PBIS Maryland 2004-2005 Progress Report

1. PBIS Maryland 2004-2005 Progress Report Susan Barrett, Sheppard Pratt Jerry Bloom, Sheppard Pratt Teri Lewis-Palmer, University of Oregon

2. Acknowledgements • Milt McKenna, MSDE • Lynne Weise, MSDE • Jerry Bloom, Sheppard Pratt • Phillip J. Leaf, Johns Hopkins • Susan G. Keys, Johns Hopkins • Catherine Bradshaw, Johns Hopkins • George Sugai, University of Oregon

3. Purpose • The purpose of this report is to provide a progress summary of PBIS in Maryland for FY04, the 5th year of implementation of PBIS in Maryland.

4. Organization of Report • Overview of PBIS • Overview of Maryland Implementation of PBIS • Overview of Participating Schools • Impact and Outcomes • Summary and Recommendations

5. PBIS Review • PBIS is a systems approach to proactive school-wide discipline that is designed to increase the capacity of schools to adopt and sustain research-validated practices for all students. • Systems • Data • Practices

6. Critical Features • High status leadership team • Active administrator participation • High priority in school improvement planning • Proactive (positive and preventive) systems approach • Data-based decision making • Continuum of behavior supports • Long term commitment • Research validated practices

7. Maryland Model • Collaboration between schools, MSDE, Sheppard Pratt, and Johns Hopkins • Began in 1999 • 24 local school systems • Over 276 schools trained • About 120 coaches • State Leadership Team

8. Maryland Model, cont. • State Level • State Leadership Team • District/Regional Coordinators • School Level • Coaches • Teams • Training • Summer Institute • Regional Trainings

9. Overview of Evaluation Model • What schools are involved in the implementation? • How well are schools doing with implementation? • What impact has implementation had on student success?

10. Leadership Team Descriptive Team Checklist Coaches Checklist Staff Survey ODR SET IPI Project Target Experimental Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation Organizational Health Inventory School Climate Survey Student Interaction in Specific Settings Two Levels of Evaluation

11. Who is Implementing? • 276 School Teams have completed training (20% of Maryland Schools) • 228 Currently active schools • Attrition occurred early in the project when coaches and other regional technical assistance structures were not established

12. Schools Trained and Active

13. Schools by Region*Does not include MANSEF Schools

14. Expansion by Region

15. Expansion Highlights • 65% of total schools were trained within the past two years • 35% of total schools were trained last year (summer 2004) • Anne Arundel (Ginny Dolan), Baltimore (Joey Levina-Parr) and Charles (Elsa Velez) Counties all have had rapid expansion as a result of identifying a facilitator (lead coach)

16. Schools by Type*Does not include MANSEF Schools

17. How Well are Schools Implementing? • Systems-wide Evaluation Tool (SET) • Annually • 7 features of SW implementation • Implementation Phases Inventory (IPI) • Semi-annually • Levels of SW: Preparation, Initiation, Implementation, and Maintenance

18. SET • 96 SETs completed during 03-04 SY • 50 schools have SETs for 2 years • 80% Total score is considered sustainability level • All regions met 80% criterion across schools • This represents a 47% increase

19. Pre-Post SETs by Region

20. IPI • Piloted this year with 21 schools • Indicates that the majority of schools reported being between Implementation and Maintenance, with a mean score of 5.38 on the 7-point scale • Have data on 112 pending summary

21. Implementation Phase

22. What is the Impact of Implementation? • Team Checklist • Coaches Checklist • Staff Survey • Student Behavior (ODR)

23. Team Checklists- Getting Started

24. Two Levels

25. Coaches Checklist

26. Staff Survey • Only 7 staff surveys have been turned in • Not enough data to make valid summary • Only measure that includes staff feedback and perceptions • Piloting on-line entry and summary of measures

27. Student Behavior (SWIS) • 90% of elementary schools are reporting ODRs at .43 per day per 100 students or lower • 94% of middle schools are reporting ODRs at .95 per day per 100 students or lower • 75% of high schools are reporting ODRs at .99 per day per 100 students or lower

28. Fidelity of Data • 85% of active schools are returning data to Coaches/State Leadership Team

29. Summary • In general, data supports thoughtful and systemic growth. • Need to maintain balance between expansion and sustainability • Encourage teams to use information for 1-3 year action planning

30. Summary • Continue to move toward county level model. Consider developing Leadership Teams in certain counties • Charles and Anne Arundel (informally) • Begin to build/expand (SST) systems to support individual students • At-risk (targeted-group) • FBA-BIP (intensive-Anne Arundel)

31. Summary • Invest in early intervention approaches (Head start, Judy Center, Pre-K) • Resilency of behaviors in secondary schools • Link across grades (consistency/transitions) • Integrate across multiple initiatives • Working Smarter • Academic and behavior link

32. Resources • pbismaryland.org • pbis.org (e.g., blue print) • swis.org • APBS in Tampa - March 10-12 • Spring Forum - May • Implementers Forum - Next fall