one facility
• (National Center on the Education of Children who are Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk, 2007)
PBIS Approach• Strengths:
– Clarifies expectations – Provides structure for youth and staff members– Data based decision making increases accountability and
protects youth• Weaknesses:
– Often mistaken for it’s parts and not as the whole model– May be viewed as competing with other models or
programs– The proactive / preventative nature may be perceived as
incongruent with Juvenile Justice practices (e.g., corrections)
Considerations for Secure Settings
• 24-hour day• Multiple programs in a facility• Multidisciplinary staff; diverse levels of training• Primary focus is security• Education personnel not in charge of discipline• Decisions re: youth behavior aren’t data-driven
25
OUTCOMES
SYSTEMSSupportingStaff Behavior & Implementation Fidelity
DATASupportingDecisionMakingPRACTICES
Evidence-based, preventive. Supporting Youth Behavior
Supporting Social Competence &Academic Achievement
Systems Issues• Disconnect between:
– Educational programming– Housing unit programming– Security programming– Mental health programming– Recreation programming– Other programming
• Must work together to form a seamless system for youth
K. Jolivette, 2009
Systems Issues• Hierarchies and politics within
and across programs– Power– History
• Changing adult behavior = a positive change in youth behavior
• Make “peace” with the history and move forward
K. Jolivette, 2009
Data Issues• Different types of and reporting mechanisms for
data collected– Anecdotal, frequency, duration– Daily, weekly, monthly, semester reports
• A common “merger” of data collected required• Limited sharing of data
– Across staff within and outside of programs• A shared data set with a schedule for sharing
• “Big Picture” of what’s going on often missing– Disconnect between morning, school, lunch, after-school,
afternoon, evening, nighttime events• Common “debriefing” on a regular basis
K. Jolivette, 2009
Practice Issues• “Saboteurs”
– Lack of “buy-in” by ALL staff across systems• Administrator for each program sets the tone• Needs to be a job expectation
• Use of non-scientific strategies, interventions, and curricula– Lack of “knowing” or time to investigate/staying with current
practices• Effectiveness related to the practices employed
• Conflicting & low expectations of youth– Lack of administrative and staff consensus on
strategies/interventions• A team (reps. from each system) needs to take the lead
– Expectations change dependent on the environment, staff, time of day, etc.
• Consistency is a key in prevention• Common policies and procedures
– Trying to catch youth being “bad” (punishment focus)• Equitable reinforcement for positive social and academic
behavior a must– Freedom, control, independence
• Reinforcement for implementation by staff a must
Non-classr
oom
Setting Systems
ClassroomSetting Systems
Individual Student
Systems
School-wideSystems
School-wide PositiveBehavior Support
Systems
Education Program
Housing Units
Other Programs
Facility-wide Systems
PositiveBehavior SupportSystems in Secure
Facilities
Individual Youth
32%
Are these proportions characteristic of youth in facility?
~ 23%Secondary Prevention
~53% TertiaryPreven-
tion
~24%Primary Prevention
Primary Prevention:1 or 0 discipline reports per month
Secondary Prevention:2-5 discipline reports per month
Tertiary Prevention:Multiple discipline reports per month
~80% of Youth
~15%
~5%
Or, are these?
Continuum of Support for ALL
Dec 7, 2007
Prob Sol.
Leadership
Adult rel.
Anger man.
Attend.
Peer interac
Ind. work
Label intervention…not youth
Implementation Process
• Establish a leadership team• Secure administrator support • Secure a commitment from at least
80% of the staff • Conduct self assessment • Create an implementation action
plan • Regularly collect and analyze data • Use data to make decisions• Evaluate impact• Program for sustainability
Exemplar• Illinois Youth Center
380 boys 13-21Medium-maximum securityCorrectional model
Illinois Youth Center (IYC): Team/Resources
• What does it take to do PBIS? – People: Staff must be committed– Equipment: Very little…computers for data
collection…printers…AV system– Locations: Throughout the school areas at IYC
Harrisburg.– Support: From the facility administrators, the
school district, and the Illinois PBIS network.
Universal Interventions• All settings, all students• Preventive, proactive
• Teams – Teachers and Students• Orientation of Youth• Reinforcement System• Social Skill Lessons• Discipline Policy• Professional Development
Intensive, Individual Interventions• Individual Students• Assessment-based• High Intensity
Targeted Group Interventions• Some students (at-risk)• High efficiency• Rapid response
• Check-In with a Teacher• One-on-One• Wrap-Around: Use the ‘Community’• Involve School Psychologists• Confinement/Segregation• Behavior Intervention Programs
What can PBIS do? IYC-Harrisburg results
42Pre PBIS Nov. 00 - Jan. 01
Nov. 02 - Jan. 03
Nov. 03 - Jan. 04
Nov. 04 - Jan. 05
Nov. 05 - Jan. 06
Nov. 06 - Jan 07 Nov. 07 - Jan. 08
Nov. 08 - Jan 090
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
872 259 152 125 157 268 362 295
BEHAVIOR REPORTS WRITTEN AND POPULATION
REPORTED BEHAVIORS
POPULATION
70% reduction
43
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
525
122
62
157
Pre PBIS Through PresentSchool Reported Major and Minor student behavirs
Nov. 01 - Jan. 02
Nov. 02 - Jan. 03
Nov. 04 - Jan. 05
Nov. 05 - Jan. 06
Student Be-haviors
77% reduction
44
Sexually Innapropriate Fighting/ Assault0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
30
6
12
0
7
0
6
Student Behaviors
Nov. 1, 01 to Jan. 31, 02
Nov. 1, 02 to Jan. 31, 03
Nov. 1, 04 to Jan. 31, 05
Feb. 1, 05 to Sept. 30, 05
60% reduction
45De-cember
January February March April May June July August Sep-tember
October No-vember
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
177
323
228
316
179
284
151
386
410
517
388
263
15 11
70 70
11
122
4526
93
18 22 16
Major and Minor Reported Student Behaviors
Pre PBIS 2000 and 2006
Pre PBIS 2006
86% reduction
46
STUDENTS WITH ZERO BEHAVIOR
REPORTS80%,339
STUDENTS WITH BEHAVIOR RE-
PORTS, 86, 21%
APRIL 2009
47
www.pbis.org
Juvenile Justice
48
49
50
51
Strategies: Lessons Learned• Start small/ Attain successes on which to
build• Maintain administrative support• Link to mission, ongoing initiatives• Incorporate a data collection and decision
model• Fit into existing overall treatment plan• Sustaining much more difficult than initial
implementation• Changing youth behavior is the easy part!
top related