Training School-Based Practitioners to Collect Intervention Integrity Data

Abstract

School-based practitioners are often overwhelmed at the idea of collecting and analyzing intervention integrity information. In order for the analysis of intervention integrity data to be feasible for busy staff, the system must support the systematic assessment of intervention integrity. In this article, we describe the process used by an intermediate service agency for the systematic assessment of intervention integrity, as well as the model used for planning and delivering professional learning to school-based practitioners in the area of intervention integrity. The model includes training and ongoing support in the areas of integrity data collection methods, data-based decision making for individuals and small groups, and effective consultation. Strengths and limitations of the model are also discussed.

Treatment Integrity of Interventions With Children in the Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions From 1999 to 2009

“…In efficacy studies, treatment integrity data permit the researcher to ensure that the interventions were implemented exactly as planned. In effectiveness studies, when initially successful interventions are studied in more diverse applied settings, treatment integrity data are essential to understanding what (a) elements of the interventions are essential to their effectiveness and (b) adaptations can be made to the interventions without sacrificing effectiveness (Brown & Rahn-Blakeslee, 2009). Conducting and publishing the results of high-quality efficacy and effectiveness trials, which include treatment integrity assessment, are necessary to provide practitioners with the evidence-based interventions statutes such as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 mandate them to implement.…”

From distal to proximal: routine educational data monitoring in school-based mental health

“…Unfortunately, few of the existing models for supporting outcome monitoring in practice were designed for use specifically by SBMH practitioners and no guidance is available to inform this process as it relates to educational data. Indeed, data-monitoring models that have been tested in schools have focused largely on treatment integrity within the context of specific treatment packages (e.g., Brown & Rahn-Blakeslee, 2009), limiting their applicability to the diverse range of youth that typically make up SBMH practitioner caseloads or the school-related problems with which they frequently present. There is great opportunity, therefore, for the field of SBMH to make significant advancements in methods of supporting providers to utilize educational outcomes during intervention in a manner consistent with the four evidence bases.…”

Intervention Integrity: New Paradigms and Applications

“…For example, efforts to increase the acceptability and feasibility of interventions and integrity measurement in time- and resource-limited school settings are often at odds with proper monitoring of intervention implementation (Evans, Schultz, & Serpell, 2008). Two articles in this special issue describe supports for families to facilitate the implementation of interventions (Swanger-Gagne, Garbacz, & Sheridan, 2009) and supports for school staff to monitor implementation integrity (Brown, & Rahn-Blakeslee, 2009). …”

“…In their article entitled, “Training school-based practitioners to collect intervention integrity data,” Brown and Rahn-Blakeslee (2009) described the Heartland Area Education Agency’s model of assessing intervention integrity, which includes providing professional development and supports to help school staff monitor intervention integrity and use these data when making educational decisions in an RTI framework. The article provides specific, practical information about the logistics and content of staff training and monitoring tools that can be broadly applied in school settings.…”