Check in, Check Out- Part 1

Leanne S. Hawken, University of UtahDanielle Starkey, Missouri, SWPBS

Ericka Dixon, Winfield Primary

Illinois PBIS Forum, 2012

Overview BEP/CICO Principles

Where have we been and where are we

going?

BEP/CICO at the state/regional level.

BEP/CICO at the school level.

Overview

3

Student Recommended for BEP/CICO

BEP/CICO Implemented

ParentFeedback

Regular Teacher Feedback

AfternoonCheck-out

Morning Check-in/DPR

Pick-up

BEP CoordinatorSummarizes Data

For Decision Making

Bi-weekly BEP Meetingto Assess Student

Progress

Exit Program

ReviseProgram

BEP-CICO Implementation

Process

Started at Fern Ridge Middle School, Elmira Oregon

Crone, Horner, & Hawken (2004). Responding to Problem Behavior in Schools: The Behavior Education Program. New York, NY: Guilford Press

5 schools◦ 3 elementary◦ 2 middle schools

One BEP Coordinator served:◦ 15-20 students elementary◦ 20-30 students secondary

Excel Data System◦ No web-based system

In the Beginning………..

To support more students, some schools have multiple BEP/CICO check-in, check out facilitators.

Expanded to include high school & preschool populations

New data system◦ SWIS CICO◦ Current – 1999 schools K-12 use SWIS CICO data base.

Fidelity of Implementation ◦ Individual Systems Evaluation Tool (I-SET)

Current BEP/CICO practice

Crone, Hawken, & Horner (2010). Responding to Problem Behavior in Schools: The Behavior Education Program (2nd ed). New York, NY: Guilford Press

7

Manual on How to Implement BEP/CICO

DVD on how to Implement BEP/CICO

Leanne S. Hawken, PhD - 2011 8

Hawken, Pettersson, Mootz, & Anderson (2005). The Behavior Education Program: A Check-in, Check-out Intervention for Students at Risk. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Effective in reducing problem behavior for:◦ Elementary school students (Cheney et al., 2009; Fairbanks,

Sugai, Guardino, & Lathrop, 2007; Filter et al., 2007; Hawken, MacLeod, & Rawlings, 2007; McCurdy, 2007; Stage, Cheney, Flower, Templeton, & Waugh, 2010; Todd, Kaufman, Meyer, & Horner, 2007).

◦ Middle School Students (Hawken, 2006; Hawken & Horner, 2003; March & Horner, 2002)

◦ Students in Urban School Settings (McCurdy, 2007)

◦ Students with disabilities (Hawken, et al., 2007, MacLeod, Hawken, & O’Neill, 2010)

***Problem behaviors measured via direct observation, rating scales, changes in percentage of points earned on DPRs, & reductions in ODRs

Research on BEP/CICO

Effective in increasing academic engagement, including for students in high school settings (Hawken & Horner, 2003, Swain-Bradway, 2009)

Reduced need for Tier 3 and special education supports following CICO implementation (Hawken, et al., 2007)

Overall range of effectiveness of CICO ranges from 40% to 70% (Fairbanks, et al., 2007) (Hawken, et al., 2007)

Research on CICO

More effective with students with attention-maintained problem behavior (March & Horner, 2002; McIntosh, et., al., 2009, Campbell & Anderson, 2008)

Effective across behavioral functions (Hawken, O’Neill, & MacLeod, 2011)

Students who do not respond to CICO benefit from function-based, individualized interventions (Fairbanks, et., al., 2007, March & Horner, 2002; Macleod, Hawken, & O’Neill, 2010)

Research on CICO

Supporting Check-In, Check-Out Implementation

Danielle Starkey,Regional SW-PBS Consultant

Heart of Missouri Regional Professional Development Center

Missouri SW-PBS Training Structure

MO SW-PBS

Missouri SW-PBS Personnel

• State Coordinator (1)• State Data/Web Consultant (1)• Tier 2/3 Consultants (6)• Regional Consultants (24)

MO SW-PBS

Missouri SW-PBSTier 2 Readiness Indicators and Guidelines

Building the Foundation for Effective Implementation of

Check-In, Check-Out

Readiness for Tier 2

• SW-PBS universal systems are consistently implemented with fidelity– Schoolwide– Non-Classroom– Classroom

MO SW-PBS

Readiness for Tier 2

• SW-PBS Universal System Outcomes– Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET)

• Score (80/80) within past 12 months

– Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ)• Score of 80% or higher

– Self-Assessment Survey (SAS)• 80% of staff report that Schoolwide, Non-Classroom &

Classroom Systems are in place

MO SW-PBS

OR

WITH

Readiness for Tier 2

• Office referral data indicates 80 percent of students in the 0-1 referral range

• System in place to document classroom minors

• Consistent use of school-wide data for making decisions as evidenced by monthly Big 5 Data Reports

MO SW-PBS

Tier 2 Training Content

Systems Training

• Foundational Knowledge• The Tier 2 Team• Student Identification Process

– Nominations– Existing school data– Screening instrument scores

• Monitoring Progress & Evaluating Outcomes using the Benchmarks for Advanced Tiers

MO SW-PBS

Intervention Training

• Check-in/Check-out (BEP-CICO)• Check & Connect• Social Skill Instructional Groups• Targeted Environmental Interventions

MO SW-PBS

Lessons Learned – CICO/BEP

• Higher level of success with implementation when solid Tier 1 is in place.

• Staff training on intervention components is essential, with a review each school year.

• Tier 2 Systems in place are critical– Team– Student Identification Process– Monitoring Progress & Evaluating Outcomes

MO SW-PBS

Winfield Primary School’s Check-In / Check-Out

(CICO) ProgramWinfield Primary

Ericka Dixonerickadixon@winfield.k12.mo.us

Total Enrollment: 386-404

Grade Levels Served: Pre-School-2nd Grade

Free and Reduced Lunch Rates:

Winfield Primary at a Glance

2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-201268% 59%

50%

Big Five Data Showing Increases in Problem Behavior

Intervention to Build Relationship

65% of the day spent on discipline

Received Verbal Permission from Parents for Students to enter CICO Intervention

2010-2011 First Year of Implementation

Big Five Data Report

2010-2011 Referrals: 133

2011-2012 Referrals: 204

22 Students Utilized the CICO Intervention 17 Staff Members were Utilized as

Coordinators 7 Students were dismissed 9 Students Continued 3 Students Moved 3 Students Moved to Tier III Intervention

2010-2011 CICO Year One Facts

2010-2011 Staff Survey ResultsPositives Negatives

Intervention Built Relationships

Saw Some Improvements in Behaviors

One More Thing to Do Time Consuming for

Both the Classroom Teacher and Staff Coordinator

Minimal Successes No Set Criteria to Exit

the Program No End Result Known No Real Training in the

Intervention-felt thrown in

Coordinators felt like counselors

Received Professional Development from our PBIS RPDC Representatives

Designed Entrance and Exit Criteria Created a Teacher Recommendation Form Created a Daily Points Sheet Created a Flow Chart and Celebrations for Fading

CICO Students Created a Letter to Inform Parents of the CICO

Program Made Personal Phone Calls to CICO Student Parents Received Written Permission from Parents to Start

and Exit CICO Offered On-Going Professional Development to Staff

2011-2012- Second Year of Implementation

2011-2012 CICO Year Two Facts

Total Participating (25)Faded (3)Discontinued and Moved to Tier III (2)Graduated to Intermediate School 3-5 (11)

2010-2012 CICO Results for

Winfield Primary School

0200400600

2010-20112011-2012% Decrease/% Increase

2011-2012 Staff Survey Results

Positives Negatives

Major Behavior Referrals Decreased

Staff Members felt Supported Professional Development

Improved Implementation Process

Students began to Self-Monitor Behavior

Parents began to get involved Coordinators felt like support

teams instead of counselors

Classroom Teachers continued to struggle with effective feedback after each classroom activity.

This intervention was not working for Tier III Students

Total Number of Students Serviced by CICO Intervention

2010-2012

Total Number Partic-ipatingGraduatedFadingDiscontinuedRemaining in CICO

Continued Professional Development on CICO Intervention

Continued Revising, Refining, and Monitor of CICO Intervention

Continued Staff Development for all Tier I and Tier II Interventions

Implement CICO in Pre-School

Implement Self-Monitoring Intervention

Implement Check-N-Connect Intervention

Implement Social Skills Intervention

Implement a Universal Behavior Screener

Future Plans for Winfield Primary School

Winfield Primary’s CICO Forms

Goals and Rewards

Daily Progress Report (DPR)

Ratio of at minimum 4:1 for Pre-corrects/Positives to Negative

Daily Parent Report

Entrance Criteria1. Student Data Inventory2. Teacher Nomination3. Universal Screening

QuestionsIf you need materials, advice, etc., please email

Ericka Dixon.erickadixon@winfield.k12.mo.us