Consultation and Coaching (HLS), Consultation (LLS)
Conditions
Brief summary
The overall purpose of this project is to determine whether school personnel implementing a two-tier School-wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS, an evidence based intervention) program for typically developing children as well as children with, or at risk for, externalizing or anxiety disorders can implement the components of the program with the same level of fidelity, integrity and clinical effectiveness when they receive a low level of support (consultation) from their coaches and supervisors as they can with a high level of support (consultation and coaching).
Detailed description
Demonstrating that school personnel can implement evidence based interventions (EBIs) for externalizing and anxiety problems with a high degree of fidelity, integrity and clinical effectiveness could spur more initiatives toward the adoption of EBIs in urban schools, thus further lowering health disparities in these settings. The overall purpose of this project is to determine whether school personnel implementing a two-tier School-wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS, an evidence based intervention) program for typically developing children as well as children with, or at risk for, externalizing or anxiety disorders can implement the components of the program with the same level of fidelity, integrity and clinical effectiveness when they receive a low level of support (consultation) from their coaches and supervisors as they can with a high level of support (consultation and coaching). This study will target six schools within the Philadelphia School District (PSD). Within those 6 schools, research participants will consist of students (grades 4-8) and school staff members. The investigators will evaluate 1) the effectiveness of SWPBS with consultation and coaching, as compared to the baseline and to SWPBS with consultation only; in reducing office discipline referrals (ODRs) and improving school climate, and children's grades, diagnostic status, symptom severity and impairment; 2) the effectiveness of the SWPBS with consultation and coaching, as compared to SWPBS with consultation only, in increasing program fidelity and integrity.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALFriends for Life
Friends for Life is a group CBT intervention, based on a theoretical model, which addresses cognitive, physiological and behavioral processes that are seen to interact in the development and perpetuation of excessive anxiety.
BEHAVIORALCoping Power Program
The Coping Power Program CPP is a cognitive-behavioral, multi-component group intervention for elementary and middle school students at risk for externalizing behavior disorders. In addition to anger management, the CPP includes units on goal setting, emotional awareness, relaxation training, social skills training, problem solving, and handling peer pressure.
Sponsors
Devereux Foundation, Pennsylvania
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
The School District of Philadelphia
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
8 Years to 15 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* All 6 participating schools are included in Tier 1. * The inclusion criteria for Tier 2 includes children in grades 3-8, who are referred by a school staff member because of behavioral or emotional difficulties or because they have received 3 or more Office Discipline Referrals. Children who consent to participate in the project.
Exclusion criteria
* There are no
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Level of Support During Implementation | 48 months | To determine whether program fidelity and integrity for Tier 1 (for all students) and Tier 2 (for at risk and high risk students) would differ between schools receiving a high level of support (consultation and coaching) and schools receiving a low level of support (consultation) for program implementers. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Benefit Analyses | 48 months | The secondary objectives are to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of SWPBS HLS (consultation and coaching) versus SWPBS LLS (consultation). |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed