Horner and Sugai provide lessons learned from their work with disseminating the Positive Behavioral Interventions and Support (PBIS) model. While PBIS represents an empirical school-wide approach for maladaptive student behaviors, the model appears to have limitations regarding sociocultural values and behavioral data collection practices. The current paper provides an overview of three identified areas for improvement and outlines how administrators using PBIS can incorporate acceptance and mindfulness-based intervention procedures to address the discussed limitations.Keywords Positive behavioral interventions and supports . Behavior analysis . Acceptance . Mindfulness According to Horner and Sugai (2015), Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a framework for delivering sociocultural and behavioral supports to improve a broad range of outcomes for students. PBIS includes a hierarchical threetiered system that differentiates students based on educational and behavioral support needs. Since its development in the 1980s and 1990s, there has been significant controversy regarding the similarities and theoretical differences between PBIS and the supported underlying foundation of applied behavior analysis (e.g., Johnston et al. 2006;Tincani 2007;Weiss et al. 2010). On the surface, PBIS appears to be an effective evidence-based practice for schools and is currently being used in 21,000 schools across the USA. While there is no question that PBIS is a remarkable example of widespread dissemination, the extent to which the PBIS zeitgeist is successful at developing students' mental health repertories across tier's remains open for discussion. Further, critical inquiry exploring the sociocultural values and interests within the PBIS model are needed (e.g., Johnston et al. 2006). Therefore, the purpose of the current paper is to analyze the sociocultural aspects regarding mental health disparities and distinctions within the PBIS model.Upon examination of Horner and Sugai's Blessons learned, three broad concerns arise. First is the nature of a top-down systematic approach. Within PBIS, school administrators select and identify all cultural practices and behavioral expectations to be reinforced in school (e.g., be respectful, be responsible, be safe). Administrators also select behaviors to coincide with the broader culture of the school, which may or may not necessarily represent the culture of the student body. For instance, prevalence reports on race and ethnicity suggest that minority students attending public schools in the USA represent 34 % of the student body (15.4 % Hispanic American, 12 % African-American; Aud et al. 2010). However, minority public school teachers represent just 17 % of educators (8 % African-American, 6 % Hispanic American; Dee 2004).Similarly, school administrators may be more likely to select behaviors associated with their own Eurocentric culture. Horner and Sugai argue that tier 1 focuses on school-wide proactive supports that are independent from documented stud...