EXCEPTIONALITY, 8(3), 189204

Copyright 19992000, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Functional Assessment and Comprehensive

Early Intervention

Joshua K. Harrower, Lise Fox, Glen Dunlap, and Don Kincaid

Child and Family Studies
University of South Florida

Functional assessment has been shown to be an essential tool in developing effective behavior support plans for young children with challenging behavior. Such plans have been effective not only in reducing problem behavior and improving socially appropriate behavior, but
also in preventing the development of further, more severe, problem behavior. The purpose
of this article is to outline a process for conducting comprehensive early intervention based
on a comprehensive assessment process that includes functional assessment. A case example
is presented to further illustrate this process. Additional elements essential to the process, including family involvement, collaborative teaming, and implementing intervention in multiple environments, are discussed.

Functional assessment is an invaluable process for developing effective behavioral supports for people of all ages. For young children, a number of demonstrations have shown
that functional assessment can result in interventions that reduce or eliminate serious
problem behaviors while enhancing developmental trajectories and facilitating the acquisition of needed competencies (e.g., Dunlap & Fox, 1999a; Moes & Frea, 2000). In addition, a number of authors (e.g., Dunlap & Fox, 1996; Dunlap, Johnson, & Robbins, 1990;
Reeve & Carr, in press) have advanced the argument that functional assessment and comprehensive assessment-based interventions have the potential to curtail the likelihood
that the later lives of young children will be impaired by serious problem behaviors. In our
view, the extent to which the assessmentintervention process will produce such widespread and durable effects is dependent on a number of considerations: the extent to
which the process involves and centers around the childs family; the extent to which the
assessment process incorporates a broad, lifestyle perspective and includes person-cenRequests for reprints should be sent to Joshua K. Harrower, University of South Florida, DARESCFSFMHI,
University of South Florida, MHC 2113A, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Boulevard, Tampa, FL 33612. E-mail:
harrower@[Link]

190

HARROWER, FOX, DUNLAP, KINCAID

tered (and family-centered) planning; and the extent to which a comprehensive orientation to behavior support is adopted.
The remainder of this article provides brief discussions of important considerations
and elements in the functional assessment and behavioral support processes, particularly
as they relate to family-centered interventions with young children. Some of the issues
and components are illustrated in a case study section, which provides the experience of
a child and family who participated in a model of early intervention that we have been
working on for the past several years (Fox, Dunlap, & Philbrick, 1997). The model is
geared for children who have problem behaviors and extensive developmental challenges, such as autism. Indeed, much of this articles content is based on work conducted
with children and families affected by pervasive disabilities; however, we emphasize
that the considerations raised in the following discussion are likely to have widespread
generality and applicability for all children whose lives are compromised by the presence of serious problem behaviors.

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND FAMILY

INVOLVEMENT
The process of functional assessment and positive behavior support in early intervention
is based on a long line of research and practice (Dunlap et al., 1990; Dunlap & Fox, 1996,
1999a; Fox, Dunlap, & Buschbacher, in press; R. L. Koegel, Koegel, & Surratt, 1992;
McEvoy et al., 1988). A crucial consideration when utilizing functional assessment in
early intervention is that the entire rationale for conducting a functional assessment is to
develop an effective assessment-based plan of intervention. Functional assessment is
central to the approach for addressing problem behavior known as positive behavior support, which is referred to in the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997)
as positive behavior interventions and supports (Sugai et al., in press; Tilly et al., 1998).
Positive behavior support refers to the application of effective, individualized approaches, based on a collaborative, assessment-based process, to develop appropriate behaviors and reduce problem behaviors in a manner that produces durable improvements
in a persons lifestyle (L. K. Koegel, Koegel, & Dunlap, 1996; Rehabilitation Research &
Training Center on Positive Behavioral Support, 2000).
Proponents of positive behavioral support advocate for a team-based approach (e.g.,
Bambara & Knoster, 1998; Hieneman & Dunlap, 1999) that includes input and participation from all individuals who are invested and involved in the life of the focus individual.
Naturally, a team-based approach to a comprehensive functional assessment and positive behavioral support mandates a large measure of family involvement.

A COMPREHENSIVE FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT

PROCESS
We believe that for family-centered early intervention to be fully comprehensive, it
should incorporate not only the use of traditional functional assessment procedures, but

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND EARLY INTERVENTION

191

also the use of person or family-centered planning processes. Although there is not, nor
should there be, a specific format for this process, there are common features to be included in its implementation. A childs team must determine the specific strategies and
account for the specific needs of the child, family, and team.

Person and Family-Centered Planning

Person-centered planning processes were designed to provide a mechanism for understanding individuals with developmental disabilities and to work with them and their supporters in achieving new experiences (OBrien, OBrien, & Mount, 1997). It is a creative
process that emphasizes the identification of the strengths and capacities of the individual
while using collaborative problem solving to seek solutions to barriers and difficulties.
The goal of person-centered planning is the development of a circle of support that assists
the individual in identifying and achieving a vision for the future (Forest & Lusthaus,
1987; Mount & Zwernick, 1988). Although these processes were developed and have
been described primarily for adults and for facilitating transitional arrangements, they are
also quite pertinent for young children and their families.
In the functional assessment and positive behavior support process, person-centered
planning provides a vehicle for thinking creatively and bringing together a circle of support for the child with problem behavior. The person-centered planning process encourages the participation of family, friends, and professionals in contributing to a collective
vision for supporting the child. It is an informal and intimate process where strategies
and solutions are generated by reaching a holistic understanding of the child and family.
This understanding guides and enhances the behavior support process by clarifying the
goals and needs of the child and family while strengthening the shared commitment of
support by the childs family, friends, and service providers.
Person-centered planning can inform the functional assessment process by providing
information on the childs preferences, activities, and environments. As a result, person-centered planning lays a strong foundation for the development of an effective support plan. Person-centered planning might identify and address many of the global or
broad ecological issues impacting the family and childs life. This information compliments the specific and precise information identified in traditional behavior assessment
approaches. The resulting comprehensive assessment process brings the team to an understanding of the purpose and variables surrounding the childs behavior, as well as the
family and team goals for the child. This increases the likelihood of developing a plan
that will effectively support the family system, the childs use of appropriate behavior
and access to an improved lifestyle, and the ongoing functioning of the team.

Functional Assessment
Functional assessment is defined as a process for developing an understanding of the interactions between a specified behavior and events in the environment (Horner & Carr,
1997). In particular, a functional assessment identifies the consequences that represent

192

HARROWER, FOX, DUNLAP, KINCAID

the behaviors function, or purpose, and the contextual events and circumstances that are
predictable antecedents of the behavior (Foster-Johnson & Dunlap, 1993; ONeill,
Vaughn, & Dunlap, 1998; Tilly et al., 1998). By now, many articles and books have described useful direct and indirect methods for conducting functional assessments (e.g.,
ONeill et al., 1997), and a substantial corpus of empirical research provides testimony to
the efficacy and feasibility of the functional assessment approach (Carr et al., 1999; Repp
& Horner, 1999).

Gathering information. There are two strategies for gathering information when
conducting a functional assessment. The first is to talk to the family and other care providers who have direct knowledge of the child and the problem behavior. Families become
partners in the functional assessment process by identifying the environments and activities where the child is most likely to have problem behavior and assisting the professional
in conducting and interpreting observations (Albin, Lucyshyn, Horner, & Flannery,
1996). Parents are often so aware of the antecedents to severe problem behavior that they
frequently engineer various preventative measures within the course of their daily activities. This is not surprising, as it serves the family well to avoid or prevent severe disruptions. Yet, if this kind of information is not effectively solicited from the family, a resulting plan that does not account for this information is likely to fail. For example, a family
might change their dinner routine significantly and allow the toddler with problem behavior to snack all day because sitting in the high chair evokes a tantrum. In this case, it is important to know what accommodations are being made and how they might influence the
development of desired behaviors (e.g., the ability to sit in a chair). Structured interviews
offer a format for systematically collecting information about the nature of the problem
behavior and can easily be tailored to address issues specific to early intervention. For example, information can be gathered regarding the childs activity patterns, play interactions, and symbolic development, all of which are relevant to the functional assessment of
a young childs behavior.
The second strategy for information gathering in the functional assessment process is to
observe the child within the settings and activities where problem behavior is likely to occur. Observations are conducted to validate or supplement the information gained from the
functional assessment interview. Observations should provide information on the nature
and intensity of problem behavior, antecedents or predictors of the problem behavior, the
ways in which others respond to problem behavior, and the perceived functions of the
problem behavior. This information might be collected using anecdotal recording, incident reports or crisis logs, time sampling techniques, and antecedentbehaviorconsequence analysis (Horner, ONeill, & Flannery, 1993; ONeill et al., 1997; ONeill et al.,
1998). In addition, many of these methods have been found to be accurate in determining
the functions of problem behavior displayed even by infant children (Weigle, 2000).
All too often, interventionists take a narrow approach to functional assessment that
adheres to a limited contingency management model of consequences and immediate
antecedents. This approach, however, is rarely adequate when dealing with severe problem behavior. For example, it is often the case that problem behaviors are evoked or exacerbated by internal discomfort or illness, and by general unhappiness with the social,

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND EARLY INTERVENTION

193

curricular, or structural elements of a setting. To achieve durable, meaningful behavior

change, it is often important for the functional assessment process to examine explicitly
the possibility of such setting influences, and for intervention to include pertinent adjustments to such variables as medical treatment and daily routines (e.g., Dadson & Horner,
1993; Kennedy & Itkonen, 1993; Turnbull & Turnbull, 1996). Families are in a unique
position to collect this type of information. For example, the child might appear to have
more problem behavior following nights when the child has had little sleep. The family
also might suspect that days that have a high pollen count and the child is bothered by allergies coincide with more problem behavior from their child. The professional can develop a simple observation checklist for the family to collect information of
wakefulness, high pollen count as reported by the newspaper, and the level of problem
behavior their child exhibits. After 1 or 2 weeks of data, patterns might be revealed that
support or dispute the relation of problem behavior to those events.
As the support provider begins the process of functional assessment, it is critical that
information is shared with the family about the purpose of the process and how information will be used in the development of a behavior support plan. Families are more likely
to reveal information to providers when there is rapport and a trusting relationship (Fox,
Vaughn, Dunlap, & Bucy, 1997). The value of a trusting relationship should not be underestimated. Family members have reported that they often feel judged when their children have problem behavior and might be reluctant to share information that makes them
feel vulnerable or exposed to criticism (Chapman, Kincaid, Shannon, Schall, &
Harrower, in press). The functional assessment interview might yield more complete information once rapport has been established with the family. The family also might be
more willing to allow observations within difficult, yet important, contexts once they
feel assurance that providers are family centered and supportive.

Hypothesis development. The next step in the process is to develop hypotheses

about the problem behavior. These behavioral hypotheses are summary statements of
what was learned through the functional assessment information. Hypothesis statements
represent the best informed guess about the relation of environmental features to problem
behavior and the purposes of problem behavior given the functional assessment information. The hypothesis statements are the foundation for building the behavior support plan.
An examination of the hypothesis statements reveals what skill the child will need to learn
to replace the problem behavior. The goal of the support plan will be to create conditions
that make the problem behavior unnecessary and ineffective for the child (Dunlap,
Vaughn, & ONeill, 1998; ONeill et al., 1997). This is accomplished by teaching the
child a skill that is the functional equivalent of the problem behavior (i.e., results in
achieving the same outcome) and removing the reinforcer for the problem behavior. In
addition, prevention or antecedent strategies are developed to provide the child with adjustments in the environment, activities, and events that reduce the need for the child to
use problem behavior to achieve a goal (Dunlap et al., 1998; ONeill et al., 1997).
It is important that the professional who works with the family in the analysis of functional assessment information and the development of the hypotheses statements maintains sensitivity as to how the family might react to the information presented. Discussions

194

HARROWER, FOX, DUNLAP, KINCAID

about how behaviors are maintained must be presented carefully so that the parents do not
feel that they have done something wrong. It is important that the parent understands
how problem behaviors are based communicatively and how their response might maintain behavior but also that their childs development of conventional communication skills
can be shaped with purposeful intervention.

Functional analysis. When there is ambiguity about the purpose of behavior, a

functional analysis might be used to confirm a hypothesis or identify clear patterns regarding the predictors and consequences associated with problem behavior (ONeill et
al., 1997). In a functional analysis, variables in the environment are manipulated to test
the hypothesized functions of problem behavior. Thus, functional analyses typically require the use of single-subject research designs and are conducted within controlled settings. However, the case can be made that the use of formal functional analysis procedures with young children is rarely necessary because their behaviors are less complex
and their learning histories are relatively brief (Dunlap & Fox, 1996; Dunlap et al., 1990;
Weigle, 2000). Thus, a functional analysis might add a time-consuming and unnecessary
step to the process.

COMPREHENSIVE EARLY INTERVENTION

In positive behavioral support, researchers have called for comprehensive applications of
an assessment-based approach to behavior intervention (Carr et al., 1994; Fox, Vaughn, et
al., 1997; Horner & Carr, 1997; Meyer & Evans, 1989). Interventions are comprehensive
when they (a) are based on a functional assessment of problem behavior; (b) address all
problem behaviors; (c) utilize multiple intervention procedures; (d) apply these procedures throughout the day; and (e) are consistent with the values and resources of the persons providing, and being provided with, behavioral support (Horner & Carr, 1997). The
goal of positive behavioral support is to achieve important lifestyle outcomes for the child
with challenging behavior. Those outcomes are determined individually but might include
accessing new environments and activities as well as developing meaningful and reciprocal social relationships. These outcomes are ambitious and only likely to be achieved
through a sustained effort of behavioral support that is applied in all environments by the
individuals who are most likely to interact with the child with challenging behavior.

Developing the Plan

The development of a behavior support plan with the family to address a childs problem
behavior is a vital step in the provision of comprehensive, assessment-based intervention.
Based on the hypotheses developed from the functional assessment information, strategies and modifications in the environment are identified that might reduce the likelihood
that the child will use problem behavior (Luiselli & Cameron, 1998). When setting events
have been identified that might impact problem behavior, strategies should be developed

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND EARLY INTERVENTION

195

to address those issues. For example, if a child has more problem behavior at preschool
when he or she has skipped eating breakfast, he or she might be offered breakfast on arrival at preschool. Or, if a child is more difficult following a night without sleep, strategies
that will help the child settle down for sleep (e.g., decreasing caffeine in the evening, establishing a consistent bedtime routine) might be included in the support plan.
In addition to making modifications in the childs environment, replacement skills are
identified that match the identified purpose of the problem behavior or will result in the
same outcome as the problem behavior. In selecting the replacement skill or functional
equivalent to the problem behavior, it is critical that the replacement skill that is selected
will be easy for the child to perform and readily interpretable (and responded to) by others in the environment. Recently, researchers have found that teaching functionally
equivalent replacement skills not only increases young childrens use of appropriate behavior but also appears to prevent minor problem behaviors from escalating to more serious ones (Reeve & Carr, in press).
While ensuring that children receive access to desired reinforcement when they do engage in positive behavior, the support plan also must provide instructions for how adults
will react to problem behavior when it occurs. It is important that strategies are outlined
that guide adults in responding to problem behavior in ways that make the behavior ineffective (ONeill et al., 1997). If the problem behavior is not severe, its occurrence might be
treated as an instructional opportunity in which the child might be guided to use the replacement skill (Dunlap et al., 1998), although instructional situations where a child is upset are not the most effective. When incorporating these strategies into a comprehensive
plan, it is important that the replacement skills are taught throughout the day and within a
variety of natural situations (L. K. Koegel, Koegel, Harrower, & Carter, 1999).
The final component of the development of a behavior support plan is to come up with
long-term support strategies that address lifestyle considerations. Although it might
seem unusual to think about a young childs lifestyle, children with severe problem behavior and their families often have very restricted lives (Turnbull & Ruef, 1996). When
children display significant problem behavior, they, and thus their families, are often excluded from engaging in the same activities as peers without such behavior and their
families. It is important that children with challenging behavior and their families are
supported in building the kind of lifestyle they would envision if their children did not
experience behavior problems.

Implementing and Monitoring Outcomes

The development of a technically sound behavior support plan provides a framework for
comprehensive, assessment-based intervention. The behavior support plan will include
many ways that adults will change what they do to support and respond to the child with
problem behavior. This ongoing stage of the process requires that team members specifically collaborate on how the plan will be implemented and monitored. First, the team
must work together to ensure that the plan is implemented with consistency and effective
in achieving their goals. Furthermore, the team (a) identifies the training and resources
needed, (b) determines who is responsible for monitoring implementation, (c) evaluates

196

HARROWER, FOX, DUNLAP, KINCAID

outcomes (through continued data collection), and (d) communicates periodically, making adjustments in the plan, as needed. The interventionist will need to work closely with
the family and other care providers to facilitate their use of these strategies and the modification of their interactions with the child.

Ensuring Contextual Fit

It is essential that the behavior support plan be designed in such a way that the family and
other care providers can implement strategies in all of the childs routines and environments. The concept of contextual fit has been described as the design of behavior support
plans that are compatible with the individual for whom the plan is designed, with the people implementing the plan, and with the environment in which the plan will be implemented (Albin et al., 1996). When the contextual fit of a support plan is good, the plan will
be implemented with fidelity. If the contextual fit is poor, the plan might not be implemented consistently and behavior change will not result. From this perspective, attention
to contextual fit has been a key element in successful applications of comprehensive behavioral support with families and their children with severe problem behavior (Fox,
Vaughn, et al., 1997; Lucyshyn, Albin, & Nixon, 1997; Vaughn, Dunlap, Fox, Clarke, &
Bucy, 1997).
The concept of contextual fit recognizes the critical importance of understanding the
broader ecology of the child in the application of positive behavioral support. It is possible to develop a behavior support plan that is technically sound but does not fit with the
values, routines, and lifestyle patterns of the family (Albin et al., 1996). The development of a plan with contextual fit requires the acknowledgment of the important roles the
family and other caregivers have in the development and implementation of the behavior
support plan. Once again, an effective person-centered planning process will help to
identify many of those issues affecting the child and the ecology of the family system. As
a result, person-centered planning might provide information critical to the contextual fit
of the support plan. Building on this foundation, interventionists then can work in partnership with families in identifying strategies that will be effective in reducing problem
behavior and teaching the child new skills that fit the family context. Furthermore,
strategies are to be developed that are effective and feasible for implementation by all of
the persons who interact with the child.

NICKY: A CASE STUDY

Nicky was a 26-month-old child diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorder who
lived with his father, mother, older brother, and infant sister. He was provided with
speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, and specialized instruction within his
home by the local Part C provider. Nicky had prolonged tantrums that were highly disruptive to his family life and interfered with the ability to be engaged with his therapist and
early interventionist. Nicky would not follow an adults direction, reacted to self-care
routines (bathing, diaper changing) with prolonged tantrums, had difficulty leaving and

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND EARLY INTERVENTION

197

returning home, and protested by having tantrums when others joined his play activities.
Nickys family said they felt that they were unable to impose any demands on him and had
greatly restructured their family life to avoid triggering his problem behavior.
The early intervention team implemented the behavior support process by first dividing responsibility for information gathering through functional assessment. The early interventionist used a functional assessment interview with the family to define the
problem behaviors and identify the possible triggers and maintaining variables associated with Nickys problem behavior. In addition, the early interventionist and occupational therapist conducted observations within routines identified by the family as
problematic. The speech therapist conducted an informal communication and play assessment to contribute information on Nickys strengths and instructional needs. The
family also was provided with observation cards to note the antecedents and consequences to Nickys problem behavior when it occurred.
The entire team, including Nickys parents, met to review the information and identify patterns in Nickys behavior. The team was able to determine that Nicky used tantrums to escape the demands of difficult play activities (i.e., play involving turn taking or
complex action schemes) and self-care routines. When he had tantrums, adults removed
the demand or stopped interacting with him. Nicky also had tantrums when transitions
occurred, even when the transition was to a more desirable activity. Often, when Nicky
tantrummed during a transition, the adult delayed or dropped the transition.
In addition to the review of the functional assessment information, the team conducted a person-centered planning meeting. The person-centered planning meeting included the entire family, the early interventionist, the therapist, Nickys grandmother,
and Nickys godmother. The person-centered planning meeting was the first time that
Nickys family gathered to discuss their commitment to supporting Nicky and their
dreams for his future. In the person-centered planning meeting, the circle of support
identified the following as important goals for Nickys future: (a) developing more play
skills, (b) communicating, (c) becoming independent in self-care, (d) meeting friends in
the community, and (e) going to school.
A behavior support plan was developed for Nicky that included steps to achieve the
goals identified in the person-centered plan and teach him skills that would replace his
problem behavior. His behavior support plan included long-term support strategies, prevention strategies, replacement skill instruction, and ways to respond to the problem behavior when it occurred. The long-term support strategies included providing Nicky with
a predictable activity schedule that included outdoor play and community experiences,
inviting children over to play with Nicky, and teaching Nicky to be independent in
self-care routines. Strategies to prevent the occurrence of problem behavior included using a visual schedule to inform Nicky of activities and choices, offering Nicky choices
within activities and routines, using transition signals, simplifying language input and
pairing prompts with visual symbols or gestures, and embedding turn taking within difficult routines and play activities. Nicky was taught to use his visual schedule and choice
boards to make requests and was taught to gesture a protest or no in response to
choices. In addition, play routines and activities were structured to teach Nicky to tolerate simple social exchanges. Finally, strategies for responding to Nickys problem behavior included following through with a demands that were given to Nicky, offering

198

HARROWER, FOX, DUNLAP, KINCAID

help to Nicky to complete one step of an activity routine before allowing escape, responding to Nickys protest by labeling the message (e.g., You dont want to go in the
car), and calmly guiding him through the activity.
Nickys behavior support plan was implemented by his early intervention team and
his family. The early interventionist modeled for the family how to use each of the strategies and provided the family with feedback when observing their interactions with
Nicky. The speech therapist developed Nickys visual schedule and assisted the family
in refining the schedule and developing additional visual supports for Nicky. Everyone
who interacted with Nicky (including the family) used a communication notebook to
comment on how Nicky was responding to the behavior support plan and tracked his
progress in skill acquisition and problem behavior reduction.
At age 3, Nicky was able to transition to a preschool classroom at his elementary
school. A transition meeting was held prior to his attending school to share the most recent version of his behavior support plan and discuss important strategies for ensuring a
smooth transition. His tantrums were minimal, and he adjusted quickly to his new environment, therapists, and teachers.

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
Having outlined a process for functional assessment and comprehensive early intervention, we now turn to a discussion regarding three issues of particular relevance to the process as it relates specifically to early intervention. These three issues include effectively
involving families, utilizing collaborative teaming, and implementing intervention in
multiple contexts and are each essential to comprehensive early intervention.

Family Involvement
The practice of involving families in the process of functional assessment and positive behavioral support for young children with challenges in behavioral adaptation is extremely
important. The impact of challenging behavior on family life can be highly disruptive and
pervasive, affecting all family members and family lifestyle (Turnbull & Ruef, 1996).
Positive behavioral support is a comprehensive approach that can be arranged to benefit
the full family system. The general rationale and importance of family involvement in
young childrens educational and support programs has been articulated in many ways
and in many places (e.g., Division of Early Childhood, 1999; Dunlap, Newton, Fox,
Benito, & Vaughn, in press; Dunst, 1997; L. K. Koegel et al., 1999).
In comparison to teachers and other professionals, families almost always possess the
greatest amount of information about their child. Family members typically spend an extensive number of hours with their child, and they have the benefit of having observed
and interacted with him or her on a daily basis for years. It is also typical that family
members have gained special insights into many aspects of their childs behavior that are
extremely relevant for a functional assessment. In addition, because young children with
significant behavioral challenges usually bring extended and intensive caregiving re-

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND EARLY INTERVENTION

199

sponsibilities, many families are invested heavily in the behavioral support process. The
presence of significant problem behaviors creates a great impact on families functioning (Fox, Vaughn, et al., 1997), and, therefore, families often are deeply concerned with
finding practical real life solutions.
Fortunately, there is a current trend in the literature toward specifically addressing
family involvement, as well as including family members as partners in the process of
functional assessment and positive behavior support (Lucyshyn, Dunlap, & Albin, in
press). Family members have been shown to be effective informants, data collectors, and
intervention agents in home and community contexts (Derby et al., 1997; Vaughn,
Clarke, & Dunlap, 1997; Wacker, Cooper, Peck, Derby, & Berg, 1999). Research has
further shown that parents can be successful at generating and testing hypotheses regarding the functions of the problem behaviors of their children (Arndorfer, Miltenberger,
Woster, Rortvedt, & Gaffaney, 1994) as well as effectively teaching appropriate replacement behaviors based on the functional assessment information they gather (Frea &
Hepburn, 1999). Additional reports are describing significant involvement on the part of
family members in the processes of functional assessment and positive behavior support
(e.g., Boulware, Schwartz, & McBride, 1999; Moes & Frea, 2000). A family-centered
model of early intervention relies on the premise that parents will gain expertise and confidence in conducting functional assessments and developing assessment-based interventions for their children (Dunlap & Fox, 1996, 1999a; Fox, Benito, & Dunlap, in press;
Fox, Dunlap, & Philbrick, 1997). The expectation with this model is that parents will
come to possess the problem-solving and team membership skills that will enable them
to maintain an active involvement (and leadership) throughout the many years of their
childrens development.
Early intervention efforts must recognize the critical need to provide supports that
serve to strengthen and sustain the family system. Dunlap and Fox (1999b) described
three issues in this area of family support that deserve special attention. First, professionals should strive to enhance family competence and confidence. This includes enhancing
skills in promoting the development of the child as well as increasing the families familiarity with the availability of, and process for accessing, relevant services. Second,
early intervention efforts should address support from a lifestyle perspective. Thus, by
incorporating intervention strategies (whereby individual family members are able to
maintain ongoing daily routines that consist of their preferences, values, and ambitions),
the likelihood of success can be increased dramatically. Finally, early intervention efforts should arrange for stability and continuity in support relationships. This is an especially important issue in the area of early intervention. Once a child turns 3 years old, the
family-centered services mandated by Part C of IDEA end, and the childs services are
described in educational terms offered under the provisions of Part B of IDEA. Without
the family-centered orientation in Part C of IDEA, families can find themselves without
family support resources, resulting in a difficult transitional period in determining the
next round of intervention services. Thus, there exists a current need to provide families
with stable, ongoing, and supportive relationships with professionals to ensure smooth
transitions in a familys ongoing access to appropriate intervention and support. Furthermore, it is essential that families are encouraged and allowed to take on advocacy and
leadership roles with regard to their childs services.

200

HARROWER, FOX, DUNLAP, KINCAID

Collaborative Teaming
Although collaborative teaming generally is recognized as an essential component of the
positive behavioral support process (Dunlap et al., 2000), it is particularly necessary
when designing and implementing comprehensive early intervention. Recent research
supports the development of comprehensive intervention from an interdisciplinary and
collaborative team approach that promotes family-professional partnerships (Fox,
Vaughn, et al., 1997; Vaughn, Dunlap, et al., 1997). Collaborative teaming can increase
the probability that services will be coordinated, and interventions will be comprehensive
and integrated, both issues of extreme importance to early intervention. Furthermore,
when interdisciplinary teams work together for a common goal, they increase their potential to promote broad, durable changes in a childs behavior (Hieneman & Dunlap, 1999).
Positive behavioral support is enhanced by the development of partnerships with the persons who are most intimately involved with the individual who is displaying problem behavior (Albin et al., 1996). Thus, positive behavioral support explicitly incorporates collaborative teaming in its development and implementation.
The construction of a collaborative team can be particularly challenging when the
child is receiving early intervention in a variety of environments by a variety of providers. It is critically important that one person serve as a facilitator of the teaming process
with an intention to involve all the childs providers. In addition, it will be important that
the teaming process is welcoming to child care providers as well as the early intervention
professionals. The success of the behavior support effort hinges on the application of the
plan with integrity in all of the childs environments.

Implementing Intervention Across Environments

Just as assessment information is to be gathered in multiple contexts, for intervention to
be comprehensive it too must be implemented across environments. Again, this is particularly important when designing supports for young children. The 1997 amendments to
IDEA charge early interventionists with the responsibility to move beyond applying intervention in environments that were designed to meet special needs and provide services
in natural environments, including the home, and community settings in which children
without disabilities participate (Pub. L. 105117, 20 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. (1997)). A
sampling of environments where intervention might need to be implemented for young
children includes preschool programs, child care centers, parties and outings with peers,
shopping centers, parks, restaurants, churches, museums, and friends houses. Providing
early intervention in natural, multiple environments is important as it increases the likelihood that children will generalize skills across settings. It also allows children increased
opportunity to practice newly learned skills as well as to imitate and participate in play activities, verbal exchanges, and social interactions with their typically developing peers.
Implementation across natural environments will require that the functional assessment process considers all of the childs environments and activity routines and that a
comprehensive support plan will be developed that can be implemented in those environments. This might pose a challenge for early intervention teams who are accustomed

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND EARLY INTERVENTION

201

to working in more traditional settings (e.g., child care, home, etc.) and at traditional
hours. To develop a fruitful functional assessment and effective comprehensive support
plan, professionals will have to be willing to conduct observations and provide support
in new environments (e.g., shopping center, playground) and at times of the day when
the family and child need support (e.g., dinner, bath).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In this article we have attempted to stress the importance of some core elements when
utilizing functional assessment with young children displaying problem behavior. We
emphasize the importance of involving families in the process in a way that is fully respectful of each family as an individual system characterized by idiosyncratic values,
ambitions, interests, strengths, and challenges. In addition, each family that includes a
young child with behavioral challenges experiences significant needs, and although
there are commonalties, these needs differ from family to family and usually include
identifiable concerns that span the areas of informational, social, and emotional support (Turnbull & Turnbull, 1996). Because families are by far the most essential resource available for their children, the ultimate effectiveness of early intervention
corresponds directly to the extent that families can be supported in their efforts to
maintain a cohesive, nurturing, and positive familial context. Therefore, it is essential
that early interventionists adopt a comprehensive and individually responsive approach to family support to ensure that the different kinds of needs a family experiences can be addressed in a sensitive and meaningful manner.
Within the last few years, there has been a significant increase in the number of effective indirect and direct methods for determining why a child is exhibiting challenging behavior. In addition, these methods are being adapted and applied in such a way as to be
responsive to a familys strengths and existing support systems. As a result, families are
being supported in developing collaborations with professionals and interventionists in
conducting functional assessments, developing hypotheses, and designing and implementing positive behavior support interventions.
Finally, although contextual fit issues in positive behavioral support are important in
all environments and across individuals of all ages, they are critically important in the
context of family life. Positive behavioral support approaches are not so much about
changing the behavior of a child as changing the behavior of families and interventionists supporting the child. A technically sound behavior support plan will be most effective if developed through collaborative teaming of parents, professionals, and other
caregivers. The resulting behavioral support plan will be more efficient and effective because it will address issues important to not only an individual child but also his or her
family. As a result, desirable quality of life outcomes are likely to be achieved by not
only the child but also the family.
As we begin to apply what we have learned about supporting families, functional assessment and behavioral support plans are no longer being seen as activities that happen
to a family but are developed in complete collaboration with a family. Families have always had the central role of educating, caring for, and nurturing their children. In the

202

HARROWER, FOX, DUNLAP, KINCAID

framework of a positive behavior support process, families are also taking appropriate
collaborative leadership roles in all aspects of the behavioral support process for their
child with challenging behaviors. This recognition of the primary role of family members in the positive behavioral support process will continue to have a tremendous impact on the quality of life of individual families and valued outcomes for individual
children. Furthermore, this recognition will shape and direct the way positive behavioral
interventions are developed, applied, and evaluated in the future.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This article was supported in part by U.S. Department of Education Grant No.
H326S980003. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department, and no official endorsement by the Department should be inferred.

REFERENCES
Albin, R. W., Lucyshyn, J. M., Horner, R. H., & Flannery, K. B. (1996). Contextual fit for behavioral support
plans. In L. K. Koegel, R. L. Koegel, & G. Dunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including people
with difficult behavior in the community (pp. 8198). Baltimore: Brookes.
Arndorfer, R. E., Miltenberger, R. G., Woster, S. H., Rortvedt, A. K., & Gaffaney, T. (1994). Home-based descriptive and experimental analysis of problem behaviors in children. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education, 14(1), 6487.
Bambara, L. M., & Knoster, T. (1998). Designing positive behavior support plans. Washington, DC: American
Association on Mental Retardation.
Boulware, G. L., Schwartz, I., & McBride, B. (1999). Addressing challenging behaviors at home: Working with
families to find solutions. Young Exceptional Children, 3, 2127.
Carr, E. G., Horner, R. H., Turnbull, A., Marquis, J., Magito-McLaughlin, D., McAtee, M., Smith, C. E., Anderson-Ryand, K. A., Ruef, M., & Doolabh, A. (1999). Positive behavior support as an approach for dealing
with problem behavior in people with developmental disabilities: A research synthesis. American Association on Mental Retardation Monograph.
Carr, E. G., Levin, L., McConnachie, G., Carlson, J. I., Kemp, D. C., & Smith, C. E. (1994). Communication-based interventions for problem behavior: A users guide for producing behavior change. Baltimore:
Brookes.
Chapman, C., Kincaid, D. K., Shannon, P., Schall, C., & Harrower, J. K. (in press). Its about us: Families and
positive behavior support. In J. M. Lucyshyn, G. Dunlap, & R. W. Albin (Eds.), Families, family life, and
positive behavior support: Addressing the challenge of problem behaviors in family contexts. Baltimore:
Brookes.
Dadson, S., & Horner, R. H. (1993). Manipulating setting events to decrease problem behaviors: A case study.
Teaching Exceptional Children, 25(1), 5355.
Derby, K. M., Wacker, D. P., Berg, W., DeRaad, A., Ulrich, S., Asmus, J., Harding, J., Prouty, A., Laffey, P., &
Stoner, E. (1997). The long-term effects of functional communication training in home settings. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 507531.
Division of Early Childhood. (1999). Concept paper on the identification of and intervention with challenging
behavior. Reston, VA: Author.
Dunlap, G., & Fox, L. (1996). Early intervention and serious problem behaviors: A comprehensive approach. In
L. K. Koegel, R. L. Koegel, & G. Dunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including people with difficult
behavior in the community (pp. 3150). Baltimore: Brookes.

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND EARLY INTERVENTION

203

Dunlap, G., & Fox, L. (1999a). A demonstration of behavioral support for young children with autism. Journal
of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1(2), 7787.
Dunlap, G., & Fox, L. (1999b). Supporting families of young children with autism. Infants and Young Children,
12, 4854.
Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Knoster, T., Fox, L., Anderson, J., & Albin, R. W. (2000). Essential elements of
inservice training in positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2(1), 2232.
Dunlap, G., Johnson, L. F., & Robbins, F. (1990). Preventing serious behavior problems through skill development and early intervention. In A. C. Repp & N. N. Singh (Eds.), Perspectives on the use of nonaversive and
aversive interventions for persons with developmental disabilities (pp. 273286). New York: Sycamore.
Dunlap, G., Newton, S., Fox, L., Benito, N., & Vaughn, B. (in press). Family involvement in functional assessment and positive behavior support. Focus on Autism.
Dunlap, G., Vaughn, B. J., & ONeill, R. E. (1998). Comprehensive behavioral support: Application and intervention. In A. M. Wetherby, S. F. Warren, & J. Reichle (Eds.), Transitions in prelinguistic communication
(pp. 343364). Baltimore: Brookes.
Dunst, C. J. (1997). Conceptual and empirical foundations of family-centered practice. In R. J. H. Illback & C.
T. Cobb (Eds.), Integrated services for children and families: Opportunities for psychological practice (pp.
7591). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Forest, M., & Lusthaus, E. (1987). The kaleidoscope: Challenge to the cascade. In M. Forest (Ed.), More education/integration (pp. 116). Ontario, Canada: G. Allan Roeher Institute.
Foster-Johnson, L., & Dunlap, G. (1993). Using functional assessment to develop effective, individualized interventions. Teaching Exceptional Children, 25, 4450.
Fox, L., Benito, N., & Dunlap, G. (in press). Early intervention with families of young children with autism
spectrum disorder and problem behavior. In J. M. Lucyshyn, G. Dunlap, & R. W. Albin (Eds.), Families,
family life, and positive behavioral support: Addressing the challenge of problem behavior in family contexts. Baltimore: Brookes.
Fox, L., Dunlap, G., & Buschbacher, P. (in press). Understanding and intervening with young childrens problem behavior: A comprehensive approach. In A. M. Wetherby & B. M. Prizant (Eds.), Communication and
language issues in autism and pervasive developmental disorder: A transactional developmental perspective. Baltimore: Brookes.
Fox, L., Dunlap, G., & Philbrick, L. A. (1997). Providing individualized supports to young children with autism
and their families. Journal of Early Intervention, 21, 114.
Fox, L., Vaughn, B. J., Dunlap, G., & Bucy, M. (1997). Parentprofessional partnership in behavioral support:
A qualitative analysis of one familys experience. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe
Handicaps, 22, 198207.
Frea, W. D., & Hepburn, S. L. (1999). Teaching parents of children with autism to perform functional assessments to plan interventions for extremely disruptive behaviors. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,
1, 112116.
Hieneman, M., & Dunlap, G. (1999). Issues and challenges in implementing community- based support for two
boys with severe behavioral difficulties. In J. R. Scotti & L. H. Meyer (Eds.), Behavioral intervention: Principles, models, and practices (pp. 363384). Baltimore: Brookes.
Horner, R. H., & Carr, E. G. (1997). Behavioral support for students with severe disabilities: Functional assessment and comprehensive intervention. The Journal of Special Education, 31, 84104.
Horner, R. H., ONeill, R. E., & Flannery, K. B. (1993). Building effective behavior support plans from functional assessment information. In M. E. Snell (Ed.), Systematic instruction for students with severe handicaps (4th ed., pp. 184214). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U. S. C. 1400 et seq. (1997).
Kennedy, C. H., & Itkonen, T. (1993). Effects of setting events on the problem behavior of students with severe
disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 321327.
Koegel, L. K., Koegel, R. L., & Dunlap, G. (Eds.). (1996). Positive behavioral support: Including people with
difficult behavior in the community. Baltimore: Brookes.
Koegel, L. K., Koegel, R. L., Harrower, J. K., & Carter, C. M. (1999). Pivotal response intervention I: Overview
of approach. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 24, 174185.
Koegel, R. L., Koegel, L. K., & Surratt, A. V. (1992). Language intervention and disruptive behavior in preschool children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 22, 141153.

204

HARROWER, FOX, DUNLAP, KINCAID

Lucyshyn, J. M., Albin, R. W., & Nixon, C. D. (1997). Embedding comprehensive behavioral support in family
ecology: An experimental, single-case analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65,
241251.
Lucyshyn, J. M., Dunlap, G., & Albin, R. W. (Eds.). (in press). Families, family life, and positive behavior support: Addressing the challenge of problem behaviors in family contexts. Baltimore: Brookes.
Luiselli, J. K., & Cameron, M. J. (Eds.). (1998). Antecedent control: Innovative approaches to behavioral support. Baltimore: Brookes.
McEvoy, M. A., Nordquist, V. M., Twardosz, S., Heckaman, K., Wehby, J. H., & Denny, R. K. (1988). Promoting autistic childrens peer interaction in an integrated early childhood setting using affection activities.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 193200.
Meyer, L. H., & Evans, I. M. (1989). Nonaversive intervention for behavior problems: A manual for home and
community. Baltimore: Brookes.
Moes, D. R., & Frea, W. D. (2000). Using family context to inform intervention planning for the treatment of a
child with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2(1), 4046.
Mount, B., & Zwernick, K. (1988). Its never too early its never too late. St. Paul, MN: Metropolitan Council.
OBrien, J., OBrien, L., & Mount, B. (1997). Person-centered planning has arrived or has it? Mental Retardation, 35, 480488.
ONeill, R. E., Horner, R. H., Albin, R. W., Storey, K., Sprague, J. R., & Newton, J. S. (1997). Functional assessment of problem behavior: A practical assessment guide. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
ONeill, R. E., Vaughn, B. J., & Dunlap, G. (1998). Comprehensive behavioral support: Assessment issues and
strategies. In A. M. Wetherby, S. F. Warren, & J. Reichle (Eds.), Transitions in prelinguistic communication
(pp. 313341). Baltimore: Brookes.
Reeve, C. E., & Carr, E. G. (in press). Prevention of severe behavior problems in children with developmental
disorders. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions.
Rehabilitation Research & Training Center on Positive Behavioral Support. (2000). Definition of positive behavioral support. Retrieved September 25, 2000 from the World Wide Web: [Link]
Repp, A. C., & Horner, R. H. (Eds.). (1999). Functional analysis of problem behavior: From effective assessment to effective support. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Lewis, T. J., Nelson, C. M., Scott, T., Liaupsin, C., Sailor,
W., Turnbull, A. P., Turnbull, H. R., Wickham, D., Wilcox, B., & Ruef, M. (in press). Applying positive behavioral support and functional behavioral assessment in schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions.
Tilly, W. D., Knoster, T. P., Kovaleski, J., Bambara, L., Dunlap, G., & Kincaid, D. (1998). Functional behavioral assessment: Policy development in light of emerging research and practice. Alexandria, VA: National
Association of State Directors of Special Education.
Turnbull, A. P., & Ruef, M. (1996). Family perspectives on problem behavior. Mental Retardation, 34,
280293.
Turnbull, A. P., & Turnbull, H. R. (1996). Group action planning as a strategy for providing comprehensive
family support. In L. K. Koegel, R. L. Koegel, & G. Dunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including
people with difficult behavior in the community (pp. 99114). Baltimore: Brookes.
Vaughn, B. J., Clarke, S., & Dunlap, G. (1997). Assessment-based intervention for severe behavior problems in
a natural family context. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 713716.
Vaughn, B. J., Dunlap, G., Fox, L., Clarke, S., & Bucy, M. (1997). Parentprofessional partnership in behavioral support: A case study of community-based intervention. The Journal of the Association for Persons
With Severe Handicaps, 22, 186197.
Wacker, D. P., Cooper, L. J., Peck, S. M., Derby, K. M., & Berg, W. K. (1999). Community-based functional assessment. In A. C. Repp & R. H. Horner (Eds.), Functional analysis of problem behavior: From effective assessment to effective support (pp. 3256). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Weigle, K. (2000). Functional analysis: An application to motherinfant interactions. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, West Virginia University, Morgantown.