Data-based decision-making

In instances of siloed implementation, school safety and prevention efforts may not be adequately monitored for effectiveness, fidelity, or impartiality in either referrals or outcomes.

The PBIS framework can help enhance efficiencies, address inequalities, and improve the effectiveness of behavior support and violence prevention efforts by using data to guide decision-making and systems to monitor and support implementation fidelity and effectiveness.

Data guide decision-making and all aspects of implementation. Leadership teams use multiple sources of data (e.g., attendance, discipline, academic, staff/student/family surveys, and rates of students experiencing homelessness) to assess strengths and needs within the school community and select a continuum of evidence-based practices that are aligned with documented needs and valued school and community outcomes.

Teams then assess the implementation fidelity and student outcomes associated with selected practices and adjust implementation supports and intensity to improve effectiveness for each and every student.

As the intensity of need increases, the precision with which systems and data are used to support implementation must also increase.

When PBIS is implemented with fidelity, it includes active use of data to guide implementation and engagement with students, families, and community members to support the development of intervention components and to monitor and adjust implementation as needed.

Uses multiple sources of data including Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBA) to: • Inform individual supports • Monitor individual student plan implementation and impact and adjust plan as needed

Organize and support educators’ awareness and implementation of individualized support plans • Monitor Tier 3 support needs and provide feedback to inform adjustments to Tiers 1 and 2 • Monitor screening, entry and exit criteria, and intervention effectiveness for all Tier 3 supports

Identify students who may benefit from Tier 2 supports • Establish and monitor entry and exit criteria for Tier 2 interventions

Organizes and supports educators’ awareness and implementation of Tier 2 supports • Monitor Tier 2 support needs and provide feedback to inform adjustments to Tiers 1 and 3 • Monitor individual student and aggregate performance and adjust • Monitor intervention effectiveness for all Tier 2 supports

Uses multiple sources of data from both within (e.g., climate surveys, attendance, academics, discipline) and community (e.g., social determinants of health) to: • Inform the design of Tier 1 systems and practices • Monitor implementation and impact of Tier 1 practices and systems

Core practices across tiers are progress monitored at the student and system level to ensure implementation fidelity and intended impact.

As well, because the MTSS/PBIS teams have worked to document evidence of effectiveness for all interventions and supports, the BTAM team is better positioned to select effective practices as it tailors the plan to the student.

The collection and use of data for decision-making are critical to multi-tiered prevention efforts.

At all tiers, teams should consider two primary sources of information. The first is fidelity data. That is, to what extent were the plans or interventions implemented as intended?

The second is outcome data. That is, to what extent are students benefiting from the interventions or plans?

Together, these data sources can guide a continuous improvement model (see Table 3).

This process begins with teams using data to understand the current context and identify goals and objectives for improvement and specific evidence-based practices aligned with those goals. Next, teams use data to identify supports and barriers to improvement and develop systems to support the implementation of selected practices.

Then, the team implements the plans and monitors the extent to which they are implemented as intended. This ensures that all students can access the intervention before determining its effectiveness.

Finally, teams evaluate the effectiveness of the plans and ensure all students are benefiting as expected. New goals and objectives are identified as needed, and the process continues.

All data must be used to promote improved student outcomes and not punish educators or students for failed implementation or outcomes.

If implementation goals or student outcomes are not realized, teams should return to the process of evaluating strengths and barriers in the system and adjust the plans by increasing implementation supports or increasing the intensity of the plan’s components.

Using data for decision-making within this framework can support BTAM teams by facilitating access to a range of data sources that can be used to fully understand the context of any concerning behaviors and systems for monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of support and management plans when needed.

Team assessment of MTSS/PBIS implementation (e.g., Tiered Fidelity Inventory [TFI]) | • Team assessment of MTSS/PBIS implementation (e.g., TFI) • Fidelity measures for specific interventions | • Team assessment of MTSS/PBIS implementation (e.g., TFI) • Individual management and support plan fidelity monitoring

Fidelity measures for specific practices | • BTAM and other MTSS/PBIS teams

School climate surveys • Community data • Behavior referrals

Universal SEB screeners • Intervention-specific progress monitoring and outcome data • Individual management and support plan progress monitoring toward individualized goals and objectives

The team connects with the MTSS/PBIS Tier 1 team to get information on the reported bullying and harassment events so that it can use the data regarding locations, times, others involved, bullying behaviors, etc. to guide its decision-making and more effectively address factors of concern for the student, direct resources to address the student’s motives, and create an environment in which violence is less likely.

The MTSS/PBIS Tier 2 team shares both fidelity and outcome data for the social skills group which the BTAM team uses during its meeting to progress monitor implementation of the management and support plan and the student’s level of success.

Leaders from the respective teams work collaboratively with school administrators to review data from the current school climate survey. Together, they analyze data on students’ perceptions of feeling connected to the school, supported by adults in the school, their own safety at school, and their perceptions regarding order and discipline at school.

Additionally, they analyze data from staff on their perceptions of their own safety at school and examines data on parents’ perceptions of their student’s safety at school as well as their perceptions of the degree to which their student is supported and treated fairly by adults within the school.

SWD should be included in any existing schoolwide screening or data systems MTSS/PBIS or BTAM teams use to assess risk or make referrals. This ensures that teams can access the information they need to make informed decisions.

TEAM/INITIATIVE PRIMARY FOCUS OR CONCERN ADDRESSED TEAM MEMBERSHIP FIDELITY DATA COLLECTED (Y/N) OUTCOME DATA COLLECTED (Y/N) COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION SHARING ROUTINES WITH OTHER TEAMS

What data would we need to know if we are doing these practices as intended?

What data do we need to know if students are benefiting?