Recent Legal Decisions Related to Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA)

1. Recent Legal Decisions Related to Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) Heidi von Ravensberg, J.D. (hvr@uoregon.edu) Tary Tobin, Ph.D. (ttobin@uoregon.edu) University of Oregon NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

2. Use of functional behavioral assessments in ways that help prevent and avoid legal troubles • Review of Recent Legal Decisions on FBA • Review of Recent Advances in Use of FBA as Reported in Education/Psychology Journals • Comparison of Results from the Searches NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

3. Focus on: • Factors related to schools being drawn into lawsuits • Characteristics of cases won (and lost) • Distinctions between "best practice" and legal requirements • Tips on Preventing Lawsuits • Practices, Records, and Other Evidence to Defend Against a Lawsuit NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

4. We wanted to see what federal courts were saying about FBA with respect to: • Identifying students’ disabilities and related special education needs -- as indicated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) • Whether an FBA was conducted • Outcomes on the FBA rulings NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

5. Federal legal decisions in lawsuits related to functional behavioral assessments • Used the Westlaw "all federal cases" database • From 8/13/2011-8/13/2013 • Search: "functional behavioral assessment" or FBA and IDEA NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

6. Most cases arose in NY with 12 other states represented: AL, AZ, DE, IL, IN, KS, MA, ME, MO, PA, RI, TX NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

7. Results • 27 cases dropped for not meeting criteria • 30 cases are U.S. District Court • 7 cases are U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals: 2ndCir (NY, 3) 3rd Cir. (PA, 1) 5thCir. (TX, 2) 8thCir. (NE, 1) NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

8. Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria: • Decision must contain a ruling on an FBA issue • The ruling on the FBA was the final adjudication • Did not include New York because it has unusual state regulations for FBA compared to federal regulations and other states. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

9. Diagnoses/Classifications • Autism – most common • Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) • Emotionally Disturbed (ED) • Down Syndrome • Many had multiple disabilities NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

10. 8 factors related to schools being drawn into lawsuits • Student has autism and/or multiple disabilities • Student has deficits in communication, social skills and/or academics • Student’s problem behavior is ongoing, unresolved and interferes with academics or others • Parent disputes school’s disability diagnoses and/or classification(s) NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

11. Parent and school dispute best way to meet student’s needs • Parent perceives child not making academic progress • School does not conduct an FBA • The FBA conducted did not stop the problem behavior or lead to better grades NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

12. Characteristics and Examples of Cases Won (and Lost) NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

13. For Ruling in Favor of Parent • School did not conduct an FBA • Student’s interfering behaviors went unresolved despite efforts of school • Student’s grades suffered • Parent wanted an FBA NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

14. Examples of Cases with Ruling in Favor of Parent NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

15. Case Highlights No FBA Conducted / Outcome in Favor of Parents Bd. of Ed. of Evanston-Skokie Community Consol. Sch. Dist. 65 v. Risen, 2013 WL 3224439 (N.D. Ill.)(U.S. Dist. Ct. Ill., 2013): Male, 9-year-old, 2nd grader, Born prematurely; mild delays in articulation abilities; gross motor delays; educational delays in socialization, play, and self-care Issue: Dispute focused on the scope of information that school district should consider in assessing child's behavior. School’s Position: Instead of considering reports based on student’s behavior at prior schools, it intended to wait and observe his behavior once he was in its classroom. Held: Contrary to the School District's argument, there was ample pre-existing evidence that student’s behavior would impede his learning or the learning of others. Therefore, the School District failed to perform a proper FBA when it concluded in its IEP that student’s behavior did not impede his learning or the learning of others, despite his long history of behavior problems at other schools. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

16. No FBA Conducted / Outcome in Favor of Parents Coleman v. Pottstown Sch. Dist., 2012 WL 568707 (E.D. Pa., Feb. 22, 2012) (U.S. Dist. Ct., Pa., 2012): Male, 18-year-old, LD from TBI; at age 8 was hit in the head with a lead pipe Parent’s Position: The Court should consider certain records because they are relevant and were previously unavailable to parents. Parents said records showed student had significant deficiencies and emotional difficulties that tend to show that the school district erroneously failed to conduct an FBA, train school personnel, and provide sufficient psychological therapy and counseling services. Held: Granted parents right to supplement the record with the school district’s behavior and discipline records. They provided information that student was generally off task, engaged in excessive talking, interrupted teachers, had attention issues, refused to do work, was disruptive and disrespectful to teachers, slept in class, and refused to cooperate. Despite school district’s insistence that these records were irrelevant, parents didn’t have access to them before the hearing, nor could they refer to them during their testimony because they did not have personal knowledge of all of the behaviors occurring at school as opposed to at home. Furthermore, even though the school district insisted that the Hearing Officer was well aware that the Student engaged in all of these behaviors, it appears that the documentation of the types of behaviors student was engaging in at school went beyond the types of behaviors discussed in the hearing. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

17. For Ruling in Favor of School • FBA was conducted • Student’s interfering behaviors diminished or changed • Student made some academic progress • FBA was documented • FBA was basis of the Behavior Support Plan (BSP) • BSP was included in Individualized Education Program (IEP) • IEP identified interfering behaviors and gave strategies to address them NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

18. Examples of Cases with Ruling in Favor of School NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

19. Federal Case Highlights FBA Conducted / Outcome in Favor of School Districts R.C. v. Keller Indep. Sch. Dist., (U.S. Dist. Ct., Tex. 2013): Male, repeated 11th grade History of multiple diagnoses; ongoing dispute if ED or Asperger's Issue: Whether student’s IEP was appropriately individualized for him where parents disagreed with the conclusions of the “IEP team,” some of the content of the IEPs, or the eligibility category. Held: Yes. During the 5 years student attended school district, he had a number of evaluations performed, or funded, by district including Formal FBA. All evaluations employed various assessment tools and gathered information from variety of sources including student, his parents, teachers, evaluators, physicians, and psychologists, and tests that were conducted were recognized as valid and appropriate for evaluating student's disabilities and were performed by qualified personnel and according to instructions provided by tests’ creators. R.C. v. Keller Indep. School Dist., 2013 WL 3963985 (N.D. Tex., July 31, 2013). NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

20. FBA Conducted / Outcome in Favor of School Districts H.D. v. Central Bucks Sch. Dist. (U.S. Dist. Ct., Pa. 2012): Male, 4th grade ADHD Issue: Whether, among other things, school district’s FBA denied student FAPE. Held: No. Student's IEP offered FAPE. The District made extraordinary efforts to shape an education program to allow student to progress in both his academic and behavioral performance. Revisions to his IEP were made to reflect the observations and data showing which interventions were and were not succeeding, with unsuccessful interventions and supports removed and successful ones retained. An FBA by a board certified associate behavioral analyst was conducted and incorporated into the IEPs. Although these revisions led to academic progress, the various behavioral interventions reasonably available were not producing lasting improvement in student’s serious behavior problems or assisting him in developing appropriate social skills. The IEP's SDI, behavior plan, and placement of student in itinerant emotional support provided a reasonable next step in maintaining his academic progress.HD v. Central Bucks School Dist., 902 F.Supp.2d 614 (E.D. Pa., Sept. 28, 2012). NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

21. Recent “Best Practice” Use of FBA as Reported in Education/Psychology Journals NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

22. First, what is FBA? NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

23. “Functional behavioral assessment is a process of identifying specific environmental factors that have an influence on when a particular behavior will occur. . . .usedto plan positive ways to prevent or manage behavior problems” (Tobin, 2005, p. 3, http://pages.uoregon.edu/ttobin/Tobin-par-3.pdf). NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

24. Different Ways of Doing FBA • Experimental: Functional Analysis • Experimenter compares rates of problem behavior when followed by different types of reinforcers, such as attention, tangible, escape, or automatic (Iwata, Dorsey, Slifer, Bauman, & Richman, 1982, 1994) • May produce false positives if not based on reinforcers from natural environment (Rooker, Iwata, Harper, Fahmie, & Camp, 2011) NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

25. Descriptive: “In most educational settings, information for FBAs is gathered using . . . interviewswith parents, teachers, and children . . . and observation worksheets that reflect a running narrative of antecedents, behaviors and consequences (ABCs) (Bijou et al. 1968) in natural settings” (Alter, Conroy, Mancil, & Haydon, 2008, p.201). NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

26. Emphasis on Teacher Training / Teachers Involved • Importance of teachertraining (Bambara, Goh, Kern, & Caskie, 2012; Debnam, Pas & Bradshaw, 2012; Duncan, Dufreme, Sterling, & Tingstrom, 2013; Kunnavatana, Bloom, Samaha, & Dayton, 2013; Massé, Couture, Levesque, & Bigén, 2013; Pence, St. Peter, & Giles, 2014; Stoiber & Gettinger, 2011) • Gardner, Spencer, Boelter, DuBard, & Jennett (2012) found “sufficient evidence to support the involvement of teachersand parentsin the BFA [Brief Functional Assessment] procedures” (p. 327). NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

27. Loman & Horner (2014) trained school professionals other than teachers (e.g., counselors, administrators, specialists) to conduct a basic FBA using a manual that is available online: • http://pbis.org/common/pbisresources/publications/TrainerManual.pdf NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

28. Goh & Bambara (2012): “Team decision makingduring intervention planning yielded statistically significantly larger effect sizes when compared to intervention studies where team decision making was absent during intervention planning” (p. 280). • Reports of specific cases detailing the use of FBA to plan and implement successful BSP, for example: NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

29. Janney, Umbreit, Ferro, Liaupsin, & Lane (2013) found that “a function-matched extinction procedure is a critical component in function-based intervention” (p. 120). In this study, extinction included reducing teacher attention to disruptive behavior. • Materials used included: Functional Assessment and Motivation Interview/Questionnaire (Janney, 2008), Function Matrix (Umbreit, Ferro, Liaupsin, & Lane, 2007), and Decision Model (Umbreit et al., 2007). NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

30. Reeves, L. M., Umbreit, J., Ferro, J. B., & Liaupsin, C. J. (2013). Function-based intervention to support the inclusion of students with autism. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 48, 379-391. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

31. Whitford, Liaupsin, Umbreit, & Ferro (2013) • High school student with learning disabilities and ADHD • Problem behavior in 3 classrooms addressed! • Team included parent, 3 general education teachers, special education teacher, and researcher. • A comprehensive intervention included changes in teachers’ behaviors -- increased use of praise, escape-extinction, and: • “Evan’s teachers agreed to walk amongst the students during instructional periods and student independent work time to ensure that all students, including Evan, remained on-task” (p. 157). NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

32. Catagnus, R. M., & Hantula, D. A. (2011). The Virtual Individual Education Plan (IEP) Team: Using online collaboration to develop a behavior intervention plan. International Journal of e- Collaboration, 7(1), 30-46. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

33. A decision system for students requiring more intensive and individualized supports for academic, social, or mental health services. ISIS-SWIS

34. Guiding Questions • Are we implementing Carly’s plan? • What data, measures, and documents do we have readily available? • Who are the members of Carly’s team? • What questions do we have regarding the progress of the plan? • What data might we look at next? Student File

35. Report Type: Measure • Guiding Questions • How is the student performing in relation to the outcome goal? • What are the trends, peaks and patterns? • What are the next steps? • How do these data compare to fidelity and other outcome data?

36. A Comparison of the Legal and Education/Psychology Study Results NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

37. Distinctions between "best practice" and legal requirements NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

38. Federal IDEA Legal Requirements • Fail to explain the purpose of the FBA • Fail to define FBA • Fail to provide a standard for how schools are to conduct FBAs • Fails to say FBA is foundational to a BSP • School must conduct FBA for certain disciplinary removals • School must provide PBIS but FBA not specifically mentioned NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

39. Best Practices • Properly identify students’ disabilities and needs • Conduct FBA when student’s behaviors put him/her at risk for poor academic performance or discipline • Document, document, document! • Make use of current standards and practices as provided by the PBIS Center www.pbis.org NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

40. Helpful Practices, Records, and Other Evidence to Prevent or Defend Against a Lawsuit • Use the Individual Student Information System (ISIS) and the School Wide Information System (SWIS) to document (see www.pbisapps.org) • Get information about ISIS/SWIS ready, certified, etc. at www.pbisapps.org • Listen to the ISIS/SWIS videos at https://www.pbisapps.org/Resources/Pages/ISIS-SWIS-Introduction.aspx NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

41. Summary • Lawsuits in which FBA was an issue often involved students with autism, ADHD, and/or multiple disabilities – and problems in school. • If school has records showing it used an FBA as the basis for a Behavior Support Plan, the outcome of a lawsuit is likely to be in favor of the school. • “Best Practice” FBAs may reduce problem behaviors and prevent lawsuits. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

42. COMMENTS? QUESTIONS?

43. “Best Practices” in Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA): Recommended Reading Alter, P. J., Conroy, M. A., Mancil, G. R., & Haydon, T. (2008). A comparison of functional behavior assessment methodologies with young children: Descriptive methods and functional analysis. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17, 200-219. Bambara, L. M., Goh, A., Kern, L., & Caskie, G. (2012). Perceived barriers and enablers to implementing individualized positive behavior interventions and supports in school settings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, 228-240. Bijou, S. W., Peterson, R. F., Ault, M. H. (1968). A method to integrate descriptive and experimental field studies at the level of data and empirical concepts. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 175–191. Borgmeier, C., & Horner, R. H. (2006). An evaluation of the predictive validity of confidence ratings in identifying accurate functional behavioral assessment hypothesis statements. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8, 100–105. Catagnus, R. M., & Hantula, D. A. (2011). The Virtual Individual Education Plan (IEP) Team: Using online collaboration to develop a behavior intervention plan. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 7(1), 30-46. Debnam, K. J., Pas, E. T., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2012). Secondary and tertiary support systems in schools implementing school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports: A preliminary descriptive analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, 142-152. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

44. Dunlap, G., Iovannone, R., Kincaid, D., Wilson, K., Christiansen, K., Strain, P., & English, C. (2010). Prevent Teach Reinforce--The school-based model of individualized positive behavior support. Baltimore: Brookes Publishing Co. Falcomata, T. S., Muething, C. S., Gainey, S., Hoffman, K., & Fragale, C. (2013). Further evaluations of functional communication training and chained schedules of reinforcement to treat multiple functions of challenging behavior. Behavior Modification, 37, 723-746. Fienup, D. M., Luiselli, J. K., Joy, M., Smyth, D., & Stein, R. (2013). Functional assessment and intervention for organizational behavior change: Improving timeliness of staff meetings at a human service organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 33, 252-264. Gardner, A. W., Spencer, T. D., Boelter, E. W., DuBard, M., & Jennett, H. K. (2012). A systematic review of brief functional analysis methodology with typically developing children. Education and Treatment of Children, 35, 313-332. Gerardo, M. (2010). No need to count to ten: Advocating for the early implementation of the functional behavioural assessment in addressing challenging behaviours. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 15(1), 15-22. doi: 10.1080/13632750903512373 Goh, A. E., & Bambara, L. M. (2012). Individualized positive behavior support in school settings: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education,33, 271-286. Johnston, S. S., & O’Neill R. E. (2001). Searching for effectiveness and efficiency in conductingfunctional assessments: A review and proposed process for teachers and other practitioners. Focus on Autism & Other Developmental Disabilities, 16, 205–215. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

45. Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A., & McCord, B. E. (2003). Functional analysis of problem behavior : A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 147-185. Herman, K. C., Tiley-Tillman, C., & Reinke, W. M. (2012). The role of assessment in a prevention science framework. School Psychology Review, 41, 306-314. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 2004, 11 Stat. 37 U.S.C. Section 1401. [See http://idea.ed.gov/ ] Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1982). Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 2, 3-20. Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1994). Toward a functional analysis of self injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 197–209. Janney, D. M. (2008). Functional Assessment and Motivation Interview/Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Arizona, Tucson. [Contact djanney@towson.edu ] Janney, D. M., Ubreit, J., Ferro, J. B., Liaupsin, C. J., & Lane, K. L. (2013). The effect of the extinction procedure in function-based intervention. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,15, 113-123. Kearney, C. A., & Graczyk, P. (2014). A response to intervention model to promote school attendance and decrease school absenteeism. Child Youth Care Forum, 43, 1-25. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

46. Kowlowski, A. M., & Matson, J. L. (2012). Interview and observation methods in functional assessment. In J. L. Matson (Ed.), Functional Assessment for Challenging Behaviors (pp. 105-124, Chapter 7), Autism and Child Psychopathology Series. Philadelphia, PA:Springer Science + Business Media, LLC. Kunnavatana, S. S., Bloom, S. E., Smaha, A. L., & Dayton, E. (2013). Training teachers to conduct trial-based functional analysis. Behavior Modification, 37, 707-722. Lanovaz, M. J., Argumedes, M., Roy, D., Duquette, J. R., & Watkins, N. (2013). Using ABC narrative recording to identify the function of problem behavior: A pilot study. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 2734-2742. Loman, S. L., & Horner, R. H. (2014). Examining the efficacy of a basic functional behavioral assessment training package for school personnel. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16, 18-30. Lydon, S., Healy, O., O'Reilly, M., & McCoy, A. (2013). A systematic review and evaluation of response redirection as a treatment for challenging behavior in individuals with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 3148-3158. Massé, L., Couture, C., Levesque, V., & Bigén, J. (2013). Impact of a school consulting programme aimed at helping teachers intergrate students with behavioural difficulties into secondary school: Actors' points of view. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 18, 327-343. Miller, F. G., & Lee, D. L. (2013). Do functional behavioral assessments improve intervention effectiveness for students diagnosed with ADHD? A single-subject meta-analysis. Journal of Behavioral Education, 22, 253-282. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

47. Nahgahgwon, K. N., Umbreit, J., Liaupsin, C. J., & Turton, A. M. (2010). Function-based planning for young children at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 33(4), 537-559. O’Neill, R. E., Albin, R. W., Storey, K., Horner, R. H., & Sprague, J. R. (2015). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior: A practical handbook, 3rd Ed.  Independence, KY: Cengage Learning. [Available NOW in a variety of formats (paperback, e-book, e-chapter, and rental) from Centgage Brain: http://www.cengagebrain.com/shop/en/US/storefront/US?cmd=CLHeaderSearch&fieldValue=O%27Neill ] Pence, S. T., St. Peter, C. C., & Giles, A. F. (2014). Teacher acquisition of functional analysis methods using pyramidal training. Journal of Behavioral Education, 23, 132-149. Reeves, L. M., Umbreit, J., Ferro, J. B., & Liaupsin, C. J. (2013). Function-based intervention to support the inclusion of students with autism. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 48, 379-391. Rooker, G. W., Iwata, B. A., Harper, J. M., Fahmie, T. A., & Camp, E. M. (2011). False-positive tangible outcomes of functional analyses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 737-745. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

48. Spear, C. F., Strickland-Cohen, M. K., Romer, N., & Albin, R. W. (2013). An examination of social validity within single-case research with students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 34, 357-370. Stoiber, K. C., & Gettinger, M. (2011). Functional assessment and positive support strategies for promoting resilience: Effects on teachers and high-risk children. Psychology in the Schools, 48, 686-706. Thodoridou, Z., & Koutsoklenis, A. (2013). Functional behavioral assessment for a boy with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 39(1), 54-64. Tobin, T. J. (2005). Parents’ guide to functional assessment, 3rd Ed.University of Oregon, College of Education, Educational and Community Supports, Eugene. Retrieved from http://uoregon.edu/~ttobin/Tobin-par-3.pdf Touchette, P. E., MacDonald, R. F., & Langer, S. N. (1985). A scatter plot for identifying stimulus controlof problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 343–351. Trahan, M. A., & Worsdell, A. S. (2011). Effectiveness of an instructional DVD in training college students to implement functional analyses. Behavioral Interventions, 26, 85-102. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR

49. Umbreit, J., Ferro, J., Liaupsin, C., & Lane, K. (2007). Functional behavioral assessment and function-based intervention: An effective, practical approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Whitford, D. K., Liaupsin, C. J., Umbreit, J., & Ferro, J. B. (2013). Implementation of a single comprehensive function-based intervention across multiple classrooms for a high school student. Education and Treatment of Children, 36, 147-167. Zirkel, P. A. (2011, Fall). Case law for functional behavioral assessments and behavior intervention plans: An empirical analysis. Seattle University Law Review, 35 (175). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2060&context=sulr Zirkel, P. A. (2013). Special education hearing officers: Balance and bias. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 24, 67-74. NWPBIS Conference, Portland, OR