FBAs and BIPs: Legal Issues and Practical Strategies for IEP Teams by Jose L. Martín, Attorney at Law RICHARDS LINDSAY & MARTIN, L.L.P 13091 Pond Springs Road, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78729 jose@rlmedlaw.com Copyright © 2015, 2017 RICHARDS LINDSAY & MARTÍN, L.L.P Issues on FBAs What is a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA)?—The FBA requirement is related to the provision in IDEA requiring that "in developing an IEP for 'a child whose behavior impedes the child's learning.' the school district must 'consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies, to address that behavior.'" 20 U.S.C. §1414(d)(3)(B)(i). There is no language, however, on the necessary components of an FBA, or who must conduct an FBA. See Letter to Janssen, 51 IDELR 253 (OSERS 2008). Neither IDEA ’04 nor the 2006 final regulations, moreover, contain a definition or additional guidance with respect to FBAs In commentary to the 1999 IDEA regulations, the USDOE indicated that in conducting an FBA, “the IEP team need to be able to address the various situation, environmental, and behavioral circumstances raised in individual cases. 64 Fed. Reg. 12,620 (1999) Some cases have attempted to cast further light on what an FBA should accomplish, In Independent Sch. Dist. No. 2310, 29 IDELR 330 (SEA MN 1998), a Minnesota hearing officer stated that the general purpose of an FBA is to provide the IEP team with additional information, analysis, and strategies for dealing with undesirable behavior, especially when it is interfering with a child's education. The process involves some variant of identifying the core or "target" behavior; observing the pupil (perhaps in different environments) and collecting data on the target behavior, antecedents and consequences; formulating a hypothesis about the cause(s) of the behavior; developing an intervention or interventions to test the hypothesis; and collecting data on the effectiveness of the intervention(s) in changing the behavior. Yet another hearing officer stated that “developing an FBA is a process that involves identifying the core or "target" behavior; observing the student and collecting data on the target behavior; formulating a hypothesis about the causes of the behavior; developing FBAs and BIPs—Page 1 interventions to test the hypothesis; and collecting data on the effectiveness of the interventions in changing the behavior.” Broward County Sch. Bd., 110 LRP 38,160 (SEA Florida 2010) This commentator’s “horsesense” definition of an FBA is an assessment of a student’s behavioral functioning, gleaned from observational data from sources knowledgeable about the student’s daytoday behavior, that is reasonably calculated to assist the IEP team in developing an appropriate BIP (Behavior Intervention Plan, a general term intended to describe the portion of an IEP that contains positive behavior interventions, supports, and strategies) The FBA is likely to include information regarding type of behaviors, frequency, severity, location, triggering factors, and previously attempted strategies, among others. There is no requirement that the FBA be conducted with the assistance of a school psychologist, or that it be part of a psychological evaluation. The better the FBA, however, the more effective the BIP. At this point, schools are getting in trouble for not conducting any FBAs, rather than for conducting poor ones (see caselaw below) When is an FBA required?—If an IDEAeligible child is exhibiting recurring behaviors that impede their learning or the learning of others, a FBA should be conducted to help determine the potential need for a behavior intervention plan (BIP). See Connor v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 109 LRP 67,343 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)(Lack of FBA not a denial of FAPE where student’s anxiety and fidgeting did not impede his learning in the classroom). In addition, IDEA provisions at sections 1415(k)(1)(D) and (F) also require FBAs in the two following situations: For longterm removals—In addition, IDEA requires an FBA “and behavioral intervention services and modifications” when the school undertakes a disciplinary change in placement based on a longterm (>10 consecutive school days) removal, including in situations where the student is removed due to special offenses (drugs, weapons, serious injury). 34 C.F.R. §300.530(d)(1)(ii) When behavior is determined to be related to disability—Also, the regulation requires an FBA and implementation of a BIP when the school determines that a behavior is a manifestation of the child’s disability in a manifestation determination review If a BIP had already been developed, the regulation requires a review of the BIP, with revisions as necessary to address the behavior 34 C.F.R. §300.530(f)(1). Is there a requirement for a FBA/BIP in cases where there is no manifestation or “link” but the school decides not to undertake a longterm removal?—In the 2006 commentary FBAs and BIPs—Page 2 to the final IDEA regulations, USDOE did not require the FBA/BIP process in situations where the behavior was not related to disability. It stated that “we must recognize that Congress specifically removed from the Act a requirement to conduct a functional behavioral assessment or review and modify an existing behavioral intervention plan for all children within 10 days of a disciplinary removal, regardless of whether the behavior was a manifestation or not. We also recognize, though, that as a matter of practice, it makes a great deal of sense to attend to behavior of children with disabilities that is interfering with their education or that of others, so that the behavior can be addressed, even when that behavior will not result in a change in placement. In fact, the Act emphasizes a proactive approach to behaviors that interfere with learning by requiring that, for children with disabilities whose behavior impedes their learning or that of others, the IEP Team consider, as appropriate, and address in the child’s IEP, “the use of positive behavioral interventions, and other strategies to address the behavior.” (See section 1414(d)(3)(B)(i) of the Act). This provision should ensure that children who need behavior intervention plans to succeed in school receive them.” Fed Reg. 46,721. Here, USDOE is reminding schools that the FBA/BIP process is one that must be considered proactively, in response to behavior that impedes learning, irrespective of a recommendation for serious disciplinary action What about cumulative removals totaling 10 school days in a school year?—As with the language of IDEA ‘04, the final regulations not contain any requirement to conduct the FBA/BIP process when a student has been removed a total of 10 school days in a school year. Schools, however, are cautioned that the general threshold for conducting the FBA/BIP process is when the student engages in recurring behaviors that interfere or impede their learning or that of others. As a matter of good practice, schools should use the FBA/BIP early in situations of repeated or escalating misbehavior, for both educational and legal reasons. In situations where a student has been removed 10 days within a school year, it is highly likely that the standard of recurringbehaviorthatimpedeslearning has been met, and thus an FBA is needed Is an FBA a required “prerequisite” to developing an appropriate BIP?—The general notion is that the FBA data informs the development of the BIP and is the data foundation of the BIP. But, legally, a BIP could be appropriate even if a formal FBA was not conducted. In the recent case of C. F. v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 57 IDELR 255 (S.D.N.Y. 2011), a federal court held that a BIP was appropriate, and addressed the pertinent behavioral issues, despite not being preceded by an FBA. The court ruled that the IEP team “had access to a substantial amount of information on C.F.'s current interfering behaviors and did draft a BIP, which reflected the behaviors and provided for the continued use of intervention strategies.” Nevertheless, it appears advisable for districts to proceed along the lines of the generally accepted practice of conducting FBAs to collect the data necessary to formulate appropriate BIPs FBAs and BIPs—Page 3 What about children who come from private schools?—In situations where a child has been placed in private schools before enrolling in a public school, the public school IEP can rely on behavioral observations and data provided by the private school. See A. L. v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 57 IDELR 69 (S.D.N.Y 2011) Is an FBA an “evaluation” requiring parental consent under IDEA?—In 2007, OSEP explained that a district that intends to conduct a functional behavioral assessment should ask whether the planned FBA will focus on the educational and behavioral needs of a specific child. If so, the FBA qualifies as an evaluation or reevaluation under Part B and therefore triggers all of the accompanying procedural safeguards, including the need to seek parental consent. If, however, the district uses an FBA as a widespread intervention tool to improve the behavior of all students in its schools, the FBA is not an evaluation and parental consent is not necessary. Letter to Christiansen, 48 IDELR 161 (OSEP 2007); see also Northwestern School Corp., 111 LRP 26,429 (SEA Indiana 2011) (district that used questionnaires to gather information from a kindergartner's teachers as part of an FBA should have obtained parental consent first, as this was not merely a review of existing data, but rather a collecting of new data) Can a parent request an independent FBA if the district has conducted its own and the parent disagrees with it?—Apparently yes OSERS has ruled that a parent who disagrees with an FBA that is conducted in order to develop an appropriate IEP is entitled to request an IEE at public expense Questions and Answers on Discipline Procedures, 52 IDELR 231 (OSERS 2009) Examples of Useful FBA Questions What are the main behavior problems in order of priority? How frequent are these behaviors? How severe? Where do the behaviors take place? When do the behaviors take place? What happens just before the behavior? What happens after behavioral incidents? What strategies are currently being used? How effective are the strategies currently used? What strategies were used, but discontinued? What consequences are currently used? How effective is application of consequences? To which reinforcers does the student respond? Which reinforcers are not effective? What input can the parent provide? FBAs and BIPs—Page 4 Will the parent assist in implementing behavioral supports/strategies? Many schools collect the above type of questions in a standardized form that teachers and staff can complete, and which the IEP team can use to help develop the BIP Comments on Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs) When to develop a BIP?—Generally, an IEP team should consider development of a BIP whenever an IDEA student exhibits recurring behavior problems that impede their learning or the learning of others. It is best to intervene early with a BIP, before the behavior pattern becomes entrenched and more difficult to address A point on BIP forms—The forms that are used to develop BIPs should be flexible, and allow for the most individualized process possible. Although not necessarily inappropriate, checklist BIPs tend to “shoehorn” staff into the listed strategies, instead of encouraging innovative and uniquely individualized approaches Moreover, many checklist items on BIP checklists include interventions and strategies that really are nothing more than traditional classroom discipline management techniques, rather than innovative ideas for individualized interventions for particular problem behaviors Interplay with IEP goals and objectives—The BIP should tie into the behavioral goals and objectives on students’ IEPs. The BIP provides daytoday strategies and techniques to address the behavior, while the objectives serve to measure progress on the behaviors in question Common BIP Problems Not taking nature of disability into account Insufficient customization of consequences and reinforcers (reduces their effectiveness) Inappropriate or partial implementation by instructional staff Simple lists of consequences—punishmentonly formats Lack of meaningful positive strategies to prevent behaviors or promote acquisition of appropriate replacement behaviors FBAs and BIPs—Page 5 Failure to revise ineffective BIPs (watch for old BIPs that student now manipulates or learns to “work”) Using minor modifications to regular discipline plan for complex cases (difficult cases require well thoughtout and highly individualized BIPs) Contingencies not clear or specific (leads to staff confusion and inconsistent implementation) Insufficient contingencies (give staff a plan B if A fails) 10 Failure to address all target behaviors 11 Overreliance on a BIP checklistbased form Ideas for Steps to Develop a Solid BIP Gather FBA data (observation, evaluation, teacher comments) and determine proper behavioral baselines as part of the FBA report Identify target behaviors Review data regarding possible strategies and consequences Develop positive strategies to promote acquisition of appropriate behaviors to replace inappropriate behaviors Customize potential consequences for inappropriate behavior Develop hierarchy of consequences, in case first consequence is ineffective (or gather a set of nonhierarchical consequences for staff to choose from) Prepare draft BIP for IEP team deliberation If feasible, solicit input from evaluating psychologist prior to presenting BIP draft at meeting Identify potential support services needed to facilitate successful implementation of BIP FBAs and BIPs—Page 6 Evaluate effectiveness of BIP periodically with a databased approach Tips for Successful Implementation of BIPs Involve implementers in drafting of BIP Communicate to staff the legal implications of failure to implement BIP Avoid power struggles over application of BIP Apply consequences in firm, but nonemotional tone Remember that positive strategies may be more effective than consequences Apply BIP consistently On complicated BIPs, hold a meeting of instructional staff to review the BIP and conduct Q & A Make BIP available to all staff who might be involved in disciplining the child Monitor implementation of BIP periodically (preferably on a planned data basis) 10 Allow implementers to provide input regarding effectiveness of BIP Some BIP Cases Walker County Bd. of Educ., 111 LRP 48,174 (SEA Alabama 2011)—The district’s failure to conduct an FBA or develop a BIP despite a student’s escalating behavior problems amounted to a denial of FAPE. The behavior had escalated to the point that the student was placed in an alternative disciplinary setting several times in a school year, and the parents reported that the student had experienced an emotional breakdown that led to a hospitalization Mesquite Ind. Sch. Dist. v. Student, 197SE0410 (SEA Texas 2011)—A parent argued that an FBA was deficient because it was conducted at an ARDC meeting, instead of by means of behavioral observations over time. Given that the school knew of the student’s serious behavior problems prior to the evaluation, the Hearing Officer stated that “the FBAs and BIPs—Page 7 FBA should have been conducted as part of Student’s comprehensive FIE given Student’s behavioral needs as related to student’s suspected ED. MISD used the FBA to identify Student’s problem behaviors and help the ARDC select interventions to directly address those behaviors; however, MISD did not conduct the FBA in accordance with best practices based on observation of Student’s behavior over time and in a variety of settings.” But the Hearing Officer ruled that, the failure to conduct the FBA as part of the FIE and in accordance with best practices is, at best, a procedural issue that is legally significant only if it results in the denial of a FAPE. “The question then is whether the FBA resulted in a BIP and Behavior IEP that addressed Student’s needs and conferred upon student the requisite benefit in the behavioral arena.” And, the Hearing Officer found that it did. Lake Travis ISD v. M.L., Cause No. 1:06cv00046SS (W.D. TX 2007). WallingfordSwarthmore Sch. Dist., 110 LRP 68,486 (SEA Pennsylvania 2010)—In a case that demonstrates that difficult cases may require more intensive FBA/BIP work, a hearing officer held that a school denied a child with multiple disabilities and behaviors a FAPE. The school commonly modified the BIP without prior FBAs or parent input, and although it had the capacity to create behavior charts and collect detailed behavioral data, there was little evidence that staff used these tools to revise and improve the student’s BIP “The District cites the use of behavioral technology (data collection) but demonstrates the clear lack of sufficient knowledge of how to apply procedures to positively affect behavior change.” Imagine Charter Schools at East Mesa, 55 IDELR 112 (SEA Arizona 2010)—When an Arizona parent requested a BIP, the IEP team determined, based on teacher input and observation, that the student was not exhibiting behavior that impeded her learning, so it denied the request. The hearing officer rejected the parent’s argument that an FBA was necessary, as the behaviors were not serious and did not subject the child to disciplinary actions. “Based on the documentation submitted, [the student's alleged] behaviors are either related to the student's learning disability or are typical mild behaviors for a secondgrader in a school classroom.” Thus, the standard for requiring an FBA was not met Little Rock Sch Dist., 37 IDELR 30 (SEA Arkansas 2002)—Failure to provide appropriate BIP for student with disruptive and injurious behaviors led to need for more restrictive environment BIP was outdated, used a onepage form, and relied mostly on the parents taking the student home when he misbehaved Conroe Ind. Sch. Dist., 38 IDELR 53 (SEA Texas 2002)—The hearing officer found that the BIP for a student with extremely disruptive behavior and verbal outbursts was appropriate. It contained some planned ignoring of minor behaviors, warnings, cooling off periods, and limited personal reactions to disciplinary incidents. FBAs and BIPs—Page 8 Neosho RV Sch. Dist. v. Clark, 38 IDELR 61 (8th Cir. 2003)—The need for a proper BIP existed long before the school made efforts to establish a plan for a student with stress related behavior problems. For a significant time, the student exhibited behaviors that impeded his ability to benefit from his education, and there was no BIP In re: Student with a Disability, 41 IDELR 115 (SEA Wisconsin 2003)—Hearing officer disagreed with parents that BIP was inappropriate because it called for consequences that included suspension The BIP contained positive behavioral supports and strategies, and the use of consequences was not inappropriate, even for behavior related to disability Moreover, the district had the right to make the final disciplinary decisions, even if the BIP called for consulting the parents Mobile County Bd. of Educ., 40 IDELR 226 (SEA Alabama 2004)—District failed to conduct an FBA and implement a BIP for an 11yearold student with severe MR, CP, hearing loss, ADHD, and ED who exhibited aggressive behaviors, which led to the student’s arrest Alex R. v. Forrestville Valley Community Unit Sch. Dist #221, 41 IDELR 146 (7th Cir 2004)—BIP drafted to deal with student’s escalating behaviors was appropriate, and included visual aids, sensory breaks, and manipulatives. The court noted that the IDEA did not include specific substantive requirements for BIPs Even though the student became more violent, and eventually needed a more restrictive behavior unit, the court refused to find that the BIP was not appropriate Internet resources on BIPs www.ldonline.org/article/6180 This article explains the requirements of the IDEA regarding addressing problem behavior. It provides a stepbystep guide to conducting a functional behavioral analysis, and writing a behavior plan. http://cecp.air.org/familybriefs/ The Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice (CECP) offers a number of family briefs on behavior. Two were mentioned above under "Behavior as Communication." If you'd like to know more about how to write a BIP, read CECP's Behavioral Planning Meetings, which describes what BIPs are and how parents and the school system work together to write one. http://cecp.air.org/fba/problembehavior/main.htm If the IEP team isn't real sure how to address a student's problem behavior, then members might find this CECP resource helpful: Addressing Student Problem Behavior, Part I: An IEP Team's Introduction to Functional Behavioral Assessment and Behavior Intervention Plans It's FBAs and BIPs—Page 9 available at the link above. Other Resources Behavior Intervention Plans Five Essential Themes that Add up to Adequacy Researcher Susan Etscheidt of the University of Northern Iowa reviewed 800 due process, district court and appellate court decisions that were decided between 1997 and 2005 and contained the term BIP (Behavior Intervention Plan). That case review yielded 52 published decisions in which the adequacy of the Positive Behavior Intervention Plan was a central feature Etscheidt reports that five themes emerged from her research. Each provides important information that advocates and parents need to take into consideration as they work together to plan effective behavioral interventions on behalf of students with disabilities FINDINGS A Positive Behavior Intervention Plan must be developed when a student’s behavior interferes with learning. Seventeen of the reviewed cases concerned the failure of IEP teams to develop positive BIPs for students with a variety of significant behavior problems. In the majority of the cases, the school districts were aware of the needs but still did not take steps to address serious behaviors that could be dangerous or long standing issues with school attendance that interfered with educational success Parents prevailed in sixteen of the seventeen cases School districts ran into difficulty trying to substitute informal BIPs, social skills programs or student contracts for a fully developed positive BIP. Districts were also confused about when to develop a BIP, one maintaining that a student who had not been suspended or removed from his program for more than ten days did not require a BIP, despite a very high frequency of disciplinary actions over a seven month period Another serious issue raised in several cases was the attempt to move students to a more restrictive placements rather than developing a positive BIP that would be sufficient to meet the students’ needs in a less restrictive school setting. In these cases, outcomes for parents were mixed – one hearing denied placement in a private school, but in several cases, districts were ordered to either engage a certified behavior analyst to evaluate and develop a BIP and IEP or private school placement and tuition was ordered FBAs and BIPs—Page 10 A Positive Behavior Intervention Plan must be based on recent and meaningful assessment data. Decisions in these cases established that school districts must base student behavior plans on data that is gathered from evaluations that are properly conducted and interpreted. When districts were able to demonstrate that they used recent and professionally developed data, they prevailed in several decisions even though the students in question were not necessarily responding positively to the BIP On the other hand, districts were not successful in defending observations, or the development of a positive BIP without the use of a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA). A Positive Behavior Intervention Plan must be individualized to meet the student’s unique needs School districts were not successful in arguing cases where they had substituted a behavior management system used to manage the entire classroom, group counseling sessions, or a restrictive program addressing students with behavior problems for the development of an individualized BIP. A Positive Behavior Intervention Plan must include positive behavior Strategies and supports. The kinds of intervention strategies developed for students was also a focus of another sixteen of the cases reviewed. Districts were successful in responding to parent complaints when the positive BIPs contained a variety of individualized, positive and student focused strategies. Strategies that were specifically mentioned in decisions included environmental alterations, alternative skill instruction, cooling off periods, curricular modifications and frequent contact with parents and professionals working with the student outside of school Plans that included punishment and discipline, shorter school days, excessive use of timeout and isolation as primary interventions were seen as contributing to students’ lack of academic progress and negative selfimage Further, districts that attempted to substitute punishments, manipulation of the student’s school day by requiring parents to take student home, adult escorts in the school building, or use of restraints for properly developed BIPs did not prevail in hearings. In these cases, parents were successful in receiving compensatory education or districts were ordered to provide meaningful assessments and detailed positive BIPs based on extensive data collection through the implementation of a proper FBA. School district use of a basket hold or restraints in crisis situations was supported in the decisions reviewed, even though it was not a positive intervention It is also interesting to note that school districts were not successful in substituting IEP goals and objectives for positive behavior intervention strategies! FBAs and BIPs—Page 11 A Positive Behavior Intervention Plan must be implemented as planned and effects must be monitored. In the nine cases addressing implementation and monitoring, school districts were successful when they could demonstrate that they made a good faith effort to implement complicated plans, and that suspending a student from school was not necessarily a deviation from a BIP and was consistent with the provisions of IDEA. In those cases, parents were not successful in arguing that any punishment of their child was not allowed because of their disability and the fact that suspension deviated from the BIP In two more extreme cases, school districts were successful in arguing that contacting the police was permitted to restore order or to escort a student to a safe place. Parents were successful in those cases where a BIP was simply not implemented at all, when the BIP was clearly inadequate and behavior of the student was bringing about more serious consequences, when staff was not trained to implement the plan, and the plan was not updated by the IEP team as needed THE BOTTOM LINE In general, parents do not frequently prevail in due process proceedings. These research findings suggest that parents have prevailed in a remarkable number of the cases reviewed because: • School districts failed to act despite clear evidence that a student’s behavior was a significant barrier to their learning; • School districts recognized a student’s need for intervention, but substituted group counseling, classroomwide behavior modification programs, IEP goals, suspension, and more restrictive school days or programs for a Functional Behavior Assessment and the development of an individualized BIP. • School districts could not demonstrate that their actions were based on current and adequate data, individualized to the student in need of intervention and utilized good professional practices This information is particularly useful and important given the new IDEA requirement that whether a student has received FAPE is to be decided based on substantive grounds and that procedural violations must meet a new high standard to be included in hearing decisions: 34 CFR 300.513 (a) Decision of Hearing Officer on the provision of FAPE, (1)(2) and (3) DISCUSSION FBAs and BIPs—Page 12 It is the responsibility of the school district and each child’s IEP Team to ensure that when behaviors are impeding that child’s ability to learn and to be successful in their academic, social and communication development, a proactive course of action is taken on behalf of that child. Unfortunately, The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has given little guidance as to what the standards should be for the collection of data and the development and implementation of a Positive Behavior Intervention Plan Susan Etscheidt’s research offers five sets of information about how hearing officers and courts have evaluated the efforts of school districts to address student behavior through the positive Behavior Intervention Plan. It is useful, of course, to know and understand where school districts have failed in meeting procedural requirements under IDEA More important, are the discussions that are closely related to the best practices advocates and parents should require of the school staff when considering interventions for a particular student We can be hopeful in concluding that hearing officers and courts have taken seriously the quality of the positive BIPs developed for students, as well as issues of when they are needed and how they are to be developed, implemented and monitored The Research: Behavioral Intervention Plans: Pedagogical and Legal Analysis of Issues. Susan Etscheidt, Department of Special Education, University of Northern Iowa Published in Behavioral Disorders, 31(2), 223243 OSEP Fact Sheet on FBAs Functional Behavioral Assessment Felix is an inquisitive, resourceful 15yearold high school student with traumatic brain injury He has struggled academically and behaviorally for years. In middle school, when presented with a difficult or complex assignment, he would frequently whine, stomp his feet, or hit his teacher or another student. When reprimanded, Felix would often run out of the room and, on several occasions, left the school grounds without permission Instead of removing Felix from his neighborhood school, the school personnel conducted a functional behavioral assessment to evaluate the reasons for his problem behavior. The team determined that Felix acted inappropriately when he was frustrated with the academic demands. Therefore, the school revised his academic program to meet his individual needs. This included an adapted curriculum with individual and small group tutoring and a revised behavioral support program. The last two years of FBAs and BIPs—Page 13 middle school were a great success for Felix, his family, and school staff Introduction Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) is an integral component of designing effective behavior support plans. FBA is a systematic process for describing problem behavior, and identifying the environmental factors and surrounding events associated with problem behavior. This information is used to identify and teach more appropriate replacement behaviors and to develop an effective plan for reducing the frequency or severity of the problem behavior Why This Approach is Important The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that, at a minimum, the FBA be conducted when disciplinary sanctions result in extended periods (i.e. either before or not later than 10 business days after either the first removal beyond 10 cumulative school days in a school year or commencing a removal that constitutes a change in placement) in which a student is removed from school. In addition to the IDEA requirements, the FBA gives schools valuable information about the possible causes of problem behavior Research demonstrates that the process of positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) and developing behavioral support plans is more effective when the FBA is conducted prior to developing interventions. The FBA is used to a) define the problem behaviors, b) describe the settings under which problem behaviors are and are not likely to be observed, c) identify the function (the why) of the problem behaviors, and d) collect information from direct observation to support these outcomes Key Principles of Practice While there are a variety of techniques available to conduct a functional behavioral assessment, all FBA processes as a general matter, based on research, include the same basic steps: Collect Information through informal consultation as well as direct observation Conversations, questionnaires, checklists, and structured interviews with key persons (e.g., teachers, parents, the student) who have contact and experiences with the individual student can offer insights into the contexts or conditions under which the behavior occurs. Direct observations should also be made, so that observers can watch the behaviors as they are occurring and note the environmental events (environmental factors, antecedent and consequence events) that may initiate or sustain the behaviors Specific, concrete behaviors are defined after observational assessments have been performed FBAs and BIPs—Page 14 Propose Testable Explanations of the student's behavior. A testable explanation is a hypothesis that may explain the relationship between a problem behavior and environmental factors that seem to be associated with its occurrences Variables observed may include settings or circumstances that seem either to lead to the problem behavior or reinforce it after the fact The hypothesis should consider the possible functions of the behavior for the student Assess the Validity of Your Hypotheses to confirm the validity of the testable explanations. In general, additional information is collected about the conditions under which the problem behavior occurs and does not occur This information should demonstrate that occurrences of the behavior and the presence of these conditions are related and predictable The results of the FBA should be used to develop an effective and efficient behavioral intervention/support plan Although the FBA term was introduced formally in the IDEA '97, there has been a strong history of using FBA for reducing behavioral problems. It is a critical tool for developing effective behavior intervention/support plans Where To Go For More Information Office of Special Education Programs Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services U.S. Department of Education 330 C Street, SW Washington, DC 20202 Phone: (202) 2055507 Web site: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP/index.html The OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Behavioral Research and Training5262 University of Oregon Eugene, OR 974035262 Phone: (541) 3462505 Fax: (541) 3465689 Web site: http://www.PBIS.org The Center was established by OSEP to give schools capacitybuilding information and technical assistance for identifying, adapting, and sustaining effective schoolwide disciplinary practices The Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice (CECP) 1000 Thomas Jefferson St., NW Washington, DC 20007 Phone (202) 9445000 Fax (202) 9445454 Web site: http://www.airdc.org/cecp/ CECP promotes and supports the development and adjustment of children with or atrisk of developing serious emotional disturbance. To achieve that goal, the Center collaborates at Federal, state, and local levels to contribute to and facilitate the production, exchange, and use of knowledge about effective practices FBAs and BIPs—Page 15 ... It is also interesting to note that school districts were not successful in substituting? ?IEP goals? ?and? ?objectives? ?for? ?positive behavior intervention? ?strategies! FBAs? ?and? ?BIPs? ??Page 11 A Positive Behavior Intervention Plan must be implemented as planned? ?and effects ... Lack of meaningful positive? ?strategies? ?to prevent behaviors or promote acquisition of appropriate replacement behaviors FBAs? ?and? ?BIPs? ??Page 5 Failure to revise ineffective? ?BIPs? ?(watch? ?for? ?old? ?BIPs? ?that student now ... to evaluate? ?and? ?develop a BIP? ?and? ?IEP? ?or private school placement? ?and? ?tuition was ordered FBAs? ?and? ?BIPs? ??Page 10 A Positive Behavior Intervention Plan must be based on recent and meaningful assessment data.