Universal Screening for

Behavior
Jessica Swain-Bradway, IL PBIS Network
With contributions from :
Jennifer Rose, Illinois PBIS Network
Lynn Owens, Schaumburg CCSD 54
This is a presentation of the IL PBIS Network. All rights reserved.
 Agenda
What is Universal Screening?
Rationale for identifying children through
universal screening for behavior
Readiness checklist
Illinois PBIS Network screening model
A review of several screeners
Exemplar discussion
 Objectives
Briefly define Universal Screening to a co-
worker
Be able to explain the rationale for including
universal screening in your multi-tiered
behavioral initiative:
Benefits
Concerns
Briefly describe a district example including
outcomes
Identify a resource for more information on
universal screening
 Universal Screening Defined
Universal screening is the systematic
assessment of all children within a given
class, grade, school building, or school
district, on academic and/or social-
emotional indicators that the school
personnel and community have agreed are
important.

Source: Ikeda, Neessen, & Witt, 2009

 Purpose of Universal Screening
for Behavior
Integral to the Response to Intervention
(RtI) model
Set the stage for prevention
Emphasis on prevention versus intervention
Use an evidence-based instrument to
identify:
Risk factors for emotional/behavioral
difficulties
Social-emotional strengths and needs
 Where are we? 2014!
We assert that MTSS is preventative
A model of reaction:
Kids have problems, we react.
This is SLOW.
This means= kids fail / have problems / hate school
/ disengage parents / teachers are stressed / etc.
The louder the problem, the more quickly we
react.
The ISSUE: all problems arent loud, if we can
hear it, it is already gaining momentum!
 Rationale: Prevalence Rates
How prevalent are emotional disorders among
school-age children and youth?
% of sample % of sample
Study Citation with any with serious
impairment impairment
Methods for the Shaffer et al., 1996
Epidemiology of Child (1,285 children
21% 5%
and Adolescent Mental ages 9-17)
Disorders (MECA)

Great Smoky Burns et al., 1995

Mountains Study of (1,015 children ages 9, 11
20% 11%
Youth and 13)

National Health & Merikangas et al., 2010

Nutrition Examination (3,042 children ages 8-
13% 11%
Survey (NHANES) 15)
 Rationale: Student Benefits
A window of opportunity ranging
between 2-4 years when prevention is
critical (Costello, et al, 1996)
U.S. Department of Education:
compelling research sponsored by OSEP on
emotional and behavioral difficulties indicating
that children at risk for these difficulties could
also be identified through universal screening
and more significant disabilities prevented
through classroom-based approaches involving
positive discipline and classroom management.
 Rationale: Student Benefits
Universal screening for behavior is more
effective than reliance on office discipline
referrals (ODRs) for identifying students with
risk factors for internalizing (e.g., depression,
overly shy, withdrawn, anxiety) behaviors
ODRs are typically measures of non-compliant,
acting-out behaviors
Teachers tend to under-refer internalizers

Sources: Walker, Cheney, Stage, & Blum, 2005; Walker et al., 2010
 Rationale: Student Benefits
Flexibility of the brain:
Use positive learning experiences to:
Reshape neurological pathways
Build positive, adaptive behaviors (versus
maladaptive) (Weinberger, et al., 2005)

The sooner we see

behaviors predictive of
increased risk, the sooner
we can prevent problem
behaviors.
 Rationale: Risks of Delaying ID
Untreated emotional problems have the potential to create
barriers to learning that interfere with the mission of schools
to educate all children. (Adelman & Taylor, 2002)

Youth who are the victims of bullying and who lack adequate
peer supports are vulnerable to mood and anxiety disorders
(Deater-Deckard, 2001; Hawker & Boulton, 2000)
The longer children go
Depressive without intervention,
disorders are the prevalent
consistently the most
disorders among adolescent suicide victims (Gould, Greenberg,
more negative their
Velting, & Shaffer, 2003)
.
behaviors can be for
Without early intervention, children who routinely
themselves
engage in aggressive, coerciveand others.
actions, are likely to develop
more serious anti-social patterns of behaviors that are
resistant to intervention. (Walker, Ramsey, & Gresham, 2004)
 Process Time
What are the risks of delaying identification
and intervention?
What are the benefits to speeding up
identification and intervention?
 Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

Tier 1/Universal
School-Wide Assessment
School-Wide Prevention Systems

Tier 2/
ODRs, Check-in
Attendance,
Tardies, Grades, We want to identify
Secondary
Check-out (CICO)
DIBELS, etc.
BEFORE big issues Social/Academic
Instructional Groups (SAIG)
Daily Progress
Report (DPR)
interfere with school:
(Behavior and Externalizers, Individualized Check-in
Academic Goals) Tier 3/ Check-out (CICO), Groups, &
Internalizers Mentoring
Competing Behavior Tertiary
Pathway, Functional Brief Functional Behavior Assessment/
Assessment Interview, Behavior Intervention Plan (FBA/BIP)
Scatter Plots, etc.
Complex or Multiple-domain FBA/BIP
SIMEO Tools:
Illinois PBIS Network, Revised April 2012 HSC-T, SD-T, EI-T Wraparound/RENEW
Adapted from T. Scott, 2004
 Examples of Externalizing
Behaviors:
Physical aggression
Verbal aggression
(Arguing, threats,
name calling, etc.)
Being out of seat
Not complying with
teacher instructions
or directives

Source: Walker and Severson, 1992

 Examples of Internalizing
Behaviors:
Withdrawn:
Not talking with other
children
Has very few, or no
friends
Extreme shyness
Timid and/or
unassertive
Avoiding or withdrawing
from social situations
Not standing up for
ones self

Source: Walker and Severson, 1992

 Illinois Universal Screening
Model
Gate 1
Teachers Rank Order
then Select Top 3 Students
on Each Dimension
(Externalizing & Internalizing)

Pass Gate 1

Gate 2 Teachers Rate Top 3 Students in

Each Dimension (Externalizing &
Internalizing) using either SSBD,
BASC-2/BESS, or other
evidence-based instrument

Tier 2
Pass Gate 2 Intervention.
(Multiple Gating Procedure Adapted from Walker & Severson, 1992)
 Illinois Universal Screening
Model
Multi-gate process for implementing
universal screening for behavior
Efficient:
Takes approximately one hour, maximum, per classroom
to complete process
Less expensive and more timely than special education
referral process
Fair:
All students receive consideration for additional
supports (gate one)
Reduces bias by using evidence-based instrument
containing consistent, criteria to identify students (gate
two)
 Gate1: Teacher ranking form
Teacher Rank Ordering for Universal Behavioral Screening: Externalizers

Property destruction (e.g., damaging books, desks, other school property)

Repeatedly quarrels with peers/adults
Coercion of others (e.g., bullying behaviors includes physical actions and verbal threats)
Regularly does not follow school/classroom rules
Consistent refusal to follow teachers directions
Frequently blurts out/speaks in class without permission
Often moves around the classroom/hallways without permission
Spreads rumors with the intention to harm others
Stealing

STEP TWO
STEP ONE

Externalizers: Students Externalizers: Top three ID # Race/ethnicity

regularly displaying at least ONE students regularly displaying
of the listed behaviors at least ONE of the
listed behaviors
 Gate 1: Teacher ranking form
Teacher Rank Ordering for Universal Behavioral Screening: Internalizers

Anxious, nervous (e.g., nailbiting, easily startled)

Introverted (e.g., often seen alone)
Rarely/doesnt speaks to peers
Overly sensitive (e.g., cries easily, has difficulty standing up to others)
Bullied by other students

STEP ONE STEP TWO

Internalizers: Students Internalizers: Top ID# Race/ethnicity

regularly displaying at least three students
ONE Regularly
of the listed behaviors displaying at least
ONE
Of the listed
behaviors
 Gate 2: Examples of Screening Measures
Screener Pros
Systematic Screening for
Behavior Disorders
(SSBD; Walker &
Severson, 1990)
http://store.cambiumlea
rning.com
BASC-2/BESS (Kamphaus
& Reynolds, 2007)
http://www.pearsonass
essments.com
Well-validated (Endorsed in 1990 by the
Program Effectiveness Panel of the U.S.
Department of Education)
Efficient (Screening process can be completed
within 45 minutes to 1 hour)
Most effective instrument for identifying
internalizers (Lane et al., 2009)
Meets AERA/APA instrument selection criteria
Inexpensive (Manual= $ 134.49; includes
reproducible screening forms)
Measures behaviors associated with
internalizing and externalizing problem
behaviors and academic competence
Meets AERA/APA instrument selection criteria
Incorporates three validity measures to rule
out response bias
Utilizes large (N= 12,350 children & youth),
nationally-representative sample
Web-based screening capacity available via
AIMSewb
Cons
Normed for grades 1-6
Dated norms (normed in 1990)
Normative sample skewed to
western U.S. region
Can be expensive for
districts/schools that dont have
access to a scantron machine
$26.25 for 25 hand-scored protocols
Online access via AIMSweb:
Additional $1.00 per student for
subscribers and $4.00 per student
for non-subscribers)
Hand-scoring is time-consuming and
reduces access to validity measures
Computer software is expensive
($620)
 Illinois Universal Screening
Model
Other relevant student information for
students being screened:
Student IDs
Birthdate
Race/ethnicity
Special education/Section 504 status
Grade level
 Illinois Universal Screening
Model
Parents of nominated students, who meet
the screening criteria, are contacted in
writing to request permission for their
childs participation in a simple, secondary
intervention (e.g., check-in/check-out)
Coordinator inform teachers of students
who are participating in interventions
Teachers receive progress monitoring data
 Illinois Universal Screening
Model: Outcomes
Key outcomes from four years of
implementation in Illinois schools:
On average within PBIS schools less than 10%
of students, enrolled in grades screened, met
criteria for needing additional supports
Over time, fewer students were identified via
universal screening process

*Enrollment based on ISBE 2010 Fall Housing Report for grades screened
 Illinois Universal Screening
Model: Outcomes
IL-PBIS Network Universal Screening Results: 2007-11
12.0%
% of students identified in grades screened

10.0% 9.4% 9.6%

8.9%
8.0%
6.3%
5.6% 5.8%
6.0%
5.1%
3.5% 3.8% 3.8% 3.8%
4.0%
2.7%
2.0%

0.0%
Externalizers Internalizers Total
2007-08: N=18 schools 2008-09: N=30 schools
2009-10: N=45 schools 2010-11: N=61 schools
 Universal Screening Resources:
Illinois PBIS Network:
Search for Universal Screening
http://www.pbisillinois.org/trainings/universalscre
ening/presentations
Florida PBIS: http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/
National PBIS Technical Assistance Center:
www.PBIS.org
RTI Action Network:
http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/research/univers
al-screening-within-a-rti-model
Sample of SSBD Critical
Events Form
Sample of SSBD CFI Form
Sample of BASC-2/BESS Form
Strengths and Difficulties
Questionnaire (SDQ)
Sample SSIS Social Skills form
Sample SSIS Problem
Behaviors form
Sample SSIS Academic
Competence form
Systems Readiness for
Screening
 Universal screening readiness
Build a foundation
Secure district and building-level administrative support for
universal screening
Establish universal screening committee consisting of district and
building-level administrators, student support personnel, teachers,
family and community representatives and assign roles

Clarify goals
Identify purpose of universal screening (e.g., mental health, social
skills assessment)
Determine desired outcomes
 Universal screening readiness
Identify resources and logistics
Identify resources for supporting students identified via screening
(in-school and community-based)
Create a timeline for executing screening process including
frequency of screening (e.g., once, or multiple times per year?)
Develop budget for materials, staff, etc.
Create administration materials (e.g., power point to share process
with staff, parents and community members, consent forms,
teacher checklists)
Schedule dates for screening(s) and meetings to share school-wide
results
 Universal screening readiness
Create a quick and easy for teachers, AND,
Select an evidence-based screening
instrument for advanced screening (gate 2)
Use The Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing, or resources from other
professional organization resources (e.g.,
National Association for School Psychologists; NASP),
as guidelines for selecting an appropriate
screener
 Universal screening readiness
Data
Develop data collection and progress
monitoring system
Determine systematic process for using results
to inform interventions
Plan for sharing screening and progress
monitoring results with staff and families
Illinois Example: Universal
Screening at the
Elementary and Jr. High
Created by:
Lynn Owens, MSW, MEd
Schaumburg CCSD 54
District External Coach
 District 54 Demographics
21 Elementary Buildings (K-6)
5 Jr. High Buildings (7-8)
1 Elementary & Jr. High Building (K-8)
District Enrollment: 14, 318
Low Income: 18%
IEP: 11.3%
Bi-Lingual: 17.5%
Ethnicity:
White: 46.3%
African American: 6.5%
Hispanic: 22.5%
Asian: 20.0%
American Indian: 0.3%
Multi-Racial: 3.3%
 District 54
PBIS Implementation
26 Elementary and Jr. High Buildings Implementing
all 3 Tiers of PBIS
Cohort model:
Pull in cohorts of schools implementing / training
Tiers
Specific components (universal screening, restorative justice, for
example)
 Universal Screening:2010-13
2010-11
4 Buildings from Cohort 1 participated
2 Elementary (Kindergarten-Sixth Grade)
2 Jr. High (Seventh-Eighth Grade)
2011-12
8 Buildings from Cohort 1 and 2 participated
4 Elementary (Kindergarten-Sixth Grade)
4 Jr. High (Seventh-Eighth Grade)
2012-13
16 Buildings from Cohort 1-4 participated
11 Elementary
5 Jr. High Buildings
 Preparing for Screening: Year 1-Pilot
Screening Window: October November 2010
District Admin and External Coach Responsibilities (Sept-Oct)
External Coaches attended Universal Screening Facilitator training by Jen
Rose, IL PBIS Network
Tier 2 Coaches identified as Screening Facilitators
Presented Universal Screening to Superintendent, Board Cabinet, District
Leadership Team, and Building Administrators
Developed Parent Information/Consent Letter
Prepared protocols for Facilitators
Identify and Train Screening Facilitators (Oct)
Cohort 1 buildings for Pilot
Implementing PBIS at least 2 years
CICO implemented with fidelity for 1 full year
Elementary Facilitator Training:
Time Lines for the year
SSBD Facilitator Training
Jr. High Facilitator Training:
Time Lines for the year
BASC-2/BESS Facilitator Training
 Preparing for Screening Year 1-Pilot
(cont)
Facilitator Responsibilities (Oct-December)
Review and follow timeline
Facilitator timeline
Teacher timeline
CICO was up and running since mid-September
Increase in students participating as result of screener
Changes to support internalizing students identified via screener
CICO Parent letter
Scheduled screening dates with administrator
20-30 min. overview
1.5 hr. administration
Wednesday Staff Development (Elementary & Jr. High)
Grade Level Meeting (Jr. High)
Presented screening overview and administration with External Coach
1 building presented without External Coach
Prepared screening protocols for scoring
SSBD: Facilitators scored using excel spread sheet
BASC-2: IL PBIS personnel scored
Reviewed results with administrator and staff
 Screening: Year 2
Screening Window: October November 2011
District Admin and External Coach Responsibilities (Aug-Sept)
Notified Tier 2 Coaches about Screening Facilitator training
Provided Facilitator training with IL PBIS Network
Building Administrators informed of screening window
Modified Parent Information/Consent Letter
Informed consent
Screener part of support students receive at Tier 2
Identify and Train Screening Facilitators (Sept)
Cohort 1 and 2 buildings conduct screening
Implementing PBIS at least 2 years
CICO implemented with fidelity for 1 full year
Elementary Facilitator Training:
Time Lines
SSBD Facilitator Training
Jr. High Facilitator Training:
Time Lines
BASC-2/BESS Facilitator Training
 Screening: Year 2 (cont)

Facilitator Responsibilities (Sept-December)

Review and follow timeline
Facilitator and Teacher timeline
Jump-start Time Line
CICO up and running since mid-September
Increase in students participating as result of screener
Changes to support internalizing students identified via screener
CICO Parent letter
DPR cards
Scheduled screening dates with administrator
20-30 min. overview
1-1.5 hr. administration
Presented overview and screening administration with External Coach to staff
5 buildings presented without assistance from External Coach
Prepared screening protocols for use for staff and scoring
SSBD: Facilitators copied/labeled protocols and scored on-site
BASC-2: Facilitators labeled protocols and PBIS scored off-site
Reviewed results with administrator and staff
 Universal Screening: Parent Letter
October 2011

Dear Parent/Guardian,

As you know, ___________ school has been implementing Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports
(PBIS) which is a proactive approach to establishing the behavioral supports and social culture needed
for all students in a school to achieve social, emotional, and academic success.

Our school was selected to be a replication site by the Illinois PBIS organization, which provides us with
training and support as we work to continually improve ways to support our children and families. As
part of being a replication site this year, we will be utilizing an assessment tool for teachers that will
help identify students who may be having minor challenges in school, such as following rules and
expectations, or making friends. Our goal in using this teacher assessment tool is to identify which
children may need some assistance before minor challenges become big problems.

Over the next few weeks, your childs classroom teacher will review the class roster and identify
students who currently may be having problems or difficulties in school. We will contact the parents of
children who have been selected by their classroom teacher to participate in a simple intervention
focused on supporting the child in a proactive and positive manner.

Please feel free to contact me at ________ if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Principal
 Universal Screening
Elementary Facilitator JumpStart List
Universal Screener To Do Checklist (ELEMENTARY)
Schedule Date with Administrator, External Coach, & PBIS TAC
__Staff Overview (following coordinator meeting with External Coach &
PBIS TAC- 20 to 30 min during STAFF DEVELOPMENT
__Screening Administration (Schedule no sooner than 2 weeks after
Overview- 1 to 1.5 hours during STAFF DEVELOPMENT
__Review and Mail Parent Letter (at least 2 weeks prior to screening date)
Prep for Overview
___Copy Teacher timeline to be given at/during overview (1 per teacher)
___Reserve meeting place with projector to view power point
___Review power point
Prep for Screening Administration
___Reserve meeting place with projector and place for teachers to
complete protocol
___Find place to keep protocols locked-up until input into excel spread sheet (keep protocols locked up until
end of school year then shred)
___Extra Pens or Pencils (just in-case some teachers forget)
___Prep protocols (Identifying information Label is attached to white copy to be sent by External Coach
week of October 11)
__Copy 3 of each per teacher (Green for Internalizers and Blue for Externalizers).
___Review power point

**CONTACT EXTERNAL COACH WITH ANY QUESTIONS! EXTERNAL COACH AND/OR PBIS TAC NEED TO BE PRESENT
DURING ADMINISTRATION!!***
Screening Tools Selected
 Elementary: Systematic Screening
for Behavior Disorders (SSBD)
Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD;
Walker and Severson, 1992)
Used in Elementary Schools (Grades 1-6)
Universal screening (similar to annual vision/hearing screenings)
Identifies behaviors that may impede academic and social
functioning
Cost Effective
Used in multiple grades and buildings
Copying and labeling protocols on-site
Score protocols on-site
Scored using excel spreadsheet
No special skills required
Student information remains locked in building
Students receive support with-in 2 weeks of administration
 SSBD: Background Information
The SSBD is NOT recommended as a diagnostic
tool for eligibility for special education services

The SSBD screening WILL NOT replace the current

procedures for special education evaluation or
any other identification for support process
IL-PBIS Network, Sept 2010
 SSBD: Staff Overview
Overview
1st-6th Staff attend a 20min presentation that includes rationale for screening
District Support
Parent Letter
Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors
Teacher timeline and ranking form
Teachers given timeline for preparation and completion of screener
Teachers provided ranking forms for Internalizers and Externalizers with descriptors
Given 2 weeks to identify Top 10 Internalizers and Top 10 Externalizers from class roster
Review Administration
Supplies
Pen/Pencil
Student roster with identifying information (DOB, Race/Ethnicity, ID, etc.)
Ranking forms with Top 3 Internalizers and Externalizers identified
Expectations
Limit talking during administration to protect student information
Complete all forms (incomplete forms returned)
Come prepared
Ask questions prior to ensure the students who need support get it
 SSBD: Administration
Administration
Two weeks prior(following overview)
Parent Letter mailed home
Staff attend overview
Facilitators prepare protocols
One week prior
Staff sent reminder email (no less than 2 days prior)
Facilitators and External Coaches make final arrangements
Day of Administration
Present brief overview of process
Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors
Review expectations
Facilitators collect and check forms for accuracy and completion
Facilitators lock completed forms in designated area until scoring date
 SSBD Screening Results-Elementary
Year 1 (2 Schools)
Total Number of Students screened: 986
Total Number of Students identified: 89
Total Number of Externalizers: 41
Total Number of Internalizers: 48
Year 2 (4 Schools)
Total Number of Students screened: 1,475
Total Number of Students identified: 115
Total Number of Externalizers: 40
Total Number of Internalizers: 75
 SSBD Screening Results-Elementary
10.00%
9.00%
Students Identified as % of Enrollment

8.00%
7.00%
6.00%
5.00%
4.00%
3.00%
2.00%
1.00%
0.00%
Internalizers Externalizers Total
Year 1 4.87% 4.16% 9.03%
Year 2 5.08% 2.71% 7.79%
 Behavioral and Emotional Screening
System (BESS): Jr. High School
Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS)
(Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007) (also called BASC-2)
Used in Elementary and Jr. High Schools (Grades Pre K-8)
Universal screening (similar to annual vision/hearing screenings)
Identifies eternalizing and internalizing behavioral strengths and
weaknesses
Cost Effective
Used in multiple grades and buildings
Only used for Jr. High buildings
Protocols provided by IL-PBIS Network years 1 and 2
Protocols Scored off-site
Scantron machine scores protocols
Student information remains locked in building until hand
delivered to TAC or PBIS office
Students receive support with-in 2-4 weeks of administration
 BASC-2/BESS
The BASC-2/BESS is NOT recommended as a
diagnostic tool for eligibility for special education
services

The BASC-2/BESS screening WILL NOT replace the

current procedures for special education
evaluation or any other identification for support
process
IL-PBIS Network, Sept 2010
 BASC-2/BESS
The BASC-2/BESS uses T-scores to
communicate results relative to the average
(mean=50)
Identifiers and percentile ranks are
provided for ease of interpretation
Normal risk level: T-score range 10-60
Elevated risk level: T-score range 61-70
Extremely Elevated risk level: T-score range 71
IL-PBIS Network, Sept 2010
 BASC-2/BESS: Staff Overview
Overview
Jr. High Teaching Staff attend a 20min presentation that includes rationale for screening
District Support
Parent Letter
Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors
Teacher timeline and ranking form
Teachers given timeline for preparation and completion of screener
Teachers provided ranking forms for Internalizers and Externalizers with descriptors
Given 2 weeks to identify Top 10 Internalizers and Top 10 Externalizers from class roster
Review Administration
Supplies
#2 Pencil(s)
Student roster with identifying information (DOB, Race/Ethnicity, ID, etc.)
Ranking forms with Top 3 Internalizers and Externalizers identified
Expectations
Limit talking during administration to protect student information
Complete all forms (incomplete forms returned)
Come prepared
Ask questions prior to ensure the students who need support get it
 BASC-2/BESS: Administration
Administration
Two weeks prior(following overview)
Parent Letter mailed home
Staff attend overview
Facilitators label protocols
Facilitators attend grade level team meetings to provide support
One week prior
Staff sent reminder email (no less than 2 days prior)
Facilitators and External Coaches make final arrangements
Day of Administration
Present brief overview of process
Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors
Review expectations
Facilitators collect and check forms for accuracy and completion
Facilitators lock completed forms in designated area until picked up for scoring
External coaches make arrangements to deliver protocols to PBIS TAC
 BASC-2/BESS Screening Data-Jr. High

Year 1 (2 Schools)
Total Number of Students screened: 1,256
Total Number of Students identified: 106
Total Number of Externalizers: 69
Total Number of Internalizers: 37

Year 2 (4 Schools)
Total Number of Students screened: 2, 441
Total Number of Students identified: 228
Total Number of Externalizers: 167
Total Number of Internalizers: 61
BASC-2/BESS Screening Data-Jr.
High
10.00%

9.00%
Students Identified as % of Enrollment

8.00%

7.00%

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

0.00%
Internalizers Externalizers Total
Year 1 2.95% 5.49% 8.44%
Year 2 2.50% 6.84% 9.34%
SD54 Tier 2 Interventions
CICO
DPR card same for all students
Check-In and Out with same staff member
Parents notified of participation through calls and/or letter
Social Academic Instructional Groups
Pro Social
Problem Solving
Academic
Check & Connect
Used when student may need more than generic check-in
Used when student needs change of check-in station or change of staff
FBA/BIP
Problem solving team identifies need for more support
Utilize SAIG groups to teach skills to support replacement behavior
 Universal Screener
Roadblocks (Year 1)
Scheduling screening window after start of school year
Assessment schedule overlapping with other measures (fidelity for MTSS,
reading assessments, etc.)
Staff Development schedule difficult to change
Created scheduling conflicts for External Coaches
Delay in students receiving support once identified
Building unprepared for increase in students participating in CICO
Not enough staff to open new CICO stations
More externalizers identified than internalizers
Delay in scoring and identifying students (Jr. High)
Staff refusing to bubble-in identifying information on scantron
Scoring done off-site
Staff support limited due to lack of knowledge about internalizers
I dont have any students to screen
Why are we calling out these students when they already have low self-
esteem
 Universal Screener
Successes (Year 2)

Scheduling screening window earlier allowed

for flexibility with External Coaches to support
teams
Facilitators who participated Year 1 had the
option conduct Screening Overview and
Administration without outside support
Increased staff support due to knowledge and
experience from Year1
 Universal Screener
Successes (Year 2)

In Year 2: Number of Students who were

identified as internalizing / at risk for
internalizing
increased 25%: Elementary buildings
Increased by 50%: Jr. High buildings
Year 2: Increased number of students
receiving Tier 2 support
Did NOT have to wait until they failed or had more
extreme behavioral problems!
Truly PREVENTATIVE!
Review: District Readiness
 Think Back: Objectives
Be able to explain an overview of Universal
Screening to a co-worker
Be able to explain the rationale for including
universal screening in your multi-tiered
behavioral initiative:
Benefits
Concerns
Briefly describe a district example including
outcomes
Identify a resource for more information on
universal screening
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
 Universal Screening Resources:
Illinois PBIS Network:
Search for Universal Screening
http://www.pbisillinois.org/trainings/universalscre
ening/presentations
Florida PBIS: http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/
National PBIS Technical Assistance Center:
www.PBIS.org
RTI Action Network:
http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/research/univers
al-screening-within-a-rti-model
Jessica.swainbradway@pbisillinois.org
 Additional Evidence-Based Screening
Instruments
Screener Pros Cons

Strengths and Difficulties Measures internalizing/externalizing behaviors Perceived length of

Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, Free administration time
2001) Option of completing pencil and paper, or online Items skewed toward
http://www.sdqinfo.org version externalizing behaviors
Can be scored online
Technically sound: Large, representative
normative group

Student Risk Screening Scale
(SRSS; Drummond, 1993)
Social Skills Improvement
System (SSIS; Gresham & Elliott,
2008)
http://psychcorp.pearsonassess
ments.com/pai/ca/cahome.htm
Measures internalizing/externalizing behaviors
Free
Quick to administer (less than 5 minutes per
student; 15 minutes for entire class, depending
upon number of students)
Easy to understand and interpret score results
Technically-adequate
Measures problem behaviors, social and
academic competence
Computer and web-based (AIMSweb)
administration and scoring available
Not as accurate as the SSBD
regarding identification of
internalizers
Expensive: Technical
manual=$105.60; Rating forms=
$43.75 for package of 25 hand-
scored forms; scoring software=
$270.00; Scanning software=
$640