Social Emotional / Mental Health Tiered System of Supports Multi-tiered System of Services & Supports: Tier I - Universal Supports and Interventions; ● Promotion & Prevention Practices Promoting positive mental health in ALL students ○ (SEL Lessons) Tier II - Targeted/Selected/Group Supports ● and Interventions Focus on students at-risk of developing a mental ○ health challenge Tier III - Intensive/Individualized Supports ● and Interventions Focus on students experiencing a mental health ○ challenge
What is a CoIIN? C ollaborative I mprovement and I nnovation N etwork • learn from each other and experts to collectively make improvements • innovative, multi-faceted learning framework to rapidly translate expert knowledge and best practices to practical program change
CSMHS Quality and Sustainability Collaborative Improvement and Innovation Network (CoIIN) and Beyond Grant funded partnership with the University of Maryland’s Center for School ● Mental Health (CSMH) Methuen is 1 of 12 districts selected nationally for participation in the first cohort ○ Implementation of National Performance Measures to improve the quality and ○ sustainability of school mental health services Methuen receives ongoing support, resources, training, and assistance with ○ implementation of project initiatives from the CSMH Communication is frequent, ongoing, and involves the reporting out of progress made ○ toward achieving CoIIN goals (PDSA cycles) School Mental Health Improvement and Innovation Task Force ● National Coalition for the State Advancement of School Mental Health (NCSA- ● 23 SMH)
25 CoIIN District-Community School Mental Health Systems
The SHAPE System SHAPE is used to: Monitor a school’s ● or district’s progress toward achieving the National Performance Measures Provide resources ● and action planning guides for each domain Gather data to ● inform the national census to understand school mental health nationally
Expanding Partnerships to Sustain Growth ● School Mental Health Improvement and Innovation Task Force - CSMH ● Expert Panel on School Mental Health - SAMHSA ● National Coalition for the State Advancement of School Mental Health (NCSA-SMH) - CSMH
National Coalition for the State Advancement of School Mental Health (NCSA-SMH) Securing the NCSA-SMH technical assistance opportunity enhanced MASMHC’s ability to: Provide technical ● assistance Distribute ● resources Engage in advocacy ● efforts
Action Planning and PDSA Cycles Plan ● Define the objective, questions, and ○ predictions Plan for data collection ○ Do ● Carry out the plan ○ Collect and analyze data ○ Study ● Complete the analysis of the data and ○ compare the results to the predictions Summarize what was learned ○ Act ● Determine whether the change will be ○ abandoned, adapted, or adopted
Identifying Areas of Need & Tracking Improvement October 2015 January 2016 May 2017
Identifying Areas of Need & Tracking Improvement October 2015 January 2016 May 2017
The Mental Health Initiative in Methuen Where did we begin? What were the most important aspects of our implementation of school mental health (SMH)? How did we sustain our growth and the changes in our practice? Why did we form the Massachusetts School Mental Health Consortium (MASMHC)?
The Mental Health Initiative in Methuen, MA Teaming Highlights of Implementation: ● CSMHS accountability report ● Universal mental health screening in Mental Health Parent and ● ● Student Advisory Council grades 3-12 MOUs established with local ● Group therapy program established ● CBH providers in all schools Established the Massachusetts ● Professional development to improve ● School Mental Health staff readiness Consortium (MASMHC) Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) ○ Resource mapping and needs ● Treatment planning ○ assessment Suicide risk assessment ○ Bridge program ● Use of psychosocial and behavioral data ○ PBIS ○
District-level Support for the Mental Health Initiative Making mental health a priority; sending a consistent message to ● all staff Establishing teams to guide the work across the district and ● ensure consistent implementation of new practices/policies Establishing partnerships to leverage resources and professional ● development Providing training to all staff regarding working with students ● with mental health problems and creating trauma-sensitive environments (Trauma-sensitive practices, PBIS, SEL curriculum) Aggregating the collected data to share with stakeholders in the ● community 34
Mental Health Initiative Structure Methuen CSMHS CoIIN Team is responsible for: ● Planning and assessing the progress of the mental health initiative ○ Selecting, testing, and analyzing data related to new practices/policies ○ Communicating and collaborating with the University of Maryland CSMH ○ team Submitting PDSA cycles and monthly run charts to the University of ○ Maryland CSMH team Attending required trainings ○ Mental Health Initiative Committee is responsible for: ● Monitoring the district-wide implementation of practices as they are ○ brought to scale Assisting in identifying test sites to pilot new practices ○ Collecting and reporting out data related to the implementation of new ○ practices/policies Assisting in the identification and resolution of site-specific problems ○ related to implementation 35
Mental Health Staff Readiness Defining and promoting a consistent view of mental ● health staff Provision of professional development that directly ● relates to mental health services and supports Representation from all schools on district-wide teams ● to promote the fidelity of implementation Increased collaboration and consultation regarding the ● implementation of new practices and policies Focusing on the collection of data to assess the ● effectiveness of interventions and the impact of mental health staff on students’ academic and psychosocial progress 36
Needs Assessments: Working Smarter SEL Needs Assessment Used to design a SEL curriculum by identifying the critical areas of need ● reported by the student population EBP Needs Assessment What evidence-based therapeutic practices and programs were being ● implemented? How did the staff rate their readiness to provide services to address the ● range of problems faced by our students? What did staff see as the critical areas of professional development that ● they needed? Presenting Problems Needs Assessment What are the most prevalent presenting problems that mental health ● 37 staff are addressing across all tiers?
Professional Development Northeastern University: Daily Report Cards ● Salem State University: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy ● Inservice days: ● Models of Case Consultancy ○ Suicide Risk Assessment ○ Intervention Planning and Progress Monitoring ○ Using Psychosocial and Educational Data to Assess and Monitor Interventions ○ SBIRT ○ Resource Mapping ○ Implementing PBIS: Tier I and Tier II trainings ● 38
Effective and Efficient Use of Resources Realignment of caseloads Assigning caseloads with consistency ● Decreasing the number of transitions between mental health staff; ● increasing the length of time each student is serviced by the same mental health staff member Aligning practices across the district (SEL, screening, management of ● 504, etc.) Resource mapping What do we have, where do we have it, and how can we use it better? ● 39
Establishing Community Partners Creation of a formal agreement designed to guide partnerships with community-based mental health agencies What we requested: ● Consultation and collaboration with in-house staff ○ Use of evidence-based practices ○ Sharing data to aid in progress monitoring and documenting the impact of the CSMHS ○ What we offered: ● Time ○ Space ○ Referrals ○ How has this impacted service delivery? 15% increase in mental health staff available to students ● Increased follow through for referrals ● Increased show rates for sessions ● Collaborative case management and consultation with partner agencies ● 40 Increased services during school breaks and over the summer ●
Partnering with Community Mental Health - Increased Services How has this impacted service delivery? 15% increase in mental ● health staff available to students Increased follow through for ● referrals Increased show rates for ● sessions Collaborative case ● management and consultation with partner agencies Increased services during ● 41 school breaks and over the summer
Partnering with Community Mental Health - Increased Services The rate and diversity ● of services increased steadily over three years True wraparound was ● established as a function of this relationship
Expanding Partnerships with CMH Increasing the number of ● partnerships Implementing group-based services ● co-facilitated with school- and community-based mental health staff Leveraging supervision hours ● Leveraging professional ● development Summer services ●
Establishing Community Partners Partnered with local mental health providers, colleges/universities, and other school ● districts University of Maryland - Center for School Mental Health (CSMH) ○ Lahey Health and Behavioral Services ○ Children’s Friends and Family Services ○ Family Services of the Merrimack Valley ○ North Shore Community Mediation Center ○ Salem State University ○ Merrimack College ○ Rivier University ○ Northeastern University ○ Consortium of multiple local public school districts ○ 44
Mental Health Parent & Student Advisory Council Provides an opportunity for parents and students to have a voice ● regarding the mental health initiative Our goals: ● Reduce the stigma associated with seeking help for mental health concerns ○ Provide an outlet to parents and students to discuss issues related to mental health, ○ including the services and supports offered by MPS Provide knowledge and resources to parents and students regarding mental health ○ Foster a shared agenda between all stakeholders to ensure the continued success and ○ expansion of mental health services and supports in Methuen and the larger region Monthly meetings are held at Methuen High School ● 45
Marketing and Promoting the Mental Health Initiative Openly discussing and sharing information about the mental health initiative with district and community stakeholders has increased the understanding of and support for the goals set forth by the committee. Legislative funding ● Local news ● Community mental health agency roundtable meetings ● Parent and student advisory council ● Administrative professional development ● Potential partners (school districts, universities, and community ● agencies) 46
Mental Health Screening: Questions to Consider Where do we start? Which students should we screen? How do we choose our screening tools? What about consent? What about staff readiness? What will the parent population say? How are we going to pay for this? 47
Selecting Screening Measures Identifying tools that matched our population’s needs ● Accounting for funding barriers ● Seeking efficient measures that produce actionable data ●
Securing Consent to Engage in Screening What options do we have for securing consent? ● What is the difference between active and passive consent? ● What else do we screen for in schools? ●
Passive Consent Message A consistent message is delivered regarding mental health screening in advance of and immediately prior to all screenings. “In an effort to promote the health and well -being of students in Methuen Public Schools, students will be periodically provided with questionnaires, surveys, and screeners that address issues related to mental health. The information gained will support the school’s ability to provide comprehensive and timely support for your son or daughter if they require any assistance. Students can opt-out of filling out any questionnaire, survey, or screener that they are not interested in taking and you can opt-out your son or daughter at any time by contacting the Guidance Office of your son's/daughter's school or filling out the opt-out form here. A list of the questionnaires, surveys, and screeners is available below for you to review. We are committed to ensuring your son or daughter is supported academically, socially, and emotionally, and we look forward to partnering with each of you toward achieving this goal.” The message above (or a slightly adapted version) is: Posted on the district’s website ● Delivered immediately prior to screenings ● Sent directly to parents/guardians in advance of screenings via an automated calling system ●
Securing & Maintaining the Psychosocial Database OR...
Evolving Practice: Seeking Innovative Strategies Initial Phase of Implementation Improved Practices Active Consent Passive Consent and Opt-out ● ● Paper and pencil screening Electronic screening ● ● Single-student or small group Grade-level or school-wide ● ● screening screening Administration facilitated by Administration through ● ● SMH staff advisory and tech courses
Post-Screening: Coordinated Follow-up Data review and coordinated follow-up planned for all ● screenings Mental health staff receive the data within twenty ● minutes of the completed screening, allowing for immediate follow-up to be conducted with students who had elevated scores Parent/guardian follow-up ○ Follow-up procedural guide developed and data rules ○ established prior to screening to identify the population receiving follow-up Clinical interview professional development ○ ● Mental health staff can then make an informed decision about whether or not to offer services: in- school group or individual therapy, outside referral, etc.
Post-Screening: Best Practices 100% of students who required follow-up ● received it within 7 days of the screening Students who indicated any degree of ● suicidal ideation or intent to self-harm received follow-up within 24 hours (same day) Crisis teams were placed on call in advance ● of all screenings and local community mental health partners were informed of the screenings
Identifying Students and Increasing Services Increasing proactive service delivery for students who require mental health services. Identification of individual students who may require mental ○ health services and supports Proactive identification and referral for services serves to ■ reduce the overall impact of mental health problems on students. The reduction of crises through preventative care improves the ■ overall functioning of a mental health system and decreases the larger impact of crises on the school as a whole. 66% increase in identification of students who require mental health services following implementation of mental health screening in 17-18.
Screening by Area of Concern 56
RCADS (17-18) Student Population % Total % Elevated Scores (At-Risk + Clinical) Total Sample 2155 100.00 Grade 5 552 25.62 13.36 percent of No Concern 469 84.97 students in grades At-Risk 30 5.43 15.03 5-8 scored in the Clinical Concern 53 9.60 moderate to Grade 6 530 24.59 severe ranges for No Concern 448 84.53 internalizing issues At-Risk 22 4.15 15.47 Clinical Concern 60 11.32 (depression, Grade 7 523 24.27 anxiety, etc.) No Concern 462 88.34 Methuen Public At-Risk 15 2.87 11.66 Schools (2018) Clinical Concern 46 8.79 Grade 8 550 25.52 No Concern 488 88.73 At-Risk 18 3.27 11.27 Clinical Concern 44 8.00 Grades 5-8 AVG = 13.36
3-Year Depression Screening Comparison Data 16.7 percent of students score in the moderate to severe range for depression, on average Methuen Public Schools (2018)
3-Year Anxiety Screening Comparison Data 18.3 percent of students score in the moderate to severe range for generalized anxiety, on average Methuen Public Schools (2018)
Using Aggregated Psychosocial Data Understanding the mental health needs of the district comprehensively to inform the design of the mental health system. Aggregated data can function as a needs assessment ○ Informs SEL curriculum design and delivery ○ Informs prevention work ○ Informs the design of Tier II interventions that target ○ specific areas of need identified through the data collection Identifies funding and resources gaps ○ Understanding the connection between psychosocial ○ functioning and academic achievement
Evidence-Based Services and Supports Multi-tiered System of SEL & Where are we focused? Mental Health Services and Universal screening (Tier I) ● Supports Individual therapy (Tier III) ● using CBT Tier I - Universal Supports and ● Implementing SBIRT ● Interventions; Prevention Expanding and improving ● Practices our SEL curriculum and Tier II - Targeted/Selected/Group ● delivery (Tier I) Supports and Interventions Implementing PBIS across ● Tier III - Intensive/Individualized ● the district (Tier I) Supports and Interventions Scaling up therapy groups ● (Tier II) 61
Expanding & Improving Mental Health Services and Supports Bringing evidence-based therapeutic services ● directly to students Ensuring only quality mental health services are ● provided to students Focusing on prevention and the promotion of ● mental wellness Advocating for the well-being of the whole student ● Increasing access to and knowledge about the ● services and supports available to students 62
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Professional Development In order to ensure staff ● readiness, MPS committed to the provision of PD to improve SMH staff’s delivery of evidence -based therapy Ongoing PD and resource ● development supports staff’s implementation of therapeutic practices This represents a significant step ● forward to underscoring school- based mental health staff’s training and ability to address the mental health needs of students
Group Therapy Implementation Overview - Tier II Step 1: Analyze Screening Data to Identify Potential Group Members Step 2: Referral Process to Identify Group Members Step 3: Counselor Interviews with Identified Population/Collect Pre-Group Data Step 4: Obtain Informed Consent Step 5: Group Sessions & Progress Monitoring Step 6: Collect Post-Group Data/Group Evaluation
Historic Tiered Services at MHS (Prior to 16-17) Tier I Tier II* Tier III Utilizing SEL needs Providing evidence-based ● ● Non-Existent ● individual therapeutic assessment data to services to students design and implement identified through screening curricula to deliver during advisory Creating intervention plans ● and conducting progress Social Emotional ● monitoring to determine the Learning (SEL) impact of services on academic, social/emotional, Instruction during and behavioral outcomes school-wide Connections lessons, Incorporating data ○ through classroom from screeners to *Our focus today = lessons, embedded in guide practice Evidence-based Tier II Group core content areas Therapy Services in MPS 5% of each SMH staff ○ member’s caseload Universal Mental ● Health Screening
Prior “Group” Counseling in MPS Established Groups in MPS: Social skills groups (Social Thinking curriculum) ● “Lunch bunch” groups ● Transition groups for new students ● Takeaways: Mostly targeted towards grammar schools ● No progress monitoring ● No therapeutic groups ● Evidence-based groups in MPS are non-existent ●
Tier II Services: Why Group Therapy? Efficient / effective practices needed for tier II mental health services ● to address target 5-15% of students at MHS Too often, we jump straight from tier I to tier III (individual therapeutic ● services) Remember: ● Focus of tier II: Prevention and promotion using small groups and ○ embedded strategies (World Health Organization, 2016) Tier II services, such as group counseling, are integral to providing ○ and sustaining mental health services in the district
Defining Group Therapy The Association for Specialists in Group Work (ASGW) has defined four types of groups: Task Groups: Promote the accomplishment of group tasks/goals ● Psycho-Educational Groups: Promote typical growth and/or prevent/remediate transitory ● difficulties in personal/social, academic, career development Counseling Groups: Address problems of living that arise in the lives of students ● Psychotherapy Groups: Address consistent patterns of dysfunctional behaviors and/or ● distortions Structured Groups: Time limited (about 6 - 8 weeks) ● Students screened in utilizing data & needs assessment ● Homogenous (students share similar needs/problems/characteristics) ● Closed group (students unable to “drop in”) ● Association for Specialists in Group Work (2007)
CBT Group Model - Key Components 1. Smaller groups – suggestions for the ideal patient-to-therapist ratio vary, but groups are usually fewer than 12 members 2. Interaction between group members is a key part of the intervention 3. Psychoeducation will always be part of the group content – but is less likely to be delivered in didactic format 4. Tailored therapy relates to aspects of the group members’ own aims and formulations 5. Involves live, in-session cognitive and behavioral interventions “Group psychotherapy views the interactions between the group members as the vehicle of change.”
Group Therapy Program Session Structure Sessions 1-3 and termination session remain consistent ● Group orientation / norms, review of CBT model, and termination ○ procedures Working phase of group therapy draws on modularized sessions, ● activities, strategies tailored to the needs of the group Combination of psycho-educational curriculum and open forum ○ Processing and therapeutic techniques embedded into sessions (cognitive ○ restructuring, behavioral activation scheduling, etc.) Preparatory work allows for productive time management for ● counselors and more targeted services All session content and technique / strategies are evidence-based and ● draw upon vetted resources
Psychoeducation & Intro to CBT Language
Cognitive Triad and Challenging Automatic Thoughts
Expansion of Groups 2017 - 2019 Implementation of Five Evidence-Based Groups Using CBT: Group Therapy for Anxiety ● Grades 9/10 ○ Grades 11/12 ○ Group Therapy for Depression ● Grades 9/10 ○ Grades 11/12 ○ Mixed Internalizing Group ● Grades 9-10 ○
Selected Data - 18-19 Mixed Internalizing Group 67% of participants ● showed improved scores on the PHQ-9 when group terminated On average, ● participants reported a 38% reduction in symptom presentation at termination Show-rate for group ● was approximately 84%
Intervention/Treatment Planning - Tier III Intervention plans have been implemented for approximately 5% of the student population since the 16-17 school year. Intervention plans consist of: Documentation of the presenting problem ● An articulated treatment plan using evidence-based services and supports to directly ● address the presenting problem A data collection plan that outline the frequency of data collection and the type of data to ● be collected related to the presenting problem Use of intervention plans has supported: Measurement of individual student growth after the start of services ● Assessment of the efficacy of implemented services and supports ● Self-reflection and adjustment to practice ● Accountability for individual staff members and the larger CSMHS ● 75
Intervention / Treatment Planning ID PRESENTING PROBLEM PROGRESS MONITORING BASELINE DATA COLLECTION ADJUSTMENT TO IMPLEMENTATION OF PRACTICE EBP PROGRESS MONITORING ADJUSTMENT TO PRACTICE TERMINATION OF EBP OUTCOME DATA COLLECTION
Intervention Plan / Treatment Planning Tool
Overview of BRYT Model Academic Co Ac Coord rdinati tion Cl Clinical Car Care Staff, , Ser ervices, , Space, , Students ts Intentional clinical support ● Academic support ● tailored to students’ 1. 1. Staff: : 1.0 FTE clin inic icia ian (school (tutoring) presenting problems ● Communication/ counselor, adjustment counselor, ● On-demand supports negotiation with or social worker); 1.0 FTE ● Crisis intervention (when teachers acad adem emic ic coord rdin inat ator r (teacher or Teacher support ● needed) classroom aide/tutor) 2. 2. Spac ace: : dedicated, private space in school; near an exit; academic Family Engagement Fam Car Care Co Coordination and therapeutic space; accessibility of private meeting Frequent, culturally- ● ● Communication/ space appropriate communication collaboration with in-school with parents 3. 3. Ser ervi vices: 4 domains: academic and out-of-school service ● Sharing progress/needs coordination, clinical care, family providers Offering support & ● engagement, care coordination ● Connection to outside learning/leadership 4. 4. Students ts: program cap; priority service providers as needed opportunities population The Brookline Center for Community Mental Health (2019)
Our data related to advocacy, implementation, & sustainability 2018-19 The most common diagnoses serviced through the Bridge program during the 2018-19 school year were anxiety and mood disorders. Perry Presenter Vinny Viewer Molly Maker Casey Creator
Almost half of the students serviced in Bridge during the 2018-19 school year were not receiving therapeutic services outside of school for a variety of reasons before referral to the program. This further makes the case for the importance of making student support available in school.
These data in the adjacent chart reflect program-wide admission and termination symptom presentation and school functioning as generated through the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). Hodges, K. (1999). Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS)
Sustainability Student Weeks in Bridge $ District Saved w/o Home Hospital Tutoring Student 1 29 $6,960 Student 2 29 $6,960 What type of data did we collect to Student 3 12 $2,880 Student 4 6 $1,440 make the case for Bridge continuing Student 5 17 $4,080 past year 1? Student 6 26 $6,240 Student 7 13 $3,120 ● Attendance - days and blocks Student 8 8 $1,920 ● Psychosocial data Student 9 14 $3,360 ● # of weeks in the program by student Student 10 4 $960 ● # referrals and program students Student 11 10 $2,400 Student 12 9 $2,160 ● Students tracked to drop out and Student 13 9 $2,160 prevented Student 14 12 $2,880 ● Grades and credit attainment Student 15 8 $1,920 ● Program graduates Student 16 19 $4,560 ● Home-hospital tutoring* prevention Total: $54,000 ● Qualitative data from parent/student/staff observations *HHT: $240 per week per student paid by the district if student is unable to attend school due to medical/mental health reasons (over 14 days)
Progress Monitoring and System Evaluation In addition to being used to identify students who may require services, psychosocial data is also used to: Gauge the efficacy of mental health services and supports ● Monitor the progress of individual students receiving services ● Accountability measure for service providers ●
Activity In small groups, discuss the following questions: ● How do we know when our therapeutic interventions are working? Not working? ● What data do we typically use to assess the efficacy of our interventions? ● How often are qualitative data or secondary / tertiary outcomes used to evaluate the impact of SMH staff?
What is Progress Monitoring? “Progress monitoring is used to assess students’ academic performance , to quantify a student rate of improvement or responsiveness to instruction, and to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. Progress monitoring can be implemented with individual students or an entire class. In progress monitoring, attention should focus on fidelity of implementation and selection of evidence-based tools, with consideration for cultural and linguistic responsiveness and recognition of student strengths.” -Center on Response to Intervention (RtI)
Progress Monitoring: A Research-driven Approach “Although monitoring of treatment response is standard practice for many medical conditions, practitioners in mental health treatments, and substance abuse treatment in particular, have been slow to adopt these practices. Progress monitoring (PM), consisting of measurement and feedback, has the potential to significantly improve treatment outcomes.” -Goodman, McKay, & DePhilippis (2013) “Research shows that when both therapists and clients receive feedback on progress, clients tend to have better outcomes.” -Lambert, et al. (2002)
The Importance of Progress Monitoring Gauge the efficacy of the therapeutic approach - Determine what is ● working and what is not Adjustment to practice - Change the treatment / intervention plan if ● the student is not responding to the therapeutic approach Improves: ● Student engagement in services ○ Quality of services ○ Consistency of therapy sessions ○ SMH staff self-assessment ○
Measure Twice, Cut Once... What specific problem am I hoping to help the student with? Does my therapeutic approach / intervention match the needs of the student? If the student is making progress, what will change? What tools exist to measure this change? How often should I measure this change? Are there multiple changes that I can measure? How will this data inform my practice?
What Are We Measuring? Symptom presentation ● Emotional regulation ● Specific behaviors ● Engagement ● Self-concept ● Overall functioning ● Consider multiple measures of progress to gain a more complete picture of the impact of the intervention.
Methods for Conducting Progress Monitoring Embedding progress monitoring ● into individual and group therapy sessions Leveraging observations from ● parents and staff Collecting wide-scale baseline data ● using universal mental health screening
Progress monitoring intervals of two weeks (GAD-7, PHQ-9, and SDQ subscales) ● Graphical history of the student’s response to treatment ●
Post-Group Data/Group Evaluation Average GAD-7 score pre-group: 15.22 Average GAD-7 score post-group: 8.42 Indicates ~7 point average decrease on the GAD-7 (mild anxiety)
Tier III Mental Health Services and Supports Academic, behavioral, and social emotional data were collected throughout the year to monitor students’ progress relevant to the intervention plans created. Of the students tracked: Academic Outcomes: ● 91.1% of students improved or maintained their level of academic performance ○ 51.3% of students improved their level of academic performance ○ Social Emotional Outcomes: ● 94.2% of students improved or maintained from a social emotional standpoint ○ 73.0% of students improved from a social emotional standpoint ○ Behavioral Outcomes: ● 88.0% of students improved or maintained behaviorally ○ 68.7% of students improved behaviorally ○
What data do we typically use to evaluate the effectiveness of SMH staff?
Suggested Professional Practice Goal A total of 5% of each SMH staff member’s caseload will be tracked using intervention plans. By December 15, 80% of the students who will be tracked with intervention plans will be identified using psychosocial data from the district-level screening program, behavioral and academic data, referrals from staff and parents, and direct observation of and contact with students from each caseload. The remaining 20% of students will be identified no later than February 1. Intervention plans will include a description of the presenting issue that will be the focus of the intervention plan, an evidence-based intervention that directly addresses the identified presenting problem, baseline and progress data that directly correlate to the presenting problem, and a timeline for delivery of the intervention and the progress monitoring. SMH staff will report out on progress regarding these students by March 15 and May 30. Interventions will be adjusted throughout the year based on progress monitoring data to ensure students are receiving the most appropriate and effective services.
Psychosocial Progress Monitoring and Evaluation I-B-1 - Variety of Assessment Methods - Uses a variety of informal and formal assessments methods, including common interim assessments, to measure students’ learning, growth, and progress toward achieving state/local standards. I-B-2 - Adjustments to Practice - Analyzes results from a variety of assessments to determine progress toward intended outcomes and uses these findings to adjust practice and identify and/or implement differentiated interventions and enhancements for students. I-C-1 - Analysis and Conclusions - Draws appropriate conclusions from a thorough analysis of a wide range of assessment data to inform instructional decisions and improve student learning. I-C-3. - Sharing Conclusions With Students - Based on assessment data, provides descriptive feedback to students, engages them in constructive conversation, and seeks feedback that focuses on how students can improve their performance. IV-A-1 - Reflective Practice - Regularly reflects on the effectiveness of lessons, units, and interactions with students, both individually and with colleagues, and uses insights gained to improve practice and student learning.
Recommend
More recommend
