3/13 & 16/2015 New Facilitators Conference Calls
Please call in a few minutes before the scheduled time. It is very distracting when people keep signing on after the meeting has started.
800-542-6140 FridayPasscode 98765#, Monday Passcode 25255#
Host:Susan Zeiders / X Y / Host:Gina Ostroff-Welsh / YFrancine Baker / X / Tyler Hoffman (Early Intervention Specialist) / X / Colleen Penzone (NE IU 19) / Y
Lori Bauerline / Jodie Holmberg (IU9) / Ronna Rebo (IU 9) / Y
Donna Bobo-Carter (Elwyn Chester Seeds) / Y / Cindy Kniess(IU4) / Y / Linda Reichart((Hildebrandt LC)
Alicia Clark (Hildebrandt LC) / X / Deanna Lelii(Elwyn Child Develop) / Y / Kayle Richardson (Capital Area Head Start) / Y
Shannon Ellis (Elwyn Philadelphia) / Stacie Molar-Main (Centers Sch&Comm) / Stephanie Roy (Centers Sch&Comm)
Meghan von der Embse(EasterSeals SEPA / Y / Katie Martin (Hildebrandt LC) / Kristine Scarpaci (Seton Hill Child Services) / X
Paula Espinal (Playtime Daycare) / Beth Megdalia-Good(Berks IU) / Barbara Stephens (Bucks Co. IU) / Y
Jamie Gordon (Capital Area IU) / Y / Karen Medovitch (Midwestern IU4) / Amanda Winnor(WestmorelandCo IU) / X
Allison Haberman(Carbon Leigh IU) / Y / Francine Mills (Butler YMCA) / Kris Woody (Early Intervention Specialist) / X
Gen Harper (FultonCoCenterfor Children) / X / Kathy Morgan (Children’sVillageDoylestown) / Y
Laura Heckart (Hildebrandt LC) / Gloria Nwabueze (Lancaster Daycare) / Y
IF:Joan Horton / IF: LeAnne Lorenzo / X / IF: Julie Beamon
IF: Karen Ashcroft / IF:AnneMarieReager / IF: Caitlin Burns
SLT:Katie Bodnar / Y / SLT:DeVoka Gordon / Y / SLT:Aimee Newswanger / X Y
Julia Slater / X Y / Mary Montgomery / Y / SLT: Dina Stipetic
IF=Independent Facilitator, SLT=State Leadership Team Member (Eastern Region) (Central Region) (Western Region)
X=present during Friday call, Y= present during Monday call
Expected Participants / Topics for discussion / Notes from DiscussionAll provisional facilitators.
Interested independent facilitators.
Interested state leadership team members. / Poll--Identifying challenging behaviors—Definitions / Friday Poll results for Friday AM: 100% voted “Pretty much matches the definition used in our program.”
Monday Poll results: 100% voted “Pretty much matches the definition used in our program.”
Conversation: Noted that more experienced teachers pose the most interesting discussions. The “level” of behavioral stress expressed can be more or less stressed based on their teaching experience.
How do you in childcare centers identify what behaviors are “challenging” – definitely differs between teachers. Currently having them document and discuss what is developmentally appropriate vs. high expectations (unrealistic), taking staff back to the basics in what is appropriate behavior for those age groups, then supervisors follow up with observations, etc.
How people perceive the behavior can affect how soon they respond (“it’s just typical development so I won’t respond . . .).
**Just because the behavior is developmentally appropriate doesn’t mean we don’t want to respond to the behaviors directly. What is most essential is that we are continuously teaching. Our consistent intervention of all behavior (typical and otherwise) is implied in the behavior definition provided by the webinar.
Some other agencies use the BIR’s and analyze the BIR’s and follow up observations – really the focus on the frequency and then the amount that helps define when the behavior moves from “typical” to “un-typical”.
Also looking for patterns of when the behavior is happening will give us a good idea of where to start.
Poll--Behavior Data Sources—Which are being used? Questions about data sources? / Friday Response: Social/Emotional Screening Tools 3 (60%); BIR’s 4 (80%); TPOT 3 (60%), TPITOS 2 (40%); No tools – 1 (20%).
Monday Response: Social/Emotional Screening Tools 6 (60%); BIR’s 6 (60%); TPOT 5 (50%), TPITOS 2 (20 %); No tools – (0).
Conversation
Have a contracted Mental Health consultant to help, struggles getting “accurate” parent’s response to ASQ-SE, (Note: Reframing – parent’s view are very different than a classroom view) teachers do not currently fill out an ASQ-SE for children in the classroom. Follow up results are sent back to families and depending on the areas of concern, suggestions for the teacher and the parents are sent with resources. Conversations are not happening at this point.
If you screen, you must intervene. There are multiple ways to intervene.
One program uses Ages and Stages as well. Parents complete one, staff complete one, parents and teachers meet. We complete after 45 days of enrollment and after 45 days of transitioning to a new room. This program had a family who didn't want to fill out one but there is a significant delay and even the child's physician has stated so. When we completed we noticed and spoke with the family and now the family is working on obtaining services. I think it was the confirmation from the center and the physician - it was an infant as well.
One challenge noted of the BIR is that it focuses on the child's needs and not the child's interests or strengths. It also shines the spotlight primarily on the child and less a whole class and teacher reflection.
One small program (only 32 children) – multiple times the families express not seeing the same concerns at home and staff see the same children in the community and those negative behaviors are NOT in the community either. Staff recognize what is different in the classroom than at home/community.
Conversation on use of TPOT/TPITOS and staff reactions (i.e. Don’t put this “blame” on me – it’s the kid!)
One program just starting to kick up the enrichment expectations on staff, so their entire paradigm is switching. Relationships between center leaders and staff impacting the behaviors of the children. **The importance of understanding what is going on throughout the whole center when developing/prioritizing supports for that staff person. Sometimes spending more time on the TPOT and those teaching skills will be more beneficial then developing behavior plans.
What tools are we using?
One program uses the Battelle and observations on behaviors.
One is trying a few different things – not screening the whole population, but if they have concerns prior to full evaluation, they are using the Ages/Stages SE.
Another uses Ages/Stages for all students coming in (not S/E) and every year, they re-issue it prior to a child entering a new classroom. Also the DAEYC 2 and the Battelle. Parents complete it and teachers receive and score (teacher’s do not complete it at this point).
How do you use the screening results?
We use it to get some background along with a family questionnaire and they often get more information from the family questionnaire than the screening.
One program admitted they don’t look at the results but feels they should start because it all plays together. This is the point where it can be exciting and you can see patterns and begin to form intervention ideas paying attention to the data. There can so often be a discrepancy between what is occurring at home vs. what is occurring in the classroom. The data can help with those discrepancies.
Using the data as a means as where to channel our efforts to better refine the use of our time and resources.
The program they work with uses Ages/Stages and are now focusing on the TPOT. Using IMFTS consultant to help assess as well and utilizing referrals to PCIT agency for families.
Crisis Management Plans vs. Behavior Plans
- Plan for program vs. plan for child
- Both require adult knowledge and skills
- Role of CLT if processes are not in place
Taking the time and understanding is teaching/training the staff – when we are under stress we go back to what we know best, not what we learned last.
If this crisis management policy/procedures are not in place, this is an important role of the Core Leadership Team. They do not have the power to create the policy/procedure, but have the responsibility to influence policy.
What are your experiences in supporting this policy development through your CLT?
-Leadership of this center has been very receptive to guidance in policy development. Though staff are initially resistant, when they see success, they have responded very well and embraced the new strategies slowly. If you can get someone to do something differently, then it will become self-reinforcing because it does work differently. Including the CLT is a key piece in staff buy in to implementing these strategies.
Does your program have processes and plans for challenging behavior? Comments? Questions?
One program has a plan, all are trained in Safety Care for crisis situations. **This is important, but when do you use that, what do you do when you don’t use that, how to prevent the need for this response . . .
This information and expectations are included in their Safety Care instruction and how and when staff should/can use this response.
How does this compare to a behavior plan for a child?
Safety care is to be used prior to developing a behavior plan. If the team has enough info. They will call a meeting to assess if they are ready to develop a behavior plan.
** What is Safety Care?
-This is run by QBS that trains you how to effectively work with behaviors in the classroom. Including de-escalation, it is a 3-day, 8-hour training, and the 3rd day is for young children. It must be completed every year. This does include on how to appropriately restrain a child.
One program learned about safety net plans at the coaches training 2015 – these are not dependent on diagnosis, but a plan that all staff have a copy of so they know what to do when an instance arises.
Main takeaway – a child’s individualized behavior plan is about what does this child need to be taught and reinforced for doing. The crisis management plan/program plan – what do we as an agency/center do when staff encounter children with challenging behaviors.
Poll—Accessing help with challenging behaviors
- If you have a process to request help, is it effective? If not, role of CLT if revising it
- If you don’t have a process, role of CLT in developing one
- Any additional people needed on CLT when addressing tier 3?
Have regular consultation – 2(33.3%); Have a process to request help from a MH Professional but not regular 2 (33.3%); We have a process to request help from our program administration 1 (16.6%) We have a process for referral 3 (50%); Teachers work together, no formal process 3 (50%).
Monday Poll Results:
Have regular consultation – 1(8.33%); Have a process to request help from a MH Professional but not regular 3 (25%); We have a process to request help from our program administration 5 (41.6%) We have a process for referral 11 (91.6%); Teachers work together, no formal process 0 (0%).
Head Start programs are contracting with outside providers (they are mandated).
What works well and what would be really helpful?
Often times in early work they help centers write clear policies and procedures. Key piece added, “If we tried x, y, and z, at what point do we need to know how to access additional support from community partners?”. A lot of centers don’t know how to navigate those avenues of support – the multiple systems of care are tricky.
Re-stressed the importance of having administrators being involved on the CLT.
One program used a flow chart describing their process to help guide staff.
CLT influence with administrator has made a huge difference in their overall implementation. Broader representation of personnel helps you make better policies and procedures and bringing more people ready to implement these procedures.
Question: Have you received support from STARS ECMH? Some were not aware of this service.
**ECMH is a national model that provides consultation to ECE providers with children exhibiting challenging behavior. In PA if you are a STAR 3 or 4 center, you can access ECMH for a child with challenging behavior. Parents must give permission and it has to be focused on a particular child – it is provided to the ECE program at no cost as a state service provided to them. Then, for programs who have consistent requests, they can choose between individual consultation or whole staff training on Tier one training in the Pyramid Model. For more information, check the PA Key website for more information at:
One program reported engaging with the PA Key ECMH program for a child who did not qualify for IU services and felt they were incredibly helpful.
PCIT is another nationally recognized process and PA has been training this across the state. This is a formal process for the parent and the child together. Find these opportunities within your county and how to be able to make referrals for children/families who may need these higher level supports.
You need a process! Teachers should not be left to struggle on their own! What do we need to do to put things in place and help staff support children?
Supporting coaches to be able to support staff in creating and carrying out behavior plans / Are you pulling others into the behavior support of staff? How are you supporting coaches in supporting staff? All literature describes a team process, though we know that is not the regular process. We strongly advocate that those having to implement the plan are part of creating the plan. How often have you heard “This isn’t working anymore?” when they have actually stopped implementing the plan. The importance of the consistency of the strategy before you can adjust the strategies. The importance of the data that tells us if we are doing what we think we are doing and if we are, is it making the difference we wanted? How are we verifying we are providing the support the staff need to implement the plan?
One program has several Itinerant/consult-support teachers going into community programs that have teachers that are very resistant to what they are trying to do. Support gives ideas, teacher’s come back saying they “can’t” do this. Can'
In the absence of feedback we will always continue to do what was always done.
Did the webinar(s) provide you with useful information? / Yes, I learned something I didn’t know before. / I am not sure / No, I already knew everything covered / No, I think the additional information and resources confused me
Friday / 6 (85.7%) / 1 (14.2%) / 0 / 0
Monday / 9(90%) / 0 / 1(10%) / 0
Was the conference call a good use of your time? / Yes, I learned more about applications of principles / Yes, I got my questions answered / Somewhat, but I still have questions / No, I didn’t learn anything beyond what was in the webinar.
Friday / 4 (57.1%) / 3 (47.8%) / 1 (14.2%) / 0
Monday / 6 (66.6%) / 5 (55.5%) / 2(22.2%) / 0
Suggestions for Improvement:
Friday:
Monday: