Wraparound and School-wide Systems of Positive Behavior and Support

Concurrent with the development of systems of care through mental health and child welfare, efforts to improve the effectiveness of interventions for students with challenging behaviors have heightened in schools. Concerns about school safety have broadened the focus of these efforts beyond students identified as Emotionally and Behaviorally Disordered (EBD) to include a school-wide focus on positive behavior supports for all students in schools. There is a recognized need to move from ineffective, reactive and typically punitive responses to misbehavior to approaches that will produce the pro-social behaviors needed for safer school environments (Council for Exceptional Children, 1999; Horner & Sugai, 1999). Similar to the systems changes needed in mental health and child welfare, educators are recognizing the need to adopt a systems approach around student behavior across general and special education.

School-wide Systems of Positive Behavior Support

Recently, a multiple-gated intervention model has been presented to guide educators in conceptualizing and applying positive behavior interventions and supports across the whole school population (Walker, Horner, Sugai, Bullis, Sprague, Bricker, Kaufmann, 1996). Similar to the primary, secondary and tertiary intervention models in public health (Larson, 1994: National Research Council & Institute of medicine, 1999, 2000), this three-tiered model applies positive behavior supports across an entire school and around all students, including those with behavioral challenges (Lewis and Sugai, 1999). Building on Zins and Ponti’s (1999) concept of effective “host environments” Walker and his colleagues propose that interventions for students with the most complex needs will be enhanced by building consistent structures for organizing and applying effective behavior interventions throughout school environments. Evaluation results in Illinois’ statewide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) initiative support this concept. An end-of-year report from Illinois PBIS schools (Lewis-Palmer, Horner, Sugai, Eber, 2002) indicates that PBIS schools who report 80% or more of staff involved in school-wide universal strategies report greater effectiveness (60%) with their wraparound-based interventions for students with significant challenges than schools with less than 80% involvement with universal strategies (40%). These findings suggest that investing in building school-wide systems of positive behavior support around all students can increase school personnel’s confidence and ability to effectively educate students with the most challenging emotional/behavioral needs. This supports the need to combine the technology of effective behavior change with interagency collaborative approaches.

Continuum of Positive Behavior Interventions and Support

The above figure illustrates the three-tiered model of PBIS which is based on the following assumptions:

• Level I includes the 80-90% of students in schools who will not demonstrate serious problem behavior if a well-defined, consistent, research-based universal system of positive behavior support is implemented across the school. These school-wide universal systems define expected behaviors for all students as well as strategies that all the adults in the school agree to use to teach, provide practice opportunities for, and reinforce pro-social behavior.
  
• At Level II, targeted interventions are designed for individuals or small groups, typically 5-15% of all students, who do not respond to the universal approaches being implemented. This allows for early intervention with positive behavior support plans designed specifically for these students.
  
• Level III includes the 1-7% of the school population who have chronic and intensive emotional/behavior problems that warrant a comprehensive plan that crosses home, school, and community. The intensive level of PBIS integrates the individualized wraparound process through related service structures in the school and community including Special Education and mental health.
  

The concept of strength-based, proactive interventions is imbedded in the three levels so that school-wide, targeted and intensive interventions all consistently apply research-based behavioral and instructional strategies. All three levels rely on a team process to ensure ownership and sustainability over time, careful analysis of data about unique strengths and needs of students and require consensus and commitment from all adults involved with the student(s).

Wraparound at the Intensive Level of PBIS

The team-based wraparound process is recommended for all students with intensive and comprehensive needs (1-7%) to ensure that the efforts of families, teachers, other caregivers and service providers are linked through one consistently implemented and carefully monitored plan. Consensus among team members about roles, goals and needs creates a context for implementation of effective interventions. Interagency collaboration and supports for families, teachers, and other caregivers are an essential part of these plans. Interventions and supports for multiple life domains such as safety, medical, social, psychological, basic needs, and living environment are a necessary part of the process. Effective behavioral and academic interventions are an important part of comprehensive plans for these students. The family-centered team, which includes a range of natural support people in the student’s life, creates a context where effective behavioral and other interventions are more likely to have the desired results.

Wraparound at the Targeted Level of PBIS

The Targeted Level of PBIS functions through a problem-solving team that meets regularly to design interventions for students at first indication of need. Elements of the wraparound process are integrated into the individual or small group interventions designed by the problem-solving team for the approximately 5-15% of students who need more support. A key difference is that these students don’t require the complete (and more time-consuming) wraparound process involving the development of a unique individualized team. Instead, a targeted individual may result from a strength-based functional assessment that identifies purpose of behavior, needs of students, and strategies likely to teach and reinforce targeted skills and replacement behaviors for identified students. In addition to behavioral and academic interventions, supports for students and their caregivers in the home or in the community may be identified as part of an early intervention plan. The strength-based, needs-driven wraparound approach, along with positive behavior support plans and effective academic interventions are integrated through early intervention teams for these students at first indication of need.

Wraparound at the Universal Level of PBIS

In addition to providing the structure for improving outcomes for the 1-15% of students in need of support, the wraparound philosophy and approach is evident in school-wide systems of positive behavior and support. Successful application of school-wide systems of positive behavior support for all students also require multiple stakeholders who, as a collaborative team, work through a strength-based process to define needs and outcomes, design strategies, and carefully monitor outcomes to ensure effectiveness. Evidence has emerged that supports what many have suspected: Schools with high investment in proactive school-wide approaches report a higher degree of capacity and effectiveness with the students with more intensive emotional/behavioral challenges (Lewis-Palmer, Horner, Sugai, Eber, 2002). Data-based decision-making by the collective staff, increases in proactive instruction and encouragement of pro-social behavior allow more resources (i.e., staff time) to be redirected from reactive discipline to academic success. The data-based decision-making and evidence-based instructional strategies apply to reading and other academic areas as well as to the discipline process throughout the school.

Because the elements of wraparound are least familiar at the Universal level of PBIS, examples of how the key features of wraparound are evident at this level are provided below.

Essential Elements of Wraparound at the Universal Level
(adapted from Scott and Eber, in press)

This three-tiered model offers a context for understanding how wraparound and positive behavior supports are connected in schools. If families and teachers feel heard and supported by service providers, and their needs and areas of concern are strategically linked to strengths in the student, themselves and others around them, effective behavior, social, and instructional interventions are more likely to be implemented.

Combining wraparound approaches and positive behavior strategies is supported by Walker & Sprague (1999)’s position that we need to combine approaches that respond to risk-factor as well as behavior change research if we want to improve outcomes in a sustainable manner over time. Their description of elements needed to address risk factors seems to point to a need for wraparound if behavior interventions are to be effective over time:

“Altering a student’s life course usually requires that a risk factors approach be used that leads to a comprehensive intervention involving caregivers, teachers, and peers at a minimum. To divert students at -risk from an at-risk life path, it is essential that key social agents in student’s lives be directly involved in the interaction due to complexity and spill-over effects.” (Walker & Sprague, 1999, p.336)

Integrating Wraparound: Capacity Building

Schools are encouraged to incorporate the elements of the wraparound process into existing programs and planning meetings. Interagency partnerships are critical to effect change for youth/families across school, home and community settings. Schools seeking to improve outcomes for students with complex challenges must seek out and build collaborative partnerships with youth-serving agencies and other community resources. But schools cannot rely solely on mental health or other community agencies
to effect change. Incorporating the team-based wraparound approach into school-based systems and programs is recommended as a process to improve partnerships with families and community agencies and thereby improve outcomes for students. Schools also need to make fundamental changes in how they approach the behavior supports needed for all students as well as how they support and educate those with complex needs. For example, school systems need to look at how to stop using reactive approaches that are not having the desired effect on individual or groups of students.

The value-base and process associated with wraparound can help ensure that students with significant challenges and their families feel respected and supported and have access to a truly individualized and comprehensive planning process. This can ensure that effective interventions are actually designed and implemented.

Potential Targets for Developing Capacity for Wraparound

1. Identify and train personnel to facilitate family-centered, strength-based comprehensive plans.
   
2. Provide ongoing practice refinement and skill development for team facilitators.
   
3. Train school personnel who may be on teams about the wraparound process and potential roles they may have on teams.
   
4. Review data around outcomes of teams to determine progress of implementation within the system.
   
5. Establish full continuum of Positive Behavior Support in schools to support a climate of proactive approaches around behavior and academic achievement.
   
6. Build Partnerships with interagency and other community-based allies to ensure students and families have access to a full range of supports and services.