District leadership teams perform key roles in building the systems to support schools in the implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS). However, there is a lack of measures for assessment and progress monitoring specific to district PBIS systems. To address this gap, we evaluated the validity of a measure of implementation of district PBIS systems, the District Systems Fidelity Inventory (DSFI). Using 183 school districts and 760 schools implementing PBIS, we found the DSFI to have good evidence of structural validity for measuring nine aspects of district systems (Leadership Teaming, Stakeholder Engagement, Funding and Alignment, Policy, Workforce Capacity, Training, Coaching, Evaluation, and Local Implementation Demonstrations). We also found DSFI subscales to be moderately related to school-level PBIS implementation fidelity, providing evidence of convergent validity. We describe how leadership teams can use the DSFI to improve PBIS implementation and student outcomes.
AlgozzineK.AlgozzineB. (2007). Classroom instructional ecology and school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 24(1), 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1300/J370v24n01_02
2.
AlgozzineR. F.BarrettS.EberL.GeorgeH.HornerR. H.LewisT. J.PutnamR. F.Swain-BradwayJ.McIntoshK.SugaiG. (2014). SWPBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory. OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. http://www.pbis.org
3.
BlairK. C.ParkE.KimW. (2020). A meta-analysis of tier 2 interventions implemented within school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Psychology in the Schools, 58(1), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22443
4.
BonifayW. E.ReiseS. P.ScheinesR.MeijerR. R. (2015). When are multidimensional data unidimensional enough for structural equation modeling? An evaluation of the DETECT multidimensionality index. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 22(4), 504–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.938596
Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. (2020). Positive behavioral interventions and supports District Systems Fidelity Inventory (DSFI)—Version 0.2. University of Oregon. https://www.pbis.org
7.
GageN. A.WhitfordD. K.KatsiyannisA. (2018). A review of schoolwide positive behavior interventions and supports as a framework for reducing disciplinary exclusions. The Journal of Special Education, 52(3), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466918767847
8.
GeorgeH. P.CoxK. E.MinchD.SandomierskiT. (2018). District practices associated with successful SWPBIS implementation. Behavioral Disorders, 43(3), 393–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742917753612
9.
Grasley-BoyN. M.GageN. A.LombardoM.AndersonL. (2022). The additive effects of implementing advanced tiers of SWPBIS with fidelity on disciplinary exclusions. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 24, 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007211011767
10.
HornerR. H.SugaiG. (2015). School-wide PBIS: An example of applied behavior analysis implemented at a scale of social importance. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8(1), 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-015-0045-4
11.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
KittelmanA.McIntoshK.HoseltonR. (2019). Adoption of PBIS within school districts. Journal of School Psychology, 76, 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.03.007
14.
KittelmanA.MercerS. H.McIntoshK.HoseltonR. (2022). Optimal timing for launching installation of tiers 2 and 3 systems of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 24, 171–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300721996084
15.
KittelmanA.MercerS. H.McIntoshK.NeseR. N. T. (2021b). Development and validation of a measure assessing sustainability of tier 2 and 3 behavior support systems. Journal of School Psychology, 85, 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2021.02.001
16.
KittelmanA.Strickland-CohenM. K.PinkelmanS. E.McIntoshK. (2020). Variables contributing to abandonment and readoption of SWPBIS. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 22(2), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300719888748
17.
LeeA.GageN. A. (2020). Updating and expanding systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effects of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports. Psychology in the Schools, 57(5), 783–804. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22336
18.
Lorenzo-SevaU.FerrandoP. J. (2006). FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavior Research Methods, 38(1), 88–91. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192753
19.
MassarM.McIntoshK.MercerS. H.HoseltonR. (2017). Factor analysis of a fidelity of implementation measure for social behavior systems. Remedial and Special Education, 40(1), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517736515
20.
MathewsS.McIntoshK.FrankJ. L.MayS. L. (2014). Critical features predicting sustained implementation of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16(3), 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300713484065
21.
McIntoshK.MassarM. M.AlgozzineR. F.GeorgeH. P.HornerR. H.LewisT. J.Swain-BradwayJ. (2017). Technical adequacy of the SWPBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 19(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300716637193
22.
McIntoshK.MercerS. H.HumeA. E.FrankJ. L.TurriM. G.MathewsS. (2013). Factors related to sustained implementation of schoolwide positive behavior support. Exceptional Children, 79(3), 293–311.
23.
McIntoshK.MercerS. H.NeseR. N. T.Strickland-CohenM. K.HoseltonR. (2016). Predictors of sustained implementation of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(4), 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715599737
24.
McIntoshK.MercerS. H.NeseR. N. T.Strickland-CohenM. K.KittelmanA.HoseltonR.HornerR. H. (2018). Factors predicting sustained implementation of a universal behavior support framework. Educational Researcher, 47(5), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18776975
25.
MercerS. H.McIntoshK.HoseltonR. (2017). Comparability of fidelity measures for assessing tier I school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 19(4), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300717693384
26.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.).
27.
NeseR. N. T.NeseJ. F. T.McIntoshK.MercerS. H.KittelmanA. (2018). Predicting latency of reaching adequate implementation of tier I schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 21(2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300718783755
28.
NetzelD. M.EberL. (2003). Shifting from reactive to proactive discipline in an urban school district: A change of focus through PBIS implementation. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5(2), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007030050020201
29.
RobertsonR. E.KokinaA. A.MooreD. W. (2020). Barriers to implementing behavior Intervention plans: Results of a statewide survey. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 22(3), 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300720908013
30.
SanettiL. M. H.Collier-MeekM. A.LongA. C. J.ByronJ.KratochwillT. R. (2015). Increasing teacher treatment integrity of behavior support plans through consultation and implementation planning. Journal of School Psychology, 53(3), 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2015.03.002
31.
SchaperA.McIntoshK.HoseltonR. (2016). Within-year fidelity growth of SWPBIS during installation and initial implementation. School Psychology Quarterly, 31(3), 358–368. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000125
32.
SugaiG.HornerR. H. (2019). Sustaining and scaling positive behavioral interventions and supports: Implementation drivers, outcomes, and considerations. Exceptional Children, 86(2), 120–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402919855331
33.
SugaiG.HornerR. H.Lewis-PalmerT. L. (2001). Team Implementation Checklist (TIC). Educational and Community Supports.
34.
SugaiG.Lewis-PalmerT. L.ToddA. W.HornerR. H. (2005). School-wide evaluation tool (SET) version 2.1. Educational and Community Supports. http://www.pbis.org
35.
TimmermanM. E.Lorenzo-SevaU. (2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological Methods, 16(2), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023353
36.
WalkerV. L.ChungY.-C.BonnetL. K. (2018). Function-based intervention in inclusive school settings: A meta-analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 20(4), 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300717718350
37.
WalkerV. L.LomanS. L.MickelsonA. M.LyonK. J. (2022). Participation of students with extensive support needs in SWPBIS: Administrator and educator perspectives. Psychology in the Schools, 59, 1623–1642. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22711
38.
WardC. S.HarmsA. L.St. Martin, K.CusumanoD.RussellC.HornerR. H. (2022). Development and technical adequacy of the District Capacity Assessment. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 24, 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300721990911
39.
WardC. S.St. Martin, K.HornerR. H.DudaM.Ingram-WestK.TedescoM.PutnamD.BuenrostroM.ChaparroE. (2015). District capacity assessment. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu
40.
ZumboB. D.GadermannA. M.ZeisserC. (2007). Ordinal versions of coefficients alpha and theta for Likert rating scales. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 6, 21–29. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1177992180
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
