Chapter 4 Solution Focused Intervention Process Overview Mississippi Bend AEA has adopted the Solution Focused Intervention Process (SFIP) to meet the needs of diverse learners within our schools. The SFIP attempts to identify and implement the best educational strategy or solution built on strengths to resolve the concern and to meet the needs of the learner. School Improvement and the Solution Focused Process All students are part of the same educational system. The general education school improvement process supports all students in our schools, including students who are exceeding or not meeting expectations. Regular screening assessments of all students provide valuable information in monitoring student progress. When data are collected on all students multiple times per year, identification of students who need further assessment and possibly supplemental or intensive instructional interventions is evident. The school improvement model used by Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency includes core instruction, supplemental instruction, and intensive instruction. Core Instruction Core instruction is provided to all students in a school which is aligned with the districts’ content standards and benchmarks. It is designed to teach all students at high levels of proficiency. A majority of students in a school should reach proficiency based on core instruction alone. If data indicate that core instruction is not sufficiently meeting the instructional needs of most students, improvement efforts must focus on studying and refining core instruction while continuing to analyze individual student performance. Changes may be needed in the area of curriculum, instruction, assessment, environment, and/or the system. Supplemental Instruction Supplemental instruction is provided, in addition to core instruction, to students who need additional assistance in order to reach proficiency. Students not meeting expectations may need some type of adaptation or modification of the core instructional program. These students are considered to be emerging in the skill area being measured. For students who are exceeding expectations, supplemental instruction may be provided at advanced levels of the core instruction. Supplemental instruction is provided to students in small group settings, matched to their learning needs.
Chapter 4 -1
Intensive Instruction Intensive instruction is provided, in addition to core and supplemental instruction, to students who need intensive instructional support in order to become proficient. Students who are not meeting expectations and may need highly differentiated instruction are considered for intensive instruction. These students are considered to have deficits in the skill area under consideration. There will be some students who need instruction that is significantly different due to their advanced learning needs. This instruction may be at advanced levels of the core or significantly adapted to provide extended learning opportunities. SOLUTION FOCUSED INTERVENTION PROCESS The child find process and subsequent intervention services provided in the Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency are known as the Solution Focused Intervention Process (SFIP). This process reflects a solution-focused, ecological, and systems approach to looking at learning and behavior in school settings. With this approach, we must carefully consider the behaviors of significant others in the student’s life and the wide range of environmental factors that may be related to the behaviors/skills shown by the target child. Only through a comprehensive view of the child can we begin to appreciate the interrelatedness and complexity of the factors governing an individual student’s performance. In a solution-focused and strength-based approach, it is assumed that human beings are competent, resilient, and capable of surviving despite the risk factors in their daily lives. Additionally, this child find system assumes that all students should be educated in the least restrictive environment (LRE). When concerns regarding a student’s progress are identified, initial efforts will attempt to identify student and system strengths and exceptions to problems in order to design interventions within general education. The Solution Focused Intervention Process involves students, parents, LEA staff, and Mississippi Bend AEA support staff collaborating in an ongoing search for solutions by clarifying student needs, focusing on student and system strengths, identifying exceptions to problems/issues, designing meaningful interventions, and monitoring student progress. The Solution Focused Intervention Process is a competency-based model consistent with the following assumptions: • • • •
Focusing on the positive, on solutions, and on present and future goals facilitates change in the desired direction. Students, parents, and teachers have the resources to resolve their concerns, and they are able to achieve solutions when they define their own goals. Solution-focused language drives the intervention planning process. Questions play a powerful role in solution-focused conversations. Change is constant. A small change in one part of a system is frequently all that is necessary to effect change in other parts of the system. Complex problems do not necessitate complex solutions.
Chapter 4 -2
• •
If an intervention works, do more of the same. If an intervention does not work, do something different. Solutions to current concerns develop from past successes. Exceptions, i.e., those times when the concerns or problems are not occurring, guide us to potential solutions.
Within the Solution Focused Intervention Process, intervention plans that build on student and system strengths are linked to goals that are generated by the student, parent(s) and staff. Evaluation and assessment activities are guided by student-specific questions. Clarification of student needs, strengths, and goals for the design of intervention plans will, as needed for each individual, encompass assessment of system, home, community, and individual-centered variables. Subsequent intervention plans may then address changes in any of these variables. Only after general education-based interventions have been exhausted or when the interventions exceed the capacity of general education, will special education be considered as a possible intervention. The Solution Focused Intervention Process has four identified levels: Initial Interventions (Level A), Collaborative Interventions (Levels B and C), and Full, Individual Evaluations (Level D). Data collection and progress monitoring occurs at all four levels of the Solution Focused Intervention Process. The use of solution-focused language is vital to the process. Examples of solution-focused language include questions that identify those times when the presenting concerns do not occur or are less intense, questions that encourage visualization of a future without the problem, solution-focused, and questions that solicit goal setting. Initial Interventions, at Level A, center on the interactions among the student, the parent(s), and the teacher(s) to find solutions. Collaborative Interventions, at Levels B and C, are designed to occur in general education. Mississippi Bend AEA support staff may be indirectly involved with students at Level B and directly involved with students at Level C. Full, Individual Evaluations, at Level D, encompass the activities that begin when special education is thought to be needed and when the student is suspected to have a disability. The following flow chart provides a visual depiction of the Solution Focused Intervention Process:
Chapter 4 -3
Level A of the Solution Focused Intervention Process – Initial Interventions When a concern is expressed about a student's performance (academic, behavioral, social/emotional, physiological, sensory, etc.), the parent(s), the teacher(s), and the student, when appropriate, will meet to develop an intervention plan based upon student strengths and successes. These intervention plans can be revised as needed. Mississippi Bend AEA support staff members are not involved at this level. Documentation is determined by the District Developed Instructional Plan or by individual building procedures in those districts that have not written District Developed Instructional Plans. Documentation may be necessary if interventions proceed to the next level(s). Level B of the Solution Focused Intervention Process – Collaborative Interventions If the student does not attain the performance goals set at Level A, consultation and assistance may be requested from the building assistance team, teacher assistance team, other personnel among the school district staff, Mississippi Bend AEA support staff, and/or other community resources. At this level Mississippi Bend AEA support staff and district special education teachers will not provide direct services to students. Services at Level B continue to focus on interventions in the general education setting. In extreme cases, the team may determine that the problem is so severe and that the student’s performance is so significantly discrepant from peers that additional general education interventions would not be appropriate and choose to go directly to Level D of the SFIP. The documentation of the rationale for not engaging in general education interventions will be documented in the student's educational record in a way that communicates the nature of the decision made and the justification for making the decision. At Level B, documentation of the student concerns and the intervention plans is more formalized than at Level A. Student-specific questions promote data collection regarding the student's present level of performance, and the student's strengths and needs are increasingly clarified. The design and monitoring of general education interventions continue in this atmosphere of expanded collaboration. Intervention plans at this level can be revised as frequently as needed. Mississippi Bend AEA does not have a specific form to document Level B intervention plans. Documentation is determined by the District Developed Instructional Plan or by individual building procedures in those districts that have not written District Developed Instructional Plans. Documentation is necessary if the student proceeds to the next level(s). Level C of the Solution Focused Intervention Process – Collaborative Interventions Which May Involve Mississippi Bend AEA Staff A move to Level C may occur if additional support, consultation, or information is needed to address the concerns. Parents and students, when appropriate, continue to be active participants. If services from Mississippi Bend AEA support staff are requested, a "Support Service Intervention Consent Form" must first be completed and signed by the Building Principal, or designee, and the Mississippi Bend AEA support staff member who will serve as case coordinator. Then, written permission is obtained from the parent. If the team believes that only a screening by the audiologist, occupational therapist, and/or physical therapist is needed, then the "Support Service Request to Conduct Screening" form is completed. Once a “Support Service Intervention Consent Form” is completed with all required signatures, a SFIP Intervention Plan must be developed. Any assessment completed at Level C is for the purpose of developing interventions rather than for solely determining the existence of a disability, e.g., ADHD. If Chapter 4 -
5
screenings of hearing, vision, and health have not previously occurred, they are initiated at this level to examine their potential relationship to the presenting concerns. The "Hearing/Health/Vision Screening Information" form is used for this purpose. At this level of intervention, Mississippi Bend AEA support staff are included as part of solutionfocused activities such as assessment, instruction, counseling, and progress monitoring. Again, the intent of assessment at this level is to use the data for developing intervention plans within general education including systemic changes designed to assist the student in attaining performance goals. Assessments are tailored to answer student-specific questions. Sources for assessment data may include, but are not limited to, reviews of already existing student information, student work samples, results of parent, teacher, and student interviews, informal assessments, curriculum based assessment, systematic observation data, and results of rating scales which measure social/emotional/behavioral strengths and needs of the student. Individually-administered norm-referenced tests of achievement may be administered at this level when other types of data are not available, especially when addressing the needs of middle school/junior high and high school students. Tests of cognitive/intellectual ability will not be administered at Level C. Relevant school, home, and community variables need to be assessed to determine their impact on the student's functioning. The purpose of such assessment is to consider environmental standards and expectations relative to the student's functioning and possible modifications and/or interventions that would promote success within general education. The variables to be considered include culture, economic/environmental conditions, educational environment, variations in communication, and extraordinary circumstances. The "Ecological Assessment" tool will be of assistance to the team as they assess these areas. Implementation of a Solution Focused Intervention Plan is to be completed within 45 school days. At the conclusion of the 45 school days or earlier, the team must review the results of the plan. The plan can be discontinued at that time, revised and/or extended for up to an additional 45 school days. Intervention plans designed to address the instructional needs of a student may not be extended beyond 90 days. Mississippi Bend AEA support staff may provide direct services to students through a Solution Focused Intervention Plan at Level C. Most Solution Focused Intervention Plans that involve support staff will be completed within the 45 school day or 90 school day period for not more than one hour per day. In special circumstances such as counseling, some Mississippi Bend AEA Level C support services may extend for the remainder of the school year if the student is benefiting from those support services. Special education teachers may provide services at Level C through a Solution Focused Intervention Plan if their respective school district includes such provision in a District Developed Instructional Plan. Special education teachers may provide interventions for up to 45 school days for not more than one hour per day. After a review by the team of the results of the Intervention Plan, implementation may be extended an additional 45 days. If the District Developed Instructional Plan includes more restrictive time periods for the provision of interventions by special education teachers, the requirements of the District Developed Instructional Plan are to be followed. The focus of interventions provided by special education teachers is on assisting the development of practices and interventions to be implemented by the general education teacher(s). Special education teachers may not provide services at Level C if their respective school district does not include such provision in a District Developed Instructional Plan.
Chapter 4 -
6
The case coordinator is required to complete the “Support Service Intervention Summary Report” when the plan is discontinued. The case coordinator may choose to write an additional summary of the services provided at Level C including data regarding outcomes of interventions and attach it to the Summary Report. In most cases, Level C interventions plans will be discontinued at the end of the school year in which they were initially developed. Since both Level B and Level C involve collaborative interventions, teams will sometimes ask whether a Level C intervention plan is always required. In the majority of cases, the answer is “yes”. However, there may be times when the team decides that it would be appropriate to move directly to Level D from Level B due to the strength of the intervention(s) and the thoroughness of documentation at Level B. The prerequisites that must be in place before moving to Level D from either Level B or Level C include a specific statement of the issue or concern, a numerical baseline, a measurable goal, implementation of a well-designed individualized intervention for a reasonable amount of time (approximately 45 school days at a minimum), and the gathering of data to determine the response to the intervention (i.e., progress monitoring). The building level team, including Mississippi Bend AEA support staff members, has the responsibility for reviewing all available information in determining and documenting whether these prerequisites have been met. Before an IEP Team adds a new goal area to an individual’s IEP, a Level C Intervention Plan must be implemented for that goal area so that the new area of concern can be addressed in the least restrictive environment. See Chapter 7 – IEP Development for more information. A student’s eligibility for accommodations required by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act also will be considered at this level. Mississippi Bend AEA staff is reminded that Section 504 responsibilities reside with general education. However, Mississippi Bend AEA staff can assist in the evaluation of 504 handicapping conditions and the development of accommodation plans. When reviewing the Solution Focused Intervention Plan, the team may decide to move to Level D because they suspect the student has a disability and may need special education services. Mississippi Bend AEA's standard for the amount and type of data upon which this decision is made is congruous with the Special Education Eligibility Standards in Appendix K. Multiple sources of relevant information related to the presenting problem are considered by the multidisciplinary team. The assessment and intervention data collected should be sufficient to reliably and validly document the area(s) of concern. Professional judgment within the team, based upon this data, codes of ethics and professional standards, determines whether continuation of interventions within the general education setting is appropriate for the student's needs or whether a Full, Individual Initial Evaluation is necessary. If at any time the student is thought to be entitled to special education, a Level D consent form for Full, Individual Initial Evaluation must be obtained. Students are not to be provided de facto special education instructional services without the benefit of entitlement to special education and the Individualized Education Program (IEP) process.
Chapter 4 -
7
SUPPORT SERVICE INTERVENTION Consent Form Dear Parent/Guardian: During a recent conversation we discussed concerns regarding difficulties your child is experiencing at school. We are requesting your permission to provide support services in order to assist your child in overcoming these difficulties. These services will be designed to assess your child’s needs and provide appropriate interventions and accommodations within general education. These services are being recommended because:
With your permission, we expect to begin providing services on:
/
/
Services will be coordinated by (Name)
(Position)
Signatures: Case Coordinator
School Phone:
Building Principal
Date
Parent/Guardian Consent Student Name
Parent/Guardian
Birthdate Male
Grade Female
Address
Ethnic: 1 2 3 4 5
City, State, Zip
School
Telephone
District I HAVE READ THIS NOTICE AND UNDERSTAND: • The purpose and nature of the proposed services. • I will be invited to participate in this process • Documents reflecting results of interventions will be shared with me as appropriate. • My consent is voluntary and may be revoked at any time. I Give (
)
Refuse (
) consent for the proposed services to be provided.
Parent/Guardian Copies to:
Date AEA
Parent
School
Case Coordinator
6/04 Chapter 4 -
8
HEARING/HEALTH/VISION SCREENING INFORMATION Student: Grade: Birthdate:
Case Coordinator: School: District:
1. HEARING Does this student have an identified hearing loss? ___ yes ___ no Does this student exhibit any signs of a hearing problem which could impact on learning? ___ Yes ___ No If yes, explain: Any hearing related recommendations: Date of last hearing screening: Information provided by: Position: Date: *********************************************************************************** 2. HEALTH Does this student exhibit any signs of health or medical problems which could impact on learning? ___ Yes ___ No If yes, explain: Is there a need for further assessment or referral for a medical problem? ___ Yes ___ No If yes, explain: Is this student presently taking medication? ___ Yes ___ No If yes, explain: Does this student require adaptive equipment or facility adaptation? ___ Yes ___ No If yes, explain: Any health related recommendations? ************************************************************************************ 3. VISION Does this student exhibit any signs of a vision problem which could impact on learning? ___ Yes ___ No If yes, explain: Does this student wear glasses/corrective lenses? ___ Yes ___ No If yes, explain: Date of last vision screening: Information provided by:
Position:
WHITE - AEA
YELLOW - SCHOOL
Date: 11/98 Chapter 4 - 10
e
'jb
gi t € € l - =; E E H 6iE E, E€F
!
E
tr
g
gE * gg E i eE € E FH-cE E g a € c € I E t r * s€E gE € e EsE € AE i I$i g;ggE I $Ec;igE f
tr o L
.-o -c L
o
lr €
o
= rEs
EE
rF .F
+ a sF H ; f i
o tt
iggtiEEFFsgEig,tEE ' o o o L
! EEEg E E.EiEEiE FEi€E€ g $ € F E E = i = FE; E i € E P €€s
B
o .!L
e
6
E
EE€n; E**EE$ta 3*€;ie#€ ; tr 3
o
$
FE Ee € = E $ F*sgi €5i
o
1t o !t
o o
Eg;gggigi HffEl*€E€E igiiiE9giiIi*€gg gg€e!E;Fgg$i€,i;gg 6 G
t,
J
I
CL=
93
'-
6
E3F H
(!
.9
T' E' J
o
E
o
? o
3 o o
o Chapter 4 - 1 2
The Role of the Case Coordinator The multidisciplinary team model is one in which the responsibility for assessment, intervention, decision-making, and delivery of service is shared by Mississippi Bend AEA support staff, LEA representatives, parent(s), and the student and community representatives, when appropriate. A case coordinator is designated to facilitate the efforts of the multidisciplinary team. The case coordinator must be a Mississippi Bend AEA team member. This same individual will remain case coordinator for the duration of the case. The number of Level C, Level D, and reevaluation cases to which a Mississippi Bend AEA team member is assigned as case coordinator should be determined by the building team. Some factors that influence these decisions may include the amount of time in the building, professional expertise, and additional caseload responsibilities. General roles and tasks for the case coordinators may include, but are limited to, the following: (a) act as a liaison between the student, his/her family, and all relevant professionals, (b) plan and facilitate discussions and decision-making sessions, (c) monitor the progress and effectiveness of the support service interventions, and (d) maintain, in cooperation with other team members, required documentation. The case coordinator assumes a number of responsibilities. While the case coordinator is responsible for making sure that certain activities are completed, it is not expected that the case coordinator must necessarily carry out all the following activities independently. Level C Activities: Complete “Support Service Intervention Consent Form” Establish baseline data Review student records and share with team Insure completion of “Hearing/Health/Vision Screening Information” form Complete ecological and other limited assessments as needed Schedule meetings Develop “SFIP Intervention Plan” Complete “Support Service Intervention Summary Report” Level D Activities: Review Procedural Safeguards Manual for Parents with parent(s) Complete “Consent for Full and Individual Initial Evaluation” Complete ecological assessment, if not previously completed Coordinate assessment tasks/responsibilities Send “Meeting Notice” Prepare rough draft of assessment report Develop IEP, when appropriate Complete “Written Prior Notice” Complete “Consent for Initial Special Education and/or Related Services” Develop additional interventions, if needed, when student is not entitled
Chapter 4 - 16
Three-Year Reevaluation Activities: Review Procedural Safeguards Manual for Parents with parent(s) Complete “Consent for/Notice of Reevaluation” Complete ecological assessment Document answers to 6 re-evaluation questions Schedule meetings Send “Meeting Notice” Hearing/Vision/Health Screening Procedures Hearing At the early childhood level (ages 3 to 5); audiometric evaluations are conducted on all children referred for early childhood services as well as those who are referred by area health care providers and parents. Annual audiometric screening is conducted on children attending public or approved private schoolbased preschool programs, students in kindergarten through second grade, and students in eighth grade. Audiometric screening is conducted on students new to a building or district. An annual audiometric evaluation is conducted for children with previously identified hearing loss. Audiometric screenings are conducted on students referred by parents, LEA/AEA personnel and community health care providers; the Support Service Request to Conduct Screening form should be used. If a student is receiving special education services and additional information about his/her hearing is warranted, the Support Service Request to Conduct Screening form should be used. If a broader range of information is required, the Consent for/Notice of Reevaluation should be used. Vision Early childhood (ages 3 to 5 years) referrals to the Mississippi Bend AEA will have vision screened using the protocols described in the Iowa Vision Screening Program Guidelines (Iowa Department of Education, 1997) as part of the developmental screening process. Referrals will be made to appropriate eye care specialists for those children needing further assessment. At the school age level, vision screening is conducted by LEA personnel. The Mississippi Bend AEA recommends that LEA personnel consult the Iowa Vision Screening Program Guidelines when determining appropriate screening guidelines. Contact the Iowa Department of Education, Bureau of Children, Family and Community Services, Grimes State Office Building, Des Moines, Iowa 503190146 to receive a copy of this document.
Chapter 4 - 17
Health As part of the screening process for early childhood (ages 3 to 5 years) referrals to the Mississippi Bend AEA, a health history questionnaire is completed with the child’s parent(s). Written parent permission is secured to obtain pertinent information from the child’s primary health care professional. This information will be considered by the team when conducting educational assessments and developing a Solution Focused Intervention Plan or the child’s Individualized Education Program (IEP). Coordination of services and development of a health care plan is an important part of the IEP for those students with special health care needs. Health screenings will be requested of the LEA personnel when the Support Service Intervention Consent form is signed by the parent(s) or guardian(s). Responsibility for notifying the appropriate person(s) in the LEA will be the responsibility of the case coordinator. Criteria and Procedures for Determining that Screening Results Represent Performance Problems that Warrant Further Assessment Hearing Children (ages 3 to 5 years) who have been evaluated by Mississippi Bend AEA and/or community audiologists and exhibit conductive and/or sensori-neural hearing loss will be referred for a medical evaluation to confirm the presence of a hearing loss. Intervention strategies will be initiated by accessing the Mississippi Bend AEA’s Early Childhood Team. At the school age level, students who do not pass the initial screening will be reevaluated within an appropriate time interval. Students who exhibit a conductive or sensori-neural hearing loss at the time of reevaluation will be referred for a medical evaluation. The LEA staff and the student’s parent(s)/guardian(s) will be informed of the audiological test results and their implications. Intervention strategies will be initiated to meet the educational and communication needs of the student with a hearing loss. Vision At the early childhood level (ages 3 to 5 years), children who have had an eye care specialist identify vision loss or a medical diagnosis indicating a condition affecting vision will be referred to the Mississippi Bend AEA’s Early Childhood Team for assessment to determine the need for special education assistance. Information generated by the vision specialist will be considered as part of the educational evaluation. Children entitled to early childhood special education who have vision loss will be provided instructional and related services as specified in their IEP. If a school age student does not pass a vision screening, the procedures of the respective local school district for notifying parents and making referrals will be followed. The results of an eye care specialist’s examination will be considered when a Solution Focused Intervention Plan or IEP is developed.
Chapter 4 - 18
Health At the early childhood level (ages 3 to 5 years), children identified through the screening process as having special health care needs will have those needs addressed through the development of their IEP. Children receiving LEA Early Childhood Special Education services receive necessary health services from the LEA nurse or designated health care provider. If a school age student has medically identified health needs, this information will be considered when developing the student’s health care plan. This health care plan will also become part of the Solution Focused Intervention Plan or IEP.
Chapter 4 - 19
Solution Focused Intervention Process (SFIP) Intervention Plan Student
Male
Date of Birth _______________
Female
Ethnic: 1 2 3 4 5
Date of Plan _______________ Grade ___________
District
School
Parent(s) Name __________________________________________ Phone _______________________ Parent(s) Address _______________________________________________________________________ Case Coordinator ______________________________________ Participants
1. What will the plan address?
2. Describe times when the concern or issue is NOT occurring.
3. Scaling/baseline data: 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Baseline data (current performance):
4. What will be different when improvement is seen?
Copies to:
AEA
Parent
School
Case Coordinator
Chapter 4 - 20
Guide for Completing the Solution Focused Intervention Process Intervention Plan, pg. 1 The Case Coordinator completes the identifying information at the top of the form. Ethnic code: 1 – Asian or Pacific Islander 2 - Black not of Hispanic Origin 3 - Hispanic
4 – Native American or Alaskan Native 5 - White not of Hispanic Origin
Participants: List all persons who are in attendance and those who are involved in developing the plan, but are not in attendance. What will the plan address? Allow the person(s) requesting the intervention plan to use the language they select in describing the concern or issue the plan will address. Have the person(s) be as specific as possible. For example: “Pete wastes time during independent seatwork by playing with objects on his desk, looking around the room, and bothering others by talking and making noises.” or “Sally doesn’t remember the spelling words from weekly lists when maintenance tests are given and doesn’t use these words correctly in creative writing assignments.” Describe times when the concern or issue is NOT occurring. Ask questions to elicit descriptions of times when the concern or issue does not occur or is less troublesome (exceptions). Once those times are clarified, ask “When else . . . ? When else . . . ?” (For example: “Pete stays better focused when seated farther away from those students with whom he plays at recess.” or “Sally remembers patterned words better.”) Scaling/Baseline data: 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Designate the number that best describes where the concern stands now. This is a non-normative scale reflecting the person’s perception. One (1) is when the concern is most evident or troublesome, and ten (10) is when the situation is the best it can be. Baseline data (current performance): Provide a specific and measurable description of the current level of performance for the concern. For example: “During a systematic observation, Pete was in his seat and working on assigned tasks 50% of the time in comparison to peers who were on task 90% of the time.” or “Sally scores 70% on weekly spelling tests but 40% on maintenance tests.”
Chapter 4 - 21
What will be different when improvement is seen? Describe with as much specificity as possible what it will look like when the student moves up one or two points on the scale. The assumptions are that small changes lead to larger changes and that shortterm goals are more attainable. At this point, the “Miracle Question” could be asked to facilitate the notion of beginning with the end in mind. (“Suppose a miracle happens and the concerns that brought you here are solved. What will be different to tell you that the miracle happened?”) The following questions also can be used to help in developing an image of a realistic solution: What might the teacher be doing differently? What might the student be doing instead? How will others [parent(s), students, and school staff] know things are better? How might others be acting differently with the student? What else? What else?
Chapter 4 - 22
Solution Focused Intervention Process (SFIP) Intervention Plan (p. 2) 5. Specific goal(s)
6. Interventions(s)
7. Techniques to monitor progress
8. Person(s) responsible for monitoring progress
Start date
Follow-up date
9. At follow-up, check status of progress: ( ) Goal met, not further intervention required ( ) Progress noted, intervention to continue ( ) Goal met, new or next goal needed (complete new Intervention Plan) ( ) Unsuccessful, return to alternatives 10. Complete an additional SFIP Intervention Plan or complete the Support Service Intervention Summary Report. Copies to:
AEA
Parent
School
Case Coordinator 7/0
Chapter 4 - 23
Guide for Completing the `Solution Focused Intervention Process Intervention Plan, pg. 2 Specific Goal(s): Describe the improvement in the concern area that will be seen when the student moves up the scale. This description must be specific, measurable, and data based. For example: “During independent seatwork in math, Pete will be on task 80% of the time with no more than two prompts.” or “Sally will score 70% or higher on spelling maintenance tests.” Intervention(s): Interventions must be clear, detailed, and achievable. Person(s) responsible for tasks must be identified. For example: “Pete’s desk will be moved closer to the teacher and away from those peers with whom he plays at recess. The classroom teacher will check with him more frequently.” or “Sally will have reduced weekly spelling lists which will focus on patterned spelling words as well as include one or two previously taught words. A parent volunteer will work with Sally twice weekly for 20 minutes reviewing spelling lists.” Techniques to Monitor Progress: Specific methods to evaluate progress should be described, e.g., curriculum based measurement (CBM) probes, observation, graphing, perceptual scaling, and checklists. For example: “Pete will be observed during independent work time in math.” or “Sally’s weekly and maintenance tests scores will be graphed.” Person(s) Responsible for Monitoring Progress: Person(s) who are responsible to gather intervention progress data are identified. At follow-up, check status of progress: Check appropriate status after discussion of progress during the intervention period. The intent here is to review the desired outcome(s) and the actions which were designed to produce them. Talk about and list improvements noticed since the last meeting. Include the smallest improvements, even those which were unintended or occurred in other settings. Talk about how the improvements came about and how this made a difference for the student, the teacher(s), the parent(s), or others. Complete an additional Intervention Plan or complete the Support Services Intervention Summary form. Describe what a little more progress will look like and what will indicate things continue to be on track. Identify what has worked, what will continue, and what will be done differently to continue progress. Use what has been learned to modify the plan or create a new approach. Record what will be done and who will be responsible. If sufficient progress has been made, complete the “Support Service Intervention Summary Report”. See Appendix N for sample Solution Focused Intervention Plans.
Chapter 4 - 24
SUPPORT SERVICE INTERVENTION Summary Report Student’s Name
Case Coordinator:
Birthdate:
Parent Guardian:
Grade:
Address:
School: District:
Telephone:
Dear Parent/Guardian: Recently you consented to support services being provided for your child. Unless I have been unable to contact you, we have had an opportunity to discuss the results of these services. The following is a brief written summary of the outcomes of our interventions:
As a result of the above, we are recommending: 1.
No further support services for your child at this time. Explanation:
2.
We believe that Special Education Services may be an option. We will contact you soon to discuss this recommendation and request your written permission to proceed.
3.
Other:
If you have any questions, please contact me at: Sincerely, (Signature: Case Coordinator)
(Date) Copies to:
AEA
Parent
School
Case Coordinator
Chapter 4 - 25
Level D of the Solution Focused Intervention Process – Full and Individual Evaluation The necessity of a Full and Individual Evaluation is determined by the team on a student-specific basis. The team determines whether a student has made acceptable progress through analysis of information including: (a) the student’s progress toward the expected goals; (b) the student’s rate of acquisition in comparison to same-grade peers; and (c) the student’s ability to maintain or retain academic/social/behavioral skills. Procedures for the Full and Individual Evaluation are found in Chapter 5.
Chapter 4 - 26
