Breaking Down the Silos: Working Beyond Traditional Boundaries to Solidify Systems of Care

1
School and Community Collaboration for an
Effective Service Delivery System Sandra
Keenan Director, Center for Effective
Collaboration and Practice American Institutes
for Research Washington, DC October 31, 2008
2
ObjectivesParticipants will learn

•     
• An overview of school based mental health models
  nationally that are implementing multiple
  approaches including PBIS, Safe Schools/Healthy
  Students and systems of care
• Data on improved school and child outcomes from
  integrated initiatives
• Challenges for partnerships between mental health
  systems and schools and strategies for overcoming
  these challenges
• designing and building sustainable coalitions
  that support the social, emotional and behavioral
  supports among multiple systems
• Strategies for involving families as partner with
  schools and mental health systems
• Community-specific examples and strategies used
  to develop partnerships between schools and
  mental health systems to implement a continuum of
  school-based mental health services
• An integration framework for communities to
  implement multiple strategies for school-based
  mental health services

3
(No Transcript)
4
WHAT WE KNOW To improve the academic success
of our children, we must also improve their
social success. Academic and social failures
are directly related.
5
What is the level of need for behavioral and
emotional support within our schools and
communities?

• Approximately 20 of our youth exhibit complex
  problems 10 have a serious emotional disorder
• Only 2 of school age children are identified
  with serious emotional disorders under special
  education.
• Fewer that 1 in 4 students with significant
  emotional and behavioral needs are receiving
  minimally adequate treatment, both in school and
  the community(Surgeon Generals Report, 2000)

6
Children and Youth with Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders(2 nationally are identified IEP)

• Get arrested more often almost 50 /1 year and
  within 5 yrs. over 60
• Spend more time in the juvenile justice system
• Are more frequently placed in restrictive
  educational environments

• Get lower grades
• Fail more courses and exams
• Are held back more often
• Graduate at lower rates
• 55 drop out rate
• Have blame placed on family
• move from program to program

7
Aspects of School Culture

• Time/Day/Month/Year
• Personnel
• Domain/classroom/school/bus/playground
• Context of service delivery.
• food/exercise/instruction/transportation/health
  services/legal/college planning/social
  network/behavior/rules..

8
Most prevalent school discipline problems

• Class disruption
• noncompliance
• bullying and harassment
• fighting/physical aggression
• truancy
• vandalism
• theft
• alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use
• dropout
• suicide

9
Understanding issues that might relate to
behavior (Schools may see this as all one
thing..inappropriate behavior to be dealt with
as a discipline issues.)

• Developmental
• Environmental
• History of reinforcement
• Related to medical condition
• Related to a mental health condition
• Cultural(active as well as reactive)
• Related to side effects of medication
• Related to another disability, such as LD, or
  Language processing difficulty
• Type of instruction and curriculum

10
TYPICAL SCHOOL
Juvenile Court
JuvenileServices
PUPIL SERVICESSCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTSCHOOL SOCIAL
WORK Special Education
Alternative Schools
SCHOOL NURSE STD/Pregnancy Prevention
HEALTH SERVICES Drug/Alcohol and Mental Health
Services
SCHOOL SECURITY Police Violence
Prevention Drug Alcohol Prevention Program
Counseling
Administration
HIGH SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNSELORS College Class
Schedule Mentors
Teachers and Staff
Physical/Health Education
SOCIAL SERVICES SSI Medicaid Teen Mother
Pregnancy Counseling Prevention Child
Abuse/Neglect Prevention
Adapted from slide by of National Resource
Center for Safe Schools Based upon Dwyer, 1994
11
School Mental Health Services in US 2002-2003

• Study was conducted of 83,000 schools
• 1/5 of students received some mental health
  services
• Major providers in schools nurses, counselors,
  school psychologists and social workers
• School nurses spent 1/3 time providing MH
  services
• 80 of schools provided MH services, but not part
  of a formal network of support

12
School Mental Health Services in US

• Most difficult service to deliver family support
  services
• Most successful strategy developing positive
  formal and informal relationships with community
  partners
• WHAT A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR COLLABORATION AND
  PARTNERSHIP!

13
National Evaluation Findings Education Outcomes
of Children/Youth with Mental Health Needs Served
in Systems of Care 

• Slides provided by
• Sylvia Fisher, Ph.D.
• Program Director of Evaluation
• Child, Adolescent and Family Branch
• Center for Mental Health Services
• Substance Abuse Mental Health Services
  Administration (SAMHSA)
• Brigitte Manteuffel, Ph.D.
• Principal Investigator, CMHI National Evaluation
• Macro International Inc.

14
System of Care Communities of the Comprehensive
Community Mental Health Services for Children and
Their Families Program
Funded by the Center for Mental Health Services
of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
15
Value-Driven Systems Change
16
Collaboration Supports Mental Health Needs of
Children/Youth and their Families

• Schools actively refer children/ youth to systems
  of care
• Partnerships grow across grant years
• Note 2005-2006 grantees serve more children
  below age 6 7 sites only serve only young
  children.

Other includes physical health, substance abuse
clinics, family court, early care, among others.
17
Some School Characteristics of Children/Youth
Entering Systems of Care

• 95 attended school in past 6 months
• 85 are in regular public school, 15 in
  alternative/special school, 7.5 in 24-hour
  restrictive school setting, etc.
• About 20 were absent 2 or more days per week
• About 22 were failing 2 or more classes
• 39 had been suspended from school in past 6
  months

18
Children and Youth Entering Systems of Care IEPs
and Special Education

• Nearly half have an IEP
• Most have IEPs for behavioral/emotional problems,
  among other reasons (see below)
• 45 of caregivers reported child/youth receipt of
  special education services

19
GOOD NEWSYouth in Systems of Care are Doing
Better

• Regular School Attendance (gt 80 of the time)
  increased from 74 to 81 in 6 months
• Absences due to behavioral and emotional problems
  were reduced by 1/5 in 18 months
• 31 more youth achieved passing grades after 18
  months

Note Findings are for youth aged 14-18 years
20
Changes in School Attendance and Performance 30
Months After Entering Systems of Care (all
children and youth)
Attendance
Performance
20
21
Fewer Disciplinary ProblemsYouth Ages 14 18
Years

• Suspensions expulsions were reduced by 1/5 in
  first 6 months and by 44 in 18 months

22
Improved Youth (Aged 14-18 Years) Behavior and
Emotional Health

• Behavioral and emotional problems decreased (35
  improved at 6 months, 48 at 18 months)
• Youth involvement with juvenile justice decreased
  (e.g., arrests fell by 60 at 18 months)
• Youth became less depressed and less anxious
• Youth suicide attempts were reduced by half in 6
  months

23
Mental health consumers/youth/families are not in
the mental health system they are in the de
facto system- schools

• Over 52 million children in 100,000 schools in
  U.S. 6 million adults working in the schools
  1/5 of U.S. population
• Children receive more MH services through schools
  than any other public system
• Student support services/school health programs
  need greater focus in health and education policy
  initiatives
• Must serve ALL children.. so they can learn in
  schools.

24
(MODELS) Promising Practices in Childrens
Mental Health, Systems of Care identified six
practices integral to success, regarding the use
of personnel and service delivery systems

• The use of school-based and school-focused
  Wraparound services to support learning and
  transition.
• The use of school-based case management.
• The use of clinicians or other student-support
  providers in the schools to work with students,
  their families, and all members of the school
  community, including teachers and administrators.
• The provision of schoolwide prevention and early
  intervention programs
• The creation of centers within the school to
  provide support to children and youth with
  emotional and behavioral needs and their
  families.
• The use of family liaisons or advocates to
  strengthen the role and empowerment of family
  members in their childrens education

25
How do these school based mental health models
integrate with promotion and prevention models?

• 3 tiered model of promotion and prevention such
  as PBS.
• Examine what we do for ALL
• Examine what we do for SOME
• Examine what we do for a FEW

26
MODEL OF POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL SUPPORTS
High-Risk Students Individual Interventions
Intensive Level (FEW) 1-5
At-Risk Students Classroom/Small Group Strategies
Targeted Level (SOME) 5-10
All Students School-wide Systems of Support
Universal Level( ALL) 80-90
27
What SW-PBS is

• Evidenced based practices imbedded in a systems
  change process
• A prevention continuum
• A framework for organizing mental health supports
  and services
• Not only school-wide but in churches, and
  community

28
Critical Features of SW-PBS .

• Team driven process
• Instruction of behaviors/social skills
• Data-based decision-making
• Instruction linked to evaluation
• Defines social culture of the school

29
Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success
1-5
1-5
5-10
5-10
80-90
80-90
30
Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success
1-5
1-5
5-10
5-10
80-90
80-90
Is there a value and Commitment to do what is
Needed to have child in school
Values and commitment to What is necessary to
teach Child to read
31
Current Implementation

• School-wide Positive Behavior Support
• 7,009 schools in 44 states 152 PreK 4231 K-6
  1564 6-9 739 9-12 324 Alt and JJ settings
• Team
• Coach
• Curriculum emphasizing prevention, teaching,
  behavioral function
• On-going data collection and use of data for
  active decision-making

32
Instructional Approach

• Focus on teaching social behavior like academic
  skills (direct instruction)
• Emphasis on teaching encouraging pro-social
  behavior that competes with development
  displays of rule-violating behavior
• Ensure effective instructional practices are
  consistently used school-wide

33
General Approach to School-wide Data

• referrals per day per month
• referrals by student
• referrals by location
• /kinds of problem behaviors
• problem behaviors by time of day

34
Show Results PBISBridgeport, CT Schools
35
Stockton School Percent of Students Meeting or
Exceeding Standards on ISAT Scores
36
Steuben School Total OSS Per Year
37
Steuben School Percent of Students Meeting or
Exceeding Standards on ISAT Scores
38
What Does the Research on PBIS Tell Us?

• Increases in instructional time lost to
  behavioral interferences
• Increases in opportunities for academic
  engagement and academic achievement
• Increases prosocial behavior
• Enhances school climate for students and adults
• Increases the willingness and ability of teachers
  to work with students with more complex behavior
  needs
• Adapted from Sugai and Horner, 2000

39
PBIS

• Aligns schools with System of Care values and
  reform efforts such as RTI (Response to
  Intervention)
• Changes the lens through which we view our
  students and their families -
• Strengths and Needs
• Creates a school culture and climate where all
  staff take responsibility for supporting positive
  student behavior

40
PBIS also helps schools to

• develop less-restrictive, but effective,
  interventions (IDEA)
• achieve improved student outcomes, through
  partnerships with community-based service
  providers such as mental health
• engage families in powerful partnerships
• gain time for instruction, improve student
  learning
• fulfill legal mandates for disabled students

41
What does SOC and Education look like in
communities?

• Answer is differentas each community.
• However, over the last decade, levels of SOC
  acculturation have begun to emerge

42

• Five levels of involvement for schools
  with mental health
• 1.the individual child and family
• 2.small group support
• 3. school wide support
• 4.district wide support
• 5. county or state initiatives
• The first level begins with the individual
  child and family. Through case management and
  the family service coordinator, school
  representatives have been included in team
  planning and follow-up through the wraparound
  process. There is usually one staff member from
  the school where the child attends that becomes
  part of the process and team.

43
Level 2 and 3

• Level 2 addresses the needs of a group of
  children or youth, such as group therapy provided
  at the school, after school programs, parent
  support groups or mentoring.
• Level 3 occurs through school wide programs that
  support all children, such as school wide
  positive behavioral supports and interventions,
  social skill classroom instruction, mental health
  provider assigned to the pre-referral team at the
  school or behavioral support centers.

44
Level 4

• The fourth level provides district level support
  through comprehensive programming with support
  for referral, assessment, various programs
  options, both in school and in the community,
  family supports and consistent case management
  and follow-up.

45

• Level 5 involves county or state initiatives that
  maintain comprehensive training and technical
  assistance structures, referral and assessment
  centers and ongoing policy and funding
  initiatives.
• Throughout all these levels, a strategic plan for
  the system of care development includes an
  analysis of the overlap or integration with the
  strategic plan of the school district as well as
  the county or state initiatives as well.

46
Building a System that Cares The PARK Project,
Bridgeport, CT

• Slides provided by the Park Project

47
How did PARK build a school-based system of care?

1. Educate them on who we are and what we do
2. Align our vision and mission with theirs
3. Build synergy
4. Show results

48
Who We Are The PARK Project

• Vision Bridgeport children will live in a safe,
  caring community that nourishes the development
  of positive mental health.
• Mission To build a system of care in partnership
  with home, school and community so that children
  with behavioral and mental health challenges can
  achieve success.

49
Who We Are System of Care is Not

• SOC is not a school reform initiative
• SOC is not a way to remove unwanted students
• SOC is not a means of isolating children with
  mental health issues

50
Build Synergy How Do Outsiders Build Synergy
With Schools?

• Be a resource to them
• What are there needs?
• How can you help them?
• Give Unconditional respect (cultural competence)
• Listen before you advise
• Acknowledge their expertise in educating children
• Focus on their successes rather than their
  failures

51
Show Results Build Youth Leadership
52
Show Results PBIS
53
Show Results Wraparound, Care Coordination
Family Advocacy

• Statistically Significant Results
• Overall decline in rates of depression
• Decrease in the number of somatic complaints
• Decrease in the number of caregiver complaints

54
What is Needed to Merge Mental Health and Schools?

• Understand that schools have their own culture
• Understand that the process is mostly about
  relationship building
• It takes time Remember to move along gently
• Know your bottom line and what you are willing to
  give up

55
Contact Information

• Phone [phone]
• FAX [phone]
• Web http//www.theparkproject.org
• Address
• 75 Washington Avenue
• Bridgeport, CT 06604

56
Sustaining Collaborations with the Public Schools

• Slides provided by
• Suzanne Hannigan
• Project Director,
• Communities of Care
• City of Worcester and
• Central Massachusetts

57
Worcester Communities of Care

• Worcester Communities of Care (WCC) was the
  recipient of a 1999 grant award.
• The primary goal of Worcester Communities of Care
  was to implement a system of care in the City of
  Worcester through development of a comprehensive
  service delivery system that was individualized
  and tailored to families specific strengths and
  needs by the integrated efforts of all the
  responsible child serving agencies.
• WCC employed a wraparound intervention model,
  enrolling families with youth, ages 8-15 (later
  ages 3-21) with SED, who were at high risk of
  out-of-home placement, school failure and court
  involvement in order to keep these youth in their
  communities and with their families.

58
Development of Partnership with Worcester Public
Schools

• Outside of the family the schools have tremendous
  influence over the development of the child
• Youth with SED
• fail more courses and get poorer grades
• are retained and drop out more often
• experience high levels of social difficulties
  with peers adults
• Parents of youth with SED are frequently involved
  in the school when only when their youth are
  experiencing having problems
• Parents of youth with SED and schools do not
  always not see each other as allies
• Worcester Communities of Care (WCC) and the
  Worcester Public Schools (WPS) had found they had
  many shared System of Care values

59
Challenges to Building this Relationship

• Parents and advocates had reported difficulties
  with
• Not feeling respected or listened to at meetings.
• Resources provided by the schools not meeting the
  individual needs of their child with SED
• Feeling that they were blamed for all of the
  issues presented by their children
• Lack of empathy around the struggles that parents
  have raising youth with SED
• The schools had reported challenges with the
  clinicians providing mental health services in
  the schools
• School-based MH providers decreased available
  "time in learning trying to accommodate
  appointment times.
• MH providers did not understand the school
  culture

60
Building Collaborative Relationships Why is this
Important?

• The Worcester Public Schools and Worcester
  Communities of Care found
• The needs of youth and families cross agency
  mandates- We were in this together.
• Collaborative relationships provide opportunities
  to work together in a more effective and
  efficient manner
• There were opportunities to build on system
  initiatives that were driving change.

61
Beginning Steps of the Worcester Communities of
Care/ Worcester Public Schools initiative

• The WCC/ WPS Initiative began in the fall 2001.
• WCC Rationale for Collaboration with WPS
• WPS funding of the Emotional Support Program
  provided in-kind match support for the WCC SOC
  project
• Collaboration with WPS would enable WCC to
  increase knowledge in the WPS around SOC values
  and principles
• Challenge for WCC Collaboration with WPS
• WCC staff and family members concern that WCC
  would lose its ability to advocate for youth
  with SED in the WPS.
• Technical Assistance from Sandy Keenan -an
  experiential framework that served to dispel the
  fears of staff and families.
• WCC began to adopt an advocacy approach that was
  informed by the mandates of the school system and
  also utilized collaborative problem-solving to
  meet the educational goals of the youth.

62
Development of a Letter of Intent

• On 2/27/02 the Worcester School Department signed
  a Letter of Intent with Worcester Communities of
  Care.
• The Letter of Intent stated
• WPS would pledge in-kind match to WCC through
  newly funded school programs for children with
  SED Emotional Support Programs (ESP).
• WCC and the WPS would develop a training program
  to meet the needs of WPS staff around
  strength-based assessment and planning to meet
  the need of families with youth with SED and
  including those referred from the Emotional
  Support Programs (ESP)
• WCC would enroll youth with SED referred by the
  WPS student support staff who met the WCC
  eligibility requirements into a 2002 summer
  wraparound program.

63
Summer Wraparound

• Summer of 2002 -WCC-Directed Wraparound WPS
  school guidance and adjustments counselors
  referred, students with histories of serious
  emotional and behavioral issues who were at risk
  of losing ground over the summer. WCC enrolled 48
  students and their families enrolled. WPS staff
  participated in the team meetings
• WPS respondents to WCC post-summer program
  survey indicated that 44 of the enrolled youth
  had returned to school after the summer were
  functioning n better than at the end of the
  school year and 29 had had returned to school
  without deterioration in functioning.
• Summer of 2003- WCC-Guided Wraparound WPS
  school guidance and adjustments counselors were
  extensively trained by WCC in the wraparound
  process. These WPS staff facilitated the team
  meetings with on-site coaching from WCC staff.
• Ongoing-WCC Training/ Coaching Contract with the
  WPS Through Safe Schools Healthy Students Grant
  and other funding the WPS has entered into yearly
  contracts with WCC to provide training in
  wraparound and strength-based work with families
  through 6/2008, demonstrating commitment of WPS
  to SOC values and principles.

64
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

• Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports
  (PBIS)
• September 2002, WCC-sponsored presentation by
  Lucille Eber for managers of the Worcester Public
  Schools on and WCC on Positive Behavioral
  Interventions and Supports (PBIS) a school-wide
  discipline and supports approach.
• 2003 WPS implementation of PBIS in host schools
  that were conducive to SOC development.
• WCC commitment to funding a WPS liaison to the
  PBIS effort through the end of the SOC grant
• PBIS liaison currently is also a trainer for PBIS
  in our 2nd Grant. Central Massachusetts
  Communities of Care
• Continued commitment of WPS to the PBIS through
  2008
• WCC Project Director participation as a member of
  the School-Based Mental Health Intake Committee
• WCC provision of intensive care coordination to
  the WPS and other community agencies for youth
  with SED and their families-he Coordinated
  Family-Focused Care

65
Safe Schools Healthy Students

• 2003 WPS awarded Safe Schools/ Healthy Students
• WCC Project Director participation as a member of
  the School-Based Mental Health Intake Committee
• WCC Asst. Project Director participation as a
  member of the School Safety Committee
• WCC provision of intensive care coordination to
  the WPS and other community agencies for youth
  with SED and their families-he Coordinated
  Family-Focused Care
• Community identification of services and supports
  for the WPS Wraparound Teams, Year 3
• 1. Parent/ Professional Advocacy League of MA,
  Worcester Chapter
• 2. Worcester Community Connections Coalition
• 3. CommunityBuild

66
Maintaining Our Collaborative Relationships

• The Worcester Public Schools and Communities of
  Care have continued to collaborate by
• Learning and respecting the mandates of each
  system
• Being willing to listen and negotiate differences
• Supporting new initiatives of each system and
  serving on committees and workgroups when asked
• Providing each system technical assistance and
  training
• Joint advocacy for improved mental health
  service for youth with Serious Emotional
  Disturbances

67
Strategies for Effective Partnerships

• Identify key personnel who are like-minded to
  talk with about collaborating (their roles will
  vary)
• Ask what they need to meet current challenges
  not just what they can do for us
• Listen to mandates and constraints facing schools
  and other child serving agencies
• Look for opportunities to build on system
  initiatives that are driving change
• Respect the expertise and experience the schools
  offer and emphasize the experiential expertise of
  families and teachers (no shame, no blame)
• Use technical assistance, e.g. a school cultural
  broker

68
Maintaining Collaborative Relationships with the
Schools

• Providing consultation and technical assistance
  to the schools in areas of need as identified by
  schools
• Receiving consultations and technical assistance
  from the schools
• Supporting the development of local family and
  youth organizations and community organizations
  that are available to professionals as well as
  families
• Providing training that always includes parent
  and professional trainers
• Being willing to listen, learn, negotiate and
  compromise

69
Lessons learned about collaboration and
partnership

• You have heard how partnerships are formed
• You have heard how collaborative efforts begin
  and are nurtured
• You have heard how they are funded and sustained
• Now lets focus more on families and youth

70
Family / Youth Experiences Resulting From
Negative Interactions with Systems Can Create
Challenges to Building Collaborative
Relationships

• Not being respected or listened to at meetings
• A history of promises not kept
• Cookie cutter solutions that did not meet the
  individual needs of their youth with SED
• Having to fight for everything they got
• Feeling blamed / judged for their childs
  behavior
• Feeling a lack of understanding / empathy for
  their feelings / stress / worries
• Feeling shame and embarrassment about their
  childs behavior
• Feeling dependent on others for help and guidance
• Never being included in any discussions (youth)

These can all happen despite our best intentions.
71
Shared Responsibility With Parents/Families/Youth

• Collaboration with families/youth is central to
  improving the outcomes for students with
  emotional and behavioral needs
• inherent expertise of a child and family to know
  their own strengths
• when a child and family help to come up with a
  solution, they are more likely to buy in to the
  process.
• relationships between a child and family and a
  care provider are evolving to be more of a
  partnership
• Traditional assessment has focused on
  deficits/locates the problem within the child
  and/or family

72
Shared Responsibility With Parents/Families

• Current assessments focus more on strengths and
  have an ecological component that looks at how
  environmental factors (e.g., what the teacher
  does, how the class is organized, how the school
  is organized) sets the stage for or reinforces
  problem behavior
• Provider-driven care asks the question, How can
  the needs of this student be addressed within the
  context of the available services?
• Family-driven care asks a much simpler question
  What do we need to do to address the issues this
  student faces? Services are more individualized
  and tailored to the needs of a child and
  family.
• In family-driven care, the scope is larger/more
  people bring their creative resources to the
  table, committed to implementing lasting, real
  solutions.

73
Levels of Family/Youth Involvement
Policy and decision-making
Families/youth supporting other families/youth/
peer to peer working in service delivery, working
as trainers
Leadership
Families/youth needing services and
supports/Advocating for your own child/self
74

• Time for your questions and answers as well as
  some discussion about what you have heard

75
Activity for Participants

• Now we are going to take a look at organizational
  change..and some activities you can do to refine
  your efforts of collaboration and partnership
  with other systems.

76
Focus of Change
System level
Focus of Evidence Based Services
Organizational level
Focus of Systems Reform
Direct Service
77
Focus of Change
System level
Organizational level
Direct Service
Systems Integration and Strategic Planning
78

• Resource Mapping a methodology used to link
  community resources with an agreed upon vision,
  organizational goals, strategies, or expected
  outcomes.
• Mapping strategies focus on what is already
  present in the community build on the strengths
  within a community.
• Mapping is relationship-driven. Key to mapping
  efforts is the development of partnerships--a
  group of equals with a common interest working
  together over a sustained period of time to
  accomplish common goals.
• 3. Mapping embraces the notion that to
  realize vision and meet goals, a community may
  have to work across programmatic and geographic
  boundaries.

79

PEOPLE IDEAS EFFECTIVE PRACTICES EXPERTISE AUTHORI
TY ENDORSEMENT ACCESS TIME MATERIALS SUPPLIES SPA
CE MACHINERY TRANSPORTATION OTHER
GOODS/SERVICES MONEY DIRECT FUNDING RESTRICTED
FUNDING MATCHING FUNDS LEVERAGED FUNDS NEW GRANT
OPPORTUNITIES
Resource Mapping Phase 1
80
Prevention ModelA Framework for Resource
Mapping
for a few children?
have in place for some children?
What supports and resources do we have in place
for all children?
81

82
Where are the overlapping goals, values and
outcomes? These become the foundation for your
strategic plan for sustainability..
83
RESOURCES TA Centers Websites

• National Center for Mental Health Promotion and
  Youth Violence Prevention (website and link to
  technical partners)www.promoteprevent.org
• http//www.promoteprevent.org/about/partners/defau
  lt.asp
• Safe Schools/ Healthy Students Communications
  Team
• 1.800.790.2647 www.sshscom.org TA_at_sshscom.org
  
• Center for Effective Collaboration
  Practicewww.air.org/cecp
• National Coordinator Training and Technical
  Assistance Centerwww.k12coordinator.org
• Technical Assistance Partnership for Child
  Family Mental Healthwww.air.org/tapartnership

84
RESOURCES MATERIALS

• Teaching and Working with Children with Emotional
  and Behavioral Challenges (Sopris West)
• Addressing Student Problem Behavior (Parts 1, 2,
  3) (CECP Forthcoming, Sopris West)
• Enhancing Collaborations Within and Across
  Disciplines to Advance Mental Health Programs in
  Schools in School Mental Health Handbook.
  (107-118). New York Kluwer Academic Publishing
  Company.

85
RESOURCES MATERIALS

• Safe, Supportive and Successful Schools Step by
  Step (Sopris West)
• Every Child Learning Safe Supportive Schools
  (Learning First Alliance)
• Safe Sound (CASEL)
• Safe, Drug Free, and Effective Schools What
  Works! (www.air.org/cecp)
• The Role of Education in a System of Care
  Effectively Serving Children with Emotional or
  Behavioral Disorders (www.air.org/cecp)