|
Intakes: What Are We Missing? |
Sunday, May 24, 2020 |
6:00 PM–6:50 PM |
Walter E. Washington Convention Center, Level 1, Room 102 |
Area: AUT; Domain: Service Delivery |
Chair: Laura Sabin Milstrey (The BISTA Center) |
Abstract: Initial assessment for new clients are typically authorized 6-8 hours, including observation, interview, assessment, program development and treatment report writing. Ensuring the aforementioned components are completed within these time constraints is a challenge. This may lead to incorrect hour recommendations, incorrect assessment of current skill levels, incorrectly identified behavior reduction strategies, and insufficient parent training targets. The following presentations will address barriers related to insufficient intake time: the first will discuss the use of a synthesized screening tool to reduce intake assessment time and help guide the decision of choosing an appropriate assessment; the second will review the interview, short observation, and synthesized contingency analysis conducted at one individual’s intake assessment to guide program development and treatment direction; the third presentation will compare parent reporting within client initial intakes to the results of their assessments and baseline levels. The symposium will conclude by opening discussion about necessity of intake assessment, acceptable authorization time, discern the necessary and unnecessary components to an informative and complete intake packet, and offer simple tools to mitigate these barriers. |
Instruction Level: Basic |
Keyword(s): Assessment, Autism, Developmental Disability, Intake |
|
ASSIST: Synthesized Screening Tool |
STEPHANIE BAKAZAN (The BISTÅ Center) |
Abstract: Typically, initial intake assessments are given 6-8 hours to complete. Behavior analysts utilize research-based assessments to help guide the development of skill acquisition goals based on the results of these assessments. Depending on client skill level, these assessments tend to take a significant amount of time to complete within such a small time frame. Behavior analysts must also determine the appropriate assessment to use given minimal-to-no information of the client’s skill level prior to intake. This descriptive assessment analyzed the use of a synthesized screening tool to reduce intake assessment time and help guide the decision of choosing an appropriate assessment for 3 clients. |
|
Practical Functional Analyses in an Impractical Time Frame |
ELIZABETH SINGER (The BISTÅ Center) |
Abstract: We are often allotted less than a few hours to conduct initial assessments with new clients and required to base our treatment plans off what little information we were able to gather during this short time. In order to best use this time, we must prioritize the skills assessed using direct observation and parent report. This presentation will review the interview, short observation, and synthesized contingency analysis conducted at one individual’s intake assessment. This information contributed to the development of appropriate treatment direction including steps for behavior intervention and parent training targets. |
|
An Investigation of Correspondence Between Intake Interviews and Baseline Levels |
LAURA SABIN MILSTREY (The BISTA Center) |
Abstract: Current intake processes generally involve open ended questions, or Likert-scale style rankings when reporting occurrences of problem behaviors and their severity, as well as current capabilities with various skills. Though some of these measures prove beneficial to the prescribed skill acquisition and problem behavior reduction programming, correlation between what is reported during this initial intake and actual levels, is typically low. The purpose of this investigation was to identify a sample of five cases, and compare reporting within their initial intakes, to the results of their assessments and baseline levels. The second purpose of this investigation was to identify the disparities, discern necessary and unnecessary components to an informative and complete intake packet, which can better guide efficient programming and therapeutic packages. |
|
|