Compassionate Care Conference 2026 Wrap-Up

Summary

---

ABA Inside Track – Compassionate Care Conference 2026 Wrap-Up

Podcast: ABA Inside Track
Episode Title: Compassionate Care Conference 2026 Wrap-Up
Date: August 12, 2026
Hosts: Robert Perry Crews, Diana, Jackie McDonald (via earlier attendance)

---

Episode Overview

This special bonus episode brings listeners a comprehensive recap of the Upstate Caring Partners Compassionate Care Conference (UCP CCC) 2026, held in Utica, New York. The hosts share their experiences, conference highlights, and in-depth, live interviews with poster presenters who showcased a diverse range of research and practice projects at the intersection of ABA and compassionate, trauma-informed care. The episode provides both a high-level summary and on-the-ground insights for behavior analysts and practitioners interested in cutting-edge developments in the field.

---

1. Conference Overview & Major Themes

What Is the Compassionate Care Conference?

• UCP CCC (Upstate Caring Partners Compassionate Care Conference) is a biannual event in Utica, NY, focused on shifting ABA practice to prioritize trauma-informed, compassionate care, and skills-based treatment.
• Attendees included researchers, professors, students, clinicians, and partner agencies presenting both practice-focused and research-based posters.
• Main jobs for the hosts this year: running ABA Inside Track trivia night and moderating a panel on research dissemination.

Quote:
“This was their third biannual conference. We were able to go two years ago and were invited back by Dr. Eric Jacobson and his team up there. We had an excellent time.” – Robert [01:17]

Conference Format & Vibe

• Day 1: Single-track sessions in the grand ballroom with featured speakers.
• Day 2: Multi-track breakouts focused on director-level topics and clinical issues, including health care.

Quote:
“It’s not a huge conference. There’s maybe, I don’t know, like 300 people probably there, so you see people again that you’ve seen before – and that’s cool.” – Diana [15:50]

---

2. Panel Session: Research for Practitioners

Title and Focus

• Moderated by the ABA Inside Track team.
• Panel title: “How much ‘search’ should be in research? Considerations on accessible research dissemination for practitioners in the field.”
• Participants: Greg Hanley, Rachel Taylor, John Garcio, Celia Heyman, Awab Abdel Jalil.

Key Points

• Discussed the research-to-practice gap in ABA and how to bridge it.
• Considered the role of AI, specialized journals, practitioner reading groups, and improved instruction for students.
• Explored future directions, including the need for editors and journals responsive to practitioner realities.

Quote:
“You always think it’s going to go one way, and then the conversation always ends up going a totally different way with lots of interesting ideas, really looking at all the different ways that everyone is responsible for disseminating research.” – Robert [05:19]

---

3. Featured Speakers & Notable Sessions

Greg Hanley

• In-depth review of practical functional assessment (PFA) and skills-based treatment (SBT) at scale—especially ongoing work in Hawaii aiming for an RCT design.
  Quote:
  “I think the only downside to this conference is… if you are really negative towards… using skills based training… you’d be kind of sad or frustrated at a lot of this conference…” – Robert [08:18]

Dr. Awab Abdel Jalil

• Explored the scientific definition—and history—of “compassion” within ABA, including interactive elements for audience engagement.

Dr. John Austin

• “Behavioral hacks” from an OBM perspective; distributed free signed books for audience participation.

Profound Autism Group (Bobby Rogers & Judith Orsini)

• Advocates/parents discussed the lived experience of profound autism, redefining care standards and recognizing caregiver dedication.

---

4. Community & Collaboration

• Hosts highlight their appreciation for the welcoming, collaborative atmosphere, including generous trivia night prizes (books, Utica Club Beer), and shout-outs to professionals working on community practice projects around PFASBT.
• The importance of humility and collaboration in ABA was a recurring theme.

---

5. Poster Session Highlights

Structure

• Extended opportunity for live interviews with over a dozen poster presenters.
• Focused on both research projects and practical, data-based interventions spanning schools, clinics, and residential settings.

---

6. Poster Interviews: Key Projects & Insights

Note: Brief summaries, standout findings, and timestamps for each highlighted poster.

---

(a) Teaching Coping Strategies for Challenging Behavior

Presenters: Sherry, Nadja, Francesca
[18:24]

• Progressive muscle relaxation (PMR), OT-informed movement breaks, and emotion identification for students with challenging behaviors.
• Early results: Students quickly mastered strategies and used them spontaneously.

Quote:
“He would come up to staff and say ‘frog jump’ and then proceed to jump like a frog to show us…” – Presenter [21:06]

---

(b) Low-Intensity ABA in Australia: Doing More With Less

Presenter: Karishma (+ Aminat)
[21:35]

• 80% funding cut led to the development of a strength-based, goal-directed model (CCTT: Communication, Cooperation, Transition, Toleration) for 2-4 hrs/week.
• Significant gains for families and staff, prioritizing meaningful goals.

Quote:
“My biggest takeaway… has been that we have to be intentional with everything… even if the funding doesn’t increase, I’m just happy that we are able to do good work in the lives of families and keep the passion alive.” – Karishma [25:53]

---

(c) Digitalizing Incident Management With PowerApps

Presenter: Nicole
[26:36]

• Transitioned from paper to PowerApps (via Office365) for incident reporting, leading to fewer errors, clear audit trails, and proactive data trend reviews.
• Regulatory compliance and social validity improved.

Quote:
“They want more… They see the value in it…” – Nicole [31:58]

---

(d) Leveraging Data (Power BI & AI) to Improve Risk Assessment

Presenters: Sirisha and Jesse
[33:15]

• Linked digitized incident reports and other data into Power BI dashboards for risk assessment, compliance, and staff alerts.
• Piloting AI (with de-identified data and LLMs) to summarize shift notes, align documentation, and reduce risk via automated workflows.

Quote:
“I think the human is the important part here… we validated, we’re continually collecting feedback… making sure this agent is being directed to look for [the right things].” – Jesse [40:36]

---

(e) Improving IEP Quality Across Campuses

Presenter: Emma
[43:13]

• Systems-level intervention: Created a checklist-based IEP review process (with PowerApp) and BST for staff across four school programs.
• Notable improvements in both compliance and ABA quality evident in maintenance data.

Quote:
“By that fifth IEP, they’re scoring 95% at the initial review. So they’re doing really excellent work.” – Emma [45:27]

---

(f) Connect: The Clinical Intersection Model

Presenters: Amy and Caitlin
[47:03]

• Developed a new framework prioritizing safety, connection, and prerequisite skills before higher-order ABA curricula.
• Found better outcomes than traditional “box-checking” VB-MAPP treatments; focus on social validity and interdisciplinary benchmarks.

Quote:
“When we focus on that social connection with the client first, we actually see more progress in communication, in socialization, and daily living skills…” – Amy [51:41]

---

(g) BCBA Consultation in Schools

Presenters: Alina & Tabitha
[54:38]

• Consultation model to reduce unsafe/disruptive behaviors through function-based interventions and enhanced communication in public schools.
• Emphasis on building rapport with staff and adapting to NY’s unique BCBA regulatory environment.

Quote:
“Their experiences were firefighting, were mental health treatment. So it’s a whole new scope of treatment for the teams…” – Tabitha [61:00]

---

(h) Integrated Therapeutic Approach – PFA, SBT, and EFL

Presenters: Victoria & Carmen
[61:58]

• Combined PFA/SBT and the Essential for Living curriculum in group activities (gardening, art, cooking) for students with years of prior ABA with limited communication gains.
• Event-based teaching in natural contexts yielded breakthrough functional outcomes and family-reported social validity.

Quote:
“We stopped the drill-and-kill history. Natural opportunities just kept presenting itself—social validity of this is absolutely astonishing... 'He’s found his joy...'" – Carmen/Victoria [64:19]

---

(i) Preparing Adults with Profound Autism for Dental Exams

Presenter: Danielle
[68:16]

• Developed a task analyzed, communication-rich protocol for dental visits, avoiding escape extinction and honoring break requests; significant reduction in restraints and problem behaviors.

Quote:
“All three participants were able to complete all the steps of the task analysis without using traditional escape extinction. We honored requests for breaks…” – Danielle [70:35]

---

(j) RBT-Led Skill-Based Treatment for SIB

Presenter: Alicia (RBT undergraduate)
[73:20]

• Skill-based treatment (SBT) for a student with severe self-injury; included social validity checks with staff, careful generalization steps, and spontaneous speech as generalization.

Quote:
“Since generalizing into the classroom, we have been seeing spontaneous vocal verbal responses from the student…” – Alicia [78:08]

---

(k) Transitions – Reducing Unsafe Behavior

Presenters: Victoria & Kaya
[82:27]

• Changing criterion design and van “reinforcement” for difficult school-to-residence transitions; layered reinforcement, rules, and explicit staff pairing practices.

Quote:
“It went smoother than we could have ever imagined... zero challenging behaviors to zero during intervention and generalization.” – Victoria [85:57]

---

(l) Indirectly Addressing Stereotypy via Enhanced Choice Model

Presenters: Charles & Rex
[89:49]

• Did not directly target “flying” (motor stereotypy); instead prioritized communication, engagement, and skill-based treatments; saw natural 98% reduction in stereotypy.

Quote:
“As we built trust… we started to see a decrease in that desire to engage in stereotypy for regulation and more socially significant engagement.” – Charles [91:51]

---

(m) Medical Exam Preparedness via Task Analysis

Presenter: Atara
[96:33]

• Task-analyzed medical exam (46 steps); individualized shaping (with interdisciplinary OT/PT collaboration) improved student success for all steps, including wait times.

Quote:
“We used a task analysis in order to teach the skills needed to go through a medical exam… Each step was broken down so they would complete the step, have access to their preferred items…after three times, it was considered mastered.” – Atara [97:02]

---

(n) BST for SBT – Training Staff on Skill-Based Treatment

Presenters: Paige & Ainsley
[100:57]

• Used Behavioral Skills Training (BST) and video modeling to rapidly teach new staff to mastery in SBT components.
• Training averaged just 50 minutes; all staff maintained high-fidelity implementation.

Quote:
“Once we went into BST training, all of our participants reached mastery criterion within three trials…average duration 50 minutes…” – Paige [102:54]

---

7. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “[Trivia prizes] just kept coming. People kept donating books... The real prize was the 24 pack of Utica Club Beer.” – Robert [03:26]
• “We have so much history that doesn’t always get taught… Guess what? We’re going to have some older pictures [in trivia].” – Dr. Austin (via Robert), [10:15]
• “It’s important for us to remember that we can’t solve every problem by ourselves.” – Robert [11:23]
• "He’s found his joy. He’s talking so much more at home. We were able to go to the movies for the first time in five to six years as a family.” – Parent reported by Victoria, [64:19]

---

8. Final Thoughts & Looking Forward

• The hosts express gratitude to conference organizers (Dr. Eric Jacobson, Awab Abdel Jalil, Katie Sodja, Tabby Kane), and to all participants for fostering a warm, learning-rich environment.
• Emphasis on keeping the dates open for the next UCP CCC in summer 2028.
• The remainder of the episode (from [18:24] onward) contains live, detailed poster interviews—valuable “street audio” for practitioners curious about the frontline of compassionate ABA innovation.

---

For more details, tune in to specific timestamps for the topics of most interest. For anyone interested in trauma-informed, practical ABA and community innovations, this episode delivers an engaging, deep dive into the future directions of compassionate care.

---

Transcript

[A]

Foreign.

[B]

And welcome to a very special bonus episode of ABA Inside Track, the podcast that's like reading in your car, but safer. I'm your host, Robert Perry Crews and with me at the end of our long journey from Utica, New York, it's me, Diana.

[C]

Hello.

[B]

Jackie McDonald, our other co host was also in Utica, New York with us. However, she went to her own house and so is not available to film this part of our special bonus episode.

[D]

And Donna, why do we have a

[B]

bonus episode coming out this week?

[E]

Oh, our bonus episode is all about the UCPCC conference that we just attended. It's an extra episode. It is not for CEUs. It's just our summary review and poster session interviews from the conference.

[B]

Yeah. So the UCP is upstate Caring Partners and the CCC is the Compassionate Caring Conference. Now this is.

[E]

Yeah, I guess it is ccc, but maybe you don't need to say conference. It's like ATM machine perhaps. Yeah.

[B]

In any case, it's up in Utica in New York every two years. This was their third biannual conference. We were able to go two years ago and we were invited back by Dr. Eric Jacobson and and his team up there. We had a excellent time.

[D]

It was a really, really great conference.

[B]

We got to do multiple. We'll say some of the things we did well. We'll name some of the highlights of the conference itself in case you're interested in going two years from now. And then we had a great chance to talk with many folks who were presenting posters on a lot of different subjects. Now if you're kind of new to going to conferences, posters are just a really great way to sort of take a small bit of research that maybe is more of a less going to be a published paper and more of a practice update. Sometimes it does turn into a published paper later. Sometimes students do these. But actually the UCP CCC posters were kind of a mix. We had some students, we had some folks doing data analysis, we had some visiting professors, we had some, you know, folks sort of from partner sites, from a company sort of talking about kind of more case study work. So it was really a lot of different evidence, excellent discussions and I hope you're going to find when we play that audio, just a, a bevy of interesting ideas.

[E]

Plethora.

[B]

A plethora of interesting ideas. So Dana and Jackie and I all went up there. We were actually just getting back from, from our trip. We had a chance to visit some family after that, after the trip up to, up to Utica and we Were invited. Our main two jobs were trivia. We did our ABA inside track trivia, which if you haven't seen us do that. Well, that's, that's. That sounds like a YP your problem. We'll hopefully be doing that again. It was a. It was a. I thought it was a hit. It was a great setup this year. We had a nice microphone set up.

[D]

We had the visuals behind us.

[B]

We had a really good crowd. Everyone was really, really engaged in the

[E]

hotel bar or slash lounge.

[B]

Yeah. We did a great picture round where right as the round was starting, all the people in the picture round, because they were speakers from the conference, all came in, were on their own team.

[E]

Yep. That was funny. They did really well that round.

[B]

Yeah. Some excellent prizes. Some excellent prizes.

[E]

Oh my gosh.

[B]

They just kept coming. People kept donating books.

[E]

Yeah. People were bringing up extra books that they wanted to donate to be part of the prize packages. Signed copies of books. But the, you know, the, the real prize up there was the 24 pack of Utica beer.

[B]

Utica Club.

[E]

Utica Club. That's what it's called. Utica Club Beer. Came with a little flask that. That went pretty quick.

[F]

Yeah.

[B]

Yeah, that was a good. It was a good prize.

[E]

It was really fun. And yeah, lots of people came and they said they had a great time. So thank you for coming if you were there.

[G]

Yeah.

[B]

And our other job was we were moderating a panel with a lot of excellent leaders in the field. Unlike some conferences, I think the Compassionate Care conference is really focused on how do we shift the field of ABA into providing trauma informed care. So there's a lot of work related to practical functional assessment skills based treatment. Definitely some other topics. A lot of either researchers, clinic directors. We had some really great speakers from the profound autism group.

[H]

Yep.

[B]

That speak as well on day two. Just so excellent.

[D]

But our talk was.

[B]

Do you want to say that it was your. It was your great title for, for what the panel was.

[E]

Yeah, it was how much search should be in research Considerations on accessible research dissemination for practitioners in the field.

[B]

Yeah.

[E]

And then the. Our panelists were Greg Hanley, Rachel Taylor, John Garcio, Celia Heyman and Awab Abdel Jalil. So awesome crew. Yeah, they had lots of great comments.

[B]

Yeah, it was. It's always very interesting to hear from such a wide array of individ. A wide array of individuals because sometimes, you know, and Danny, you sort of took the lead on writing the questions and then we sort of like looked through and thought like, oh, well, I

[D]

wonder what Their answers will be, you

[B]

know, you always get that as a, as a moderator and you always think it's going to go one way and then the conversations always end up going a totally different way with like lots of interesting ideas, really sort of looking at all the different ways that everyone is responsible for disseminating research.

[E]

Every, you know, the challenges with the, with the research to practice gap, why that exists and what we can do better as a field to try to remedy that. That gap.

[B]

Yeah, but just lots of different, lots of different solutions. We sort of talked about, you know, does AI have a place in it? Is it the editor's job to come up with a focus of journals that don't currently exist that might get more traction? Is it about, you know, us individual practitioners doing more to get people involved in smaller reading groups? Is it. Professors need to teach their students how to read papers more thoroughly. So again, a lot of, a lot of excellent ideas. We just asked the questions. I thought we were pretty funny to start everything off, but it was mostly just the intros and, and the outros there on us. So it was really great to speak to all those folks.

[E]

Yeah, I sort of thought there'd be a little more focus on, well, do we need to be changing like what the research looks like to ensure that it has the highest level of a ability possible. We didn't get to all our questions though, which was sags. I really liked our last two.

[D]

I know it's.

[B]

And they were a good panel. They were all very, you know, good

[D]

with each other's time.

[B]

They weren't doubling over each other.

[E]

Oh yeah, yeah.

[B]

But it just, you never feel like

[E]

you have enough time is you just don't have a lot of time.

[D]

Yeah, it's the sort of thing you'd

[B]

almost need to do like five separate 30 minute talks and then you splice together the best ideas probably would be if you wanted to maximize all of that work. But I mean, you know, we, we do that every week. You know, you have an hour and you're like, we're going to cover so much information. It just never feels like it's as much as you want to cover when we have special guests or even when it's just the three of us talking about some research articles. But that was, that was a lot of fun. We always enjoy getting a chance to do a little moderation. We also, while we were there, got to listen to. It was, it was fun. Like day one was just single track. So you stayed in the grand ballroom and you just listened to all the great speakers. Day two, you really had the multi track components. So there was a focus sometimes on being more of a kind of a director level, how to spread change or maybe a clinical level, a variety of topics. I'm on healthcare, but I think. So we split up a little bit, a little bit on that second day. But day one, we had Dr. Hanley speaking, doing a very kind of thorough review of the work that his consulting firm and a lot of his students have been doing around PFA SBT at scale. Again, I think the only downside to this conference is if you are really negative towards or you're concerned about the direction of using skills based training as a major treatment component, or maybe moving away from analog FAS to, you know, almost full focus on practical functional assessment. You'll be kind of sad or frustrated at a lot of this conference because

[E]

we probably wouldn't be at this conference.

[B]

You probably wouldn't go to this conference. But if you, if you magically ended up there, you know, I'm going to be a grumpy. No one would be mean about it. But you'd sort of be the odd man, the odd person out at the conference because these are folks who are mostly looking to either implement SBT or they've been using PFA sbt and they're looking to put it to larger scale. Certainly, you know, Greg Hanley speaking a lot about some of the work they're doing right now in Hawaii as a comparison, kind of trying to move towards more like an RCT study of some of the PFA SPT methodology.

[E]

We need more RCTs in our field. So I was excited to hear that.

[B]

That was really cool. We had Dr. Wab Abdel Jalil talking about compassion, a definition of compassion, starting all the way at Taylor. Like a history of compassion.

[I]

Yeah.

[B]

As a scientific term, it was really excellent looking at what does it mean to be compassionate versus as, you know, sort of just a fun action word that doesn't mean anything to actually how would we define compassionate action as applied behavior analysts.

[E]

He also, he put up a cool picture of like four old guys in the field and try, you know, tried to get the audience to figure out who they were. And it was kind of tricky. Do you remember who it was?

[D]

Sibiju was one of them.

[B]

And Mot Wolf, was he in there? Who else was there? I forget the other two.

[E]

It was Risley and Bear.

[B]

Oh, okay.

[E]

Yeah, yeah. Great picture.

[B]

Should have interrupted that one.

[D]

I know. Well, funny enough, Dr. John Austin, who

[B]

is, you know, the next speaker we're

[E]

going to talk about.

[B]

But after trivia, he was saying how much he really liked having some of the picture rounds, having some kind of reference to older material. He says, you know, even though we're kind of a young field, we have so much history that doesn't always get taught. So spoiler alert, if you're going to be coming to any updated trivia that we'll be doing in the next year, guess what? We're going to have some older pictures. And let's see how folks do. So there's a, there's a little, little prediction market bet for you.

[I]

All right.

[B]

And speaking of Dr. Austin, he did a really nice talk, talking, you know, about behavioral hacks in terms of kind of the OBM side of running your organizations, which was a lot of fun. I meant it.

[E]

Great speaker.

[D]

I know. He's.

[B]

He is really fun.

[F]

He.

[B]

He is a guy that when you see a picture of him smiling, that is what he looks like when he does a talk. Just very personable, very friendly. I meant to see if I could see if I could sneak a hardcover book of results and get him to sign it for me, but I got embarrassed asking, so I didn't get a chance to. But, oh, well, maybe. Maybe next time. But he was very friendly.

[E]

He also brought in maybe 20 copies of his book to this talk. And as he asked questions of the audience, anyone who raised their hand and gave an answer got a book.

[B]

Oh, yeah. And people were asking.

[D]

People were answering a heck of a lot.

[E]

It was like, Oprah, Yes. You get a book. You get a book. It was pretty fun. We already had the book, so.

[B]

Yeah, we do. We got, we got the electronic copy when we talked about it on the show. And then Bobby Rogers and Judith or City from the, I think the Profound Autism group, which I think is actually located here in Massachusetts, or at least they have their conference up here in Massachusetts.

[E]

The conference is here. They're all over.

[B]

Yeah. But that they, they were, they were excellent speakers, you know, parents and advocates and leaders. And it was really nice. I think it's been a while. I think we've had a lot of conferences recently where we have been asked to practice as behavior analysts, practice humility, cultural humility, or just humility as practitioners, which is always important, I think, for us to do. We have an amazing science, but it's important for us to remember that we can't solve every problem by ourselves. And I really appreciated that they took a little bit of time at the end just to kind of just let everyone give themselves a chance to give a pat on the back for really being such, you know, caring human beings. And, you know, sometimes you need that. And it was, I really appreciated. It was very warm. It was very genuine and very, very

[E]

appreciative of the work everyone was doing. It's really great. Yeah.

[B]

But again, the discussion of profound autism. What does that mean? It was really nice to sort of hear how that work had come to define that. What does that care mean as someone who's going to need 247 care and not just necessarily being about, you know, type 1, 2, 3 or whatever's in DSM, you know, DSM 5. So was really excellent, excellent perspective.

[E]

And then all of these speakers were really fantastic.

[B]

It was really great.

[E]

Yeah, it was, it was a great lineup.

[B]

And then we sort of broke out for, for the afternoon. I do want to shout out. I know we talk on the show all the time about communities of practice and I want to shout out Rhond Musi and Tina Gun, who are part of my PFA SBT community of practice. And they did an excellent talk on scaling. Some of which they, they, they did give me a really nice shout out because they'd asked if I could talk about some, some things I'd said at a previous meeting. They put it into a really nice, productive. Any thoughts I had, they added to their PowerPoint. I sort of just was grousing a little bit about sometimes hard it can be to get PFASBT buy in.

[J]

In.

[D]

In schools.

[B]

Not always, but sometimes. And they were very kind to listen to me complain for a little bit and then directly answered some of the questions I had for them in the talk, which it's very rare that you

[D]

get a group to do that.

[B]

And so I just wanted to say thank them for the great work they were going to do, whether I complained at them or not. But it was really nice to sort of have a little bit of extra know how of them you kind of being in that group. So thanks to them. And then I know Jackie went to some other talks and, and Daniel went some other talks in the afternoon as well, like healthcare.

[D]

There was, it was a lot, there

[B]

were a lot of great options.

[E]

Yeah, I went to Brandon Franklin's talk on using, you know, friendly procedures in order to increase dental health visits. And what was cool about that talk is, you know, the audience was like, fairly familiar, I think, with the approach in, in theory he's. And he was like, it's easy to write about this, but let me just show you. And so he had two like 10 probably 10 minute clips where he just went through and like, here's where I, here's where we first like introduced a toothbrush. Here's where I, you know, was able to get them to floss and like, you can just really see what the whole process looked like. And, and he just emphasized like, it's, it's slow, it's messy, it's shaping. You know, there's an art to this and, and it's not going to go like perfectly or the same way every time. And that's okay. That's what the process is like. It was just, it was really cool. It was nice to see.

[B]

Well, we had a great time and again, just wanted to, you know, thank everyone who invited us. So Dr. Eric Jacobson Wall, Abdel Jaleel,

[E]

Katie Sodja ran the, ran the conference behind the scenes. And then Tabby Kane also is heavily involved there.

[B]

Yeah,

[E]

a lot of folks, it takes a lot of folks to run a conference. And then I also wanted to shout out some listeners and friends that we met along the way. So we met Haley, we met Victoria, we met Sarah, we met Hannah and probably many other folks that I might be forgetting, forgetting their names too. But lots of folks came up and said hi to us and that they listened to the show, which we totally appreciate. And also we made some new friends that we had never met before and who maybe didn't listen to the show. And that's also completely fine. But it was really cool. It's like a, it's not a huge conference. There's maybe, I don't know, like 300 people probably there. So you like see people again that you have seen before and that's cool. And so you just kind of like, you're like, oh, hey, like I see you again. I've seen, you know, Teresa Ainsley. Yeah, lots and lots of new friends that we made. So thanks everybody. So, Carmen.

[I]

Sorry.

[B]

No, no.

[D]

So we had a blast.

[B]

So again, if you are thinking of saving the date we have two years from now and this, I believe they'll do it again in the summer up in, up in Utica. We definitely recommend taking a trip up and hopefully we'll be there. Hopefully we'll be there as well. But we had a blast. And that kind of brings us to the end of our, our spiel. So what we're going to do next is we had such a great amount of time given to us and Dr. Abdel Juliel was so kind in sort of helping facilitate time with the folks at the posters that we even were

[D]

able to get, I think we got

[B]

like, like 80% of folk. Usually we ran out of some time.

[E]

It was a very long poster session.

[B]

It was a good chunk of time. We had enough time to talk with everyone but. But he'd come over and say I think over there they're totally ready for you. They were practicing. So we had everyone kind of ready to talk. Which usually it's one of those things I'm like hi, I'm sticking a microphone in your face.

[D]

Let's go.

[B]

You want to talk. And people are always very friendly but there's a sense of like whoa. Wasn't expecting this. But everyone seemed ready to talk about their work. They're saying such, you know, they were, they were just ready to go. So we got some nice summaries that did some nice follow up questions.

[E]

Well I or Jackie and I presented a poster as well for our two of our graduate students work. They were nice enough to let us bring the poster and talk about it at this conference. So you didn't interview me.

[B]

You said don't interview you.

[E]

I know, but all I'm trying to say is because I am a post was a poster presenter. I also got the email from Awab saying hey aba, Inside track is going to come around and interview you, so be ready.

[D]

There's even a picture of us so

[B]

they knew who to look for.

[E]

So that was great. I don't think we've ever had that before. And it made people much more ready for the experience. So that was great. That was. Yeah, I'm gonna have to do that from now on.

[K]

Yeah.

[B]

So for the rest of the episode you're gonna get a chance to hear kind of the unfiltered street audio just coming up to folks. You know, I usually chat for, you know, a little bit of time and you kind of set up to do and then they explain what they were doing. Sometimes I had some follow up questions, sometimes they just told me exactly what was on the poster and they, they painted a great picture for y'.

[J]

All.

[B]

But we had a lot of great, a lot of great folks sharing. So I introduced each of them and the topic of their poster and then we discussed it for a little bit. But we hope you enjoy that. It's kind of just a little, little taste of what at least one part of the conference was like. But anyway, so I hope you enjoy that poster session as much as we enjoyed the whole conference and keep your eye out for the next CCC 2028. But yeah, please do enjoy the remainder of our time. Up in Utica. And with that, let's take it away. Me in the past.

[D]

All right, let's see. Yeah, looks like it's working. Okay, so I am here with Sherry and Nadja and Francesca. We're at.

[G]

Where are we?

[B]

We're in Utica.

[D]

We're in fabulous Utica. And we're going to be talking about their poster teaching coping strategies with, you know, as. As a response to challenging behavior. Correct. Is that. Is that it? So I'd love to hear a little bit more about this because I know coping strategy is one of those. One of those kind of buzzwords of like, oh, coping. But it's such a big class, so I'd love to hear kind of what specifically coping strategies were you looking at? How did you train them? I mean, I guess we can start with research.

[L]

So research suggests that, you know, pmr, progressive muscle relaxation can help with reducing those problem behaviors as well as, like, self regulation. So we did a little bit of like, frog dumps, bear walks, you know, identifying emotions, things of that nature.

[J]

So part of what helped us decide on some of the strategies that we chose was we collaborated with the client's ot and she kind of said, like, hey, you know, this behavior looks like he might be seeking these types of input. And so he was, you know, seeking through hands, feet, body. And so we chose, you know, bear walk, frog jump, the fast high fives as ways to kind of give that input that they were searching for. So we had a lot of success with teaching the strategies. He mastered them quite quickly. And then we broke down the PMR step by step to teach based on,

[I]

like, we're on the body.

[D]

So it was sort of in. In response to just sort of patterns of challenging behavior. This was sort of an alternative step to sort of take kind of in between, like, emotion, you know, operating kind of emotional responding. Just like, let's do something different when you're starting to feel that way. Here's a chain of events that was kind of the. The thought process.

[M]

Yeah.

[D]

So this is a fairly new study.

[H]

We started working with him in May. So we got to the point where

[D]

we felt confident that he new the skills. Our next step is to take it into the classroom setting. So when he is displaying some of those warning signs, we're hoping that we can get him to engage in these alternatives to see that his challenging behavior lessens over time.

[H]

That's our hope.

[D]

Do the students seem to like the skills?

[F]

Like.

[D]

Like, I know you collaborated with the ot Usually they're pretty helpful with finding lots and Lots of examples of activities and hopefully, you know, the ones the child enjoys the most. Did you get feedback from?

[N]

Seems to really like

[J]

outside of sessions. He would come up to staff and say frog jump and then proceed to jump like a frog to show us that he could frog jump. So yeah, he definitely enjoyed the time and sessions and with the adults.

[D]

Excellent, excellent. And you're going to be doing more work is in the classroom coming up. Excellent. All right, well, thank you very much for taking some time and going through your poster and your study. Appreciate it. Give me one second. All right.

[F]

All right.

[D]

So I'm here talking with Karishma about and Aminat over there about their study or their poster here at ucp. Connect with Compassion. I love a good title with a colon. Nice job there. But you're fostering meaningful progress in low frequency early intervention ABA program. So tell me a little bit about

[F]

what you did here.

[L]

Absolutely. So this study evolved from a place where. Don't you. Don't we just love doing ABA at. At the place that we do where we have got RBTs, senior behavior technicians, then we've got BCBAs working together collaboratively and bringing meaningful changes in the lives of kids. Right. We don't have that in Australia anymore. Well, we had 80% of the funding slash in the last three years and we were in a position where we were receiving two to four hours per week. So I was in a position where I could have actually fought with insurance companies and asked for more money or I could have used my science and said can I still provide services and support to the families in low intensity and low frequency ABA and see where that takes me. This is what originated this study altogether where I I focused on selecting a space, making a space where low frequency early intervention ABA can lead to changes. So what I designed was I can instead of doing assessments, developmental assessments, I created a sense strength based interview where I literally sat with the families and asked them about what do they really want from this intervention? What do they want at the end of the program that we want to be connected, conducting. And then I conducted a baseline assessment of those skills and we together sat with the goal planning. We weren't just sitting at VB map. We were sitting with. Do you think that this goal is going to be contextual and meaningful for your child? Is it going to be replicated in the daycare? I'm not going to be waiting for generalization. I'm going to be planning that generalization from the beginning because we are in a position where we have to be making Everything contextual. And then we ran the study for six months with five participants who all had ASD diagnosis and they were all previously receiving ABA but could no longer receive it at that intensity. This is what led to me formulating the CCTT model. It's divided into communication, cooperation, transition and toleration. These are what I call as foundational skills. And this is going to be helping with preventing behaviors of concerns and still bringing socially significant change in the lives of the children. And we saw some beautiful outcomes. I was still able to prioritize on bringing joy to the families, creating good connections. And at the same time I could see that their functional communication is increasing, they're making more choices. Is I'm not working on those 50 mans. I'm working on those requests that are actually going to be meaningful to that participant. Altogether I was seeing there's a significant difference in their cooperation. They were choosing to work, they were looking for my sessions. And even if I was seeing them in low intensity, it was what is important, which is the results. Right. I also saw significant decrease in behaviors. What the parents reported were that their bruises were healing. The child was meaningfully participating in the activities on an everyday basis. And it wasn't just me. The clinicians who were also collaborating on the cases, such as the speech and occupational therapists, they also reported meaningful changes. So here is what is happening in Australia and I really hope that we have more research and data on low frequency aba.

[D]

It's a lot of this. It does feel like a happy ending of do more with less actually resulted in more meaningful outcomes in a way like you just got to the heart of. These are what's important to my client, my stakeholder. But it does remind me of some of the work that Dr. Francesca Delia Espinosa was doing in Europe during COVID And it's kind of sad that we're post Covid and sort of dealing with that same resource drain. So I really do. While I'm glad that the results were so strong, I really do hope that some of that funding gets put back into place.

[L]

Well, I think we are nothing but pragmatic when it comes to being in our field and we will keep on evolving ourselves. I think my biggest takeaway of the conference has been that we have to be intentional with everything that we are doing. And even if the funding doesn't increase, I'm just happy that we are able to do. Do good work in the lives of the families and keep the passion alive.

[F]

Well, good.

[D]

Keep keeping optimism alive. Even with bad news from funding Sources. I mean, that's. I guess step one is just what can we do differently? So I really appreciate hearing about. About your poster and your study, and I see future directions. I hope it continues to go as successfully as it has so far.

[L]

Thank you. Very excited for it.

[H]

All right.

[D]

I'm here with Nicole and Nicole, I. I'm gonna be honest. I picked. I wanted to talk to you about your poster because anyone telling me that paper past, AI, future. I'm a little skeptical about the work here. I'm the guy, I think we mentioned the panel earlier of some people like to print out their papers. I print all my articles. If I have to read it digitally, I'm like, I don't think I want to do it. I can't read it till I get it in my hands. So tell me, make me feel better. Make me feel better about your poster here. We're not getting rid of paper forever. What are we doing here?

[O]

Believe it or not, we still have paper, so I can tell you about it.

[D]

Okay.

[J]

All right.

[O]

So with paper, they're filled out, they're handwritten. Sometimes they're difficult to read. Sometimes they're not all filled out correctly and they got to get fixed. They go into one folder, then they're passed to another. Another person, another folder, another office, you know, then they're going to get faxed to our incident management team. Right. Long process. And there's a timeline or required time frame. You have to get them done. So our goal was to utilize power apps to hopefully improve that process.

[N]

Okay.

[D]

And PowerApps is the. That's the app itself. That's the name of the app, or

[O]

just this general category of Office 365 power platform. So part of their suite has PowerApps. So we have developers who are complete geniuses. They never say no.

[C]

I love them.

[O]

So what we've built is a way to have required fields. It can be filled out anywhere as long as you can log into Office365 dropdowns, very little text fields. So it limits that room for error. We still have text fields just nowadays. Then it routes. So you select. The person has to go to next within the app. They get an email notification. They go in, finish their section. We have some power apps that have four or five people that it routes to very efficiently at that point in time. When the form is completed, it can be sent to our incident management, whoever that final sign off is. Now, typically by that point, everything's filled out correctly, Right? It's all there. You can read it all the signatures are appropriate and we have a beautiful audit trail with power apps. So at that point in time it's completed and if corrections need to be made, it's usually caught before it gets to incident management. So normally they'll reach out to me or developers and say, oh, we have to correct something and it hasn't even got to incident management to where they have to address it. We can take care of it before it even gets there. So yeah, so that's the great piece of the power apps then from this we're then able to join all this data with other implications and really get a great view of what's going on. And not only that, but the proactive

[N]

approach because now we have all this

[O]

data, we can now see trends and hopefully prevent something in the future from happening. Yeah, the proactive piece of it is really impressive to me. I worked in program for almost 10 years in understanding. Now the data that we're getting and getting all these proactive pieces and understanding what could potentially be avoided is huge.

[D]

All right now, right now this is focused on the, on your problem behavior kind of incidents. So like, kind of like, like crisis paperwork or this is, this is, this is everything is getting digitized or that's the goal.

[O]

So incident forms, restrictive interventions, safety assessment, minor incidents and all of that really got developed between 2024 and 2026. However, we have, we built over 30 power apps in 2025. Okay, so is everything going digital? I have learned that not everything should be a power app, but the majority of what our currently paper we are going in that direction to improve workflows for everybody.

[D]

Okay, I bet there was some friction. Can you tell me a horror story? The first time the F didn't work and, and then you had to fix it afterwards.

[I]

Oh.

[O]

Oh, that's odd. I mean it.

[D]

No bugs in the system.

[A]

It's just.

[O]

Oh, everything smooths out.

[D]

Yeah, it's perfect.

[O]

Yeah. No, absolutely. Anytime a power app is launched, we try to pilot it. What was great in the the beginning is we picked some really wonderful. The people that we picked were people who were comfortable and people who weren't. You got to have a good mix.

[D]

Okay.

[P]

Okay.

[O]

So picking them and then doing the pilots, getting them used to it. There was a lot of training involved,

[D]

a lot of teams meetings, a lot

[O]

of in person meeting getting them comfortable with it. But really after the first year, first year and a half, people were reaching out to us saying why can't this be upon our. Why can't that be a power.

[D]

It was like, wow, okay, this, there's your social validity.

[F]

I want more.

[O]

They want more. They see the value in it, you know, however, anytime you're rolling out something brand new, you're going to run into bugs and it's expensive. We try to work them out.

[C]

When.

[O]

During the pilot, but we always take into account things are going to break. The point is we corrected as quick, quickly as we possibly can, and we get it going as quickly as possible.

[D]

Well, I, I wish you the best of luck with your.

[B]

With your AI future.

[D]

I'm going to keep my paper for now, but.

[O]

I understand.

[D]

But, you know, maybe just special occasions, we'll call out the old data sheets.

[O]

So with paper, what's really great about this, and I forgot to mention, is all the information that goes into the power app prints to a PDF, so

[D]

I can have the best of both worlds.

[G]

You can.

[Q]

Okay.

[O]

Yes. You actually can. And I forgot to mention that, but yes. So it will print to a New York State form. It'll print to an official form, an agency form, whatever you want. It maps to it. You can print it off. It's all right, I get it. And we, that was one of the biggest requests is can this print to paper. And we, we do meet that need.

[G]

Okay.

[D]

All right. You're selling me a little bit more with that. I appreciate it. Thanks for thinking of us Paper fans out in the audience.

[F]

Appreciate it.

[D]

All right, well, thank you so much, Nicole. I appreciate your time.

[G]

Thank you for stopping by.

[D]

And I'll start with kind of both of you, if you mind hanging out. So I'm over here with Sirisha and Jesse. We have two posters, but I was told all the posters in this corner are telling me a story. And we talked to Nicole earlier about kind of the switch to the power apps trying to use online data, and now it looks like your posters are using that data in interesting ways. So I'd kind of love to hear the rest of the data usage story here.

[R]

Yes.

[S]

So initially we used to have everything on paper, as Nepal mentioned, and then we moved to power apps, and then we had a huge amount of data and everything. All of the data is in backend, in the SharePoint, in SQL, in our warehouses. And then we then moved to Power Bi to report everything, which we had for clinicians, for leadership, for behavior technicians, and everybody to see and analyze each individual's risk behavior or a staffing metric or a staffing individuals metric. So this particular thing is a high risk report where we see which PWs or individual is at a higher risk of elopement. Or ER calls, 911 emergency calls or head injury protocol stuff. So based on that, the clinicians will get the data for past month, past week or past day. It's a near real time data. And then they put them into a special review or an additional review based off of that and then discuss if the kid needs any special treatment or any extra additional support or care. And then they move on to the team meetings and then discuss what actions that need to be taken. And then we also send out email alerts for them every week to see which individual has an issue with the OR at higher risk prior week. So that would be easy for them to take action the next week for each clinician.

[D]

Oh wow. So sounds like it require required a lot of sort of thinking through the flow chart of how to take the data once the data was all electronic. Okay, now, now you know, what does it go into application wise? How do we send everything out? Yeah, I'm guessing it was a lot of like individual programming to create that system rather than off, just off the shelf software.

[S]

Or we have our own inbuilt forms which are provided by clinicians like a customized form for each individual incident forms. So that's all in PowerApps. So they input everything into power apps and then all of that is connected into SharePoint list. Each form has each list and then we connect all of those lists to the Power BI report. So this particular report has around 10 more than 10 different sources of SharePoint list. So we connect all of them and map all of the individuals and map all of the programs and then make into a union table and then put them into a single table to see which, where what is the ranking or what is the count or what is their risk behavior so that they could have a clear idea of who that individual and how is it performing or if that action needs to be taken for them.

[D]

Okay, gotcha.

[P]

It's going to be pretty common place in an industry like this. We have a lot of data, a lot of data. We collect day to day for every individual and it's a lot of sources. And the fact that we've managed to put this together has alleviated a lot of things already and enabled a lot of other more exciting projects as well.

[D]

Okay, and so Jesse, does that bring us to talking about the AI or how AI is kind of coming into this picture here?

[P]

Yeah, absolutely. You know the high index reports tells us a lot about behavior, but the data that this is based on, not just quantitatively but qualitatively looks at shift notes and Documentation for service and goals, incidents. And the numbers, the numbers show the immensity of what we collect.

[D]

So it's a lot.

[B]

It's a lot in the tens of thousands of notes.

[P]

And that's just May and June, oh God. Of this year. And for five of our residential sites, not even any of our other programs.

[D]

Oh, okay.

[P]

So that's a lot for a team to exam on a day to day basis and a lot for when you're talking about the care for a particular individual. So what we did was use these same data sets that exist out there and use AI to kind of bring them together, build the data connections, de identify before anything hits an LLM. So making sure we're using IDs, hashing where we can and really making sure that we're being also secure about the data working, we build these workflows using like a no code workflow builder to pilot to, to be able to start something. And these workflows not only like compile the data, you also have an agent that actually analyzes the notes. So one thing LLMs are really good at natural language. So they're really good at putting together the context and the actual text that goes into all of it. So using AI to analyze that based on, on a set of standards data sources, we have knowledge base based entirely in regulation, for example, and our training guidance and running the audit logic with the agent. We also, I mean the agent also puts together the templates and delivers the emails. But a lot of this was done with our subject matter experts. I think the most important part is the validation. We had, you know, with our residential teams, with our clinical teams, our behavioral team. We have analysts that know so much about the data, but we also have people that are serving the people we serve that know about the day to day intricacies of what that means, what that. But for us it was really important that we at least start somewhere because it's a lot of dangers.

[D]

I can imagine. Now how does, because you mentioned it was de identified data before you put it into the LLM because I'm guessing you're using one of the like the commercially available.

[P]

Yeah, we're using a closed source, not open source model. Commercially available.

[D]

Okay.

[P]

I'm not going to say which one unless they want to pay me.

[D]

Oh, there you go. That's, you know, they're getting enough money last I checked. Right. So but in terms of that, how does the de identified data then? So you're looking more at trends or could. But you mentioned it's sending it's able to send emails. So how does it take the DE identified data to then give you something that is identified?

[P]

So what we're comparing specifically is, say, an incident that occurs and the notes and the documentation that our behavior specialists might have behind them and making sure that they are, in fact, compliant. This was a big part of our compliance team and where they help to step in. So preparing whether or not the narrative in those notes matches what we're saying is happening in these incidents or in the day to day. We're down to the shift. We're down to the service that we're providing for a person.

[D]

Okay, all right. The individual id.

[T]

Okay.

[D]

Oh, okay. So the individual id, There's. Okay, there's a way to find that on the back end. The humans get to do that person. Yes. Okay.

[P]

I think the human is the important part here. Like we validated, we're continually collecting feedback from our staff, from our president, from our program managers, our resident managers, from our compliance team. Understand what we're flagging and really following the instructions. That's really what it comes down to. Making sure this agent is being directed to look for being

[U]

instance.

[S]

Gotcha.

[D]

Okay, well, I like anything that AI and then a human does something with the information. So this sounds very, very, very promising. Is it sort of where it is or. It looks like it's still kind of moving out of pilot phase at this point or.

[P]

We're still in pilot.

[D]

Okay. Still in pilot phase.

[P]

We haven't connected enough data to make a significant. We've definitely had some key learning, the first being one, these incidents are not incidents.

[U]

Sorry.

[P]

The documentation gaps are clustered, of course, by site for specific stat. So now let's go back and retrain. And the second key learning is that AI is really good at doing one thing and one thing. So this workflow, as you know, through this ui, yes, it has multiple steps. But as you're really considering how this is built, it's also multiple LLMs. It's multiple agents thinking through each piece to make sure that what we're getting is transparent. You know, we're trying to minimize hallucination as much as possible and improve reliability. So that really takes a lot of simplifying for the agent, but also using what we can from the human, the human side to make sure that it's working him.

[D]

All right, well, I appreciate you both kind of sharing about this data analysis process if it's very big one, and I'm glad you're doing it and not me because it seems very, very hard and confusing and I appreciate the time you took to make it make sense to the non data giant data set people of mine. So thank you very much to both of you. All right, all right. I'm here with Emma and we are talking. Emma, I work in, in schools myself, so some IEPs are just, just terribly written and it's a little embarrassing. So when I see improving IP quality, I definitely take notice. So I'd love to hear about, about your poster here.

[O]

Yeah.

[N]

So we had a few challenges that we were trying to address. The first one was making sure that our IEPs met all of our state requirements, of course. And then the other piece was having them include some high quality ABA programming, make sure that we have some kind of comprehensive treatment going on within our IEPs. A challenge that was specific to our site is that our school program is split across four campuses. Each campus has their own education director, their own processes for doing things. So what we did was a systems level intervention where we brought all of the leadership together and came up with a way that we were going to address quality of IEP across all of the buildings, bringing everyone together. The way we did this was first through an IEP requirements checklist that said in each section of the iep, this is what we want you to include. And then we did a power app of that checklist where when an IEP was complete, you have it reviewed. You either the component that we were looking at was present, partially or not present with comments for specific recommendations we wanted them to incorporate. And then we did like a BST model to have them kind of practice these skills. So you can see over in the graph for audio listeners, their instruction phase was pretty high. And then it reduced a little bit during that modeling and practice phase. And then as we incorporated more consistent feedback through the power app, we saw a general improvement in IEP quality. Quality scores.

[O]

Yeah.

[N]

Some of our discussion points were that in the future we're generalizing this to shift from being an outside quality assurance person reviewing to having the ed directors reviewing.

[D]

Right.

[N]

And supporting their own kind of accountability within their teams. And then continuing to update this as IEP requirements change.

[D]

Oh, always, yeah. New York, New York requirements are legendary. I believe in the field. Yeah, I love the power apps in terms of the data collection. I was speaking with someone else recently, Nicole, about the power apps process.

[G]

Yes.

[D]

Was it something that individuals as you did the check you just filled out, partially complete, not present all that, or was it something that was sort of semi automated by looking for certain terms, anything like that?

[N]

It was not automated. They had to do it manually. So that was a heavy lift.

[D]

I can imagine.

[Q]

Yeah.

[D]

But hopefully they're doing it per site. It's less of a heavy lift for, you know, one person to be checking in.

[T]

Yes.

[N]

Yep. And people build fluency. So that was another thing, as we saw people that if they had four or five IEPs within two months by that fifth IEP, they're scoring 95% at the initial review. So they're doing really excellent work. Some of the other, conversely, the challenge can be if you have one IP and then four months later another ip. It can be easy to lose those skills if you're not having them reinforced often. So just making sure that's a part of our process.

[D]

And your goal quality indicators, you were sort of pulling from research. It was more like you had the groups get together and sort of talk about like, these are the, the benchmarks of a quality goal, quality objective.

[M]

Yes.

[D]

So a little of both.

[N]

We first pulled directly from the state regulations. What are our auditors going to be looking for? Do we have those pieces? And then we talked as a leadership team about in addition to these pieces that we have to have, what are things that we should be focusing on, focusing on for the population that we serve in the type of program we run?

[D]

Okay, this is great. I mean, I, I. Are you, are you thinking of trying to, like, start telling schools, you know, and they're like, hey, you know what, you can start using this too, because your IP is not so hot or it's going to be. It's just going to stay here in UCP and it's just going to be your own awesome tool.

[N]

We would love to generalize it. I think that that's a cool, forward thinking direction that we can move.

[D]

I don't know. Schools don't love hearing that their IEPs aren't any good. As someone who's told them that they don't like it, I don't know why, but, you know, at least this is an objective way to do or semi objective way to do it. Certainly with the, you know, the quality might change a little place to place, but, you know, you could start there

[N]

and individualize it for the programs to evaluate for sure.

[D]

Excellent. Well, Emma, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it.

[M]

Okay.

[D]

All right. I am here with Amy and Caitlin at the UCP conference. I noticed this because anytime I see a model, this is Connect, the Clinical intersection model. As a poster, I say, oh, I haven't heard of that. And then it's a few seconds I heard this is a model that the two of you have developed and you're piloting and trialing, which kudos for that. Making anything new in this field is scary and hard. So I'd love to hear about the model so far and sort of what you've learned so far.

[M]

So it was born at a conference, actually. Amy and I were just chit chatting about some of our similar beliefs and some of our similar, like, woes clinically and making sure that our clients are making progress. And I was up late one night reviewing a treatment plan. 30 months, the client didn't have an established method of communication, still had really high rates of interfering behavior, and almost like no significant clinical progress across the VB Mapp or the Vineland. And so it really kind of sent us down a rabbit hole and looking at. We dove into some treatment plans and dissected them, put the goals into different buckets and tried to kind of find some common themes and understand what are clinicians prioritizing and perhaps maybe what shouldn't we be prioritizing and prioritize instead to really drive progress clinically. And so I think that's kind of how it originated. What we found was that the majority of the treatment plans, we're really, really heavy with advanced like skill acquisition skills. And not a lot of we were missing so many prerequisites. And so we really dove in to understand what those prerequisites were. And then Amy can kind of talk

[V]

through the next part.

[R]

Okay.

[W]

So we built a framework starting with the foundation of safety and connection. So this is based on universal protocols where we are looking at what helps a learner feel safe and connected, what builds a therapeutic relationship. And we're developing skill acquisition targets based on this. We're measuring social validity data for the client to ensure that our therapy, you know, feels safe for them. It makes them feel connected to the person that they're working with and establishes this foundation for learning. The next piece is that we're going to look at behavioral costs aligned with the diagnostic indicators of autism. So we're looking at social communication and flexibility because we see these as some prerequisite skills prior to getting to these advanced skills that are aligned with curriculums. Most of our clients programming was mostly,

[M]

I mean, it was straight like assessment programming, like copy and pasted from either the VB map or any, you know, insert assessment. Right. It was a copy and paste and

[D]

the BB map says do it. I guess that's what we got to do no matter what.

[M]

Exactly. And it was a lot of box checking.

[U]

Right.

[M]

And. And really. And so we. We also found that even if they had mastered this skill, we weren't seeing it generalized across use of island pretty heavily to kind of review our results. And so the. The families weren't seeing that progress as well.

[W]

So we also took an interdisciplinary lens to look at what prerequisite skills we were missing. So we crosswalked skills from ASHA Milestones, CDC Milestones, Ages and Stages questionnaire to understand what prerequisites in social communication we were missing prior to teaching language skills in aba. And so our results ended up showing that our clients, when we started with safety and connection and social communication and flexibility skills, rather than these advanced skills from their Vineland scores from intake to six months, our clients in the connect model made significantly more progress than clients, our control clients. And the way that we did this was through training our, the dc, the director of clinical services, training the clinicians in behavioral cusp, the diagnostic indicators of autism, and understanding the developmental sequencing of skills.

[M]

It was a big case conceptualization package to really focus in on what does treatment really mean and how do you put together a really great package that's not out of order. It's not. You're not working on skills that are not developmentally appropriate.

[W]

And I think our big takeaway is we can't be afraid of working on skills that value that therapeutic alliance, that focus on that social connection with the learner, because when we focus on that social connection with the client first, we actually see more progress in communication, more progress in socialization, and more progress in daily living space skills as reported by the family. That's generalized at home. We're seeing more progress in the rate of skill acquisition within the center. So when we build these, the foundation for learning through safety and connection, social communication flexibility, first, we allow our clients to be more ready for those advanced skills later on in therapy.

[M]

And then we're able to remain values aligned and we're able to kind of put our money where our mouth is.

[N]

Right?

[M]

Because we were. We were seeing. We had these really incredible universal protocols, or what we call a foundational plan. And then there was sort of gaps in the programming and, and we were having to hand over hand prompt. We were getting involved really physically. We were using a lot of negative reinforcement because they weren't ready for it. And so what we found is, is now the inverse is true. And they're.

[H]

And.

[M]

And we also got skills for free. We didn't end up having to teach a lot of those skills because we had cooperation and we weren't forcing Compliance.

[B]

Sure.

[D]

So in terms of your initial results look really strong in terms of what you mean, more skills, you reach an acquisition level than your controls. Participant or not participants, but the clients. So what's next? Scaling this up? Is it just trying it again, making sure you didn't get lucky the first time kind of stuff?

[M]

It's definitely scaling. So we started out working at the time, same, same clinic. I've just recently taken over a different center. And so it's been a really, like, great opportunity to kind of come in and start embedding this. So I don't have all the data yet, because I just got there, but. So we're hoping to have similar results. I think something else, too, that we. We looked at was just like, you know, these kiddos, we. We started from, like, the beginning of their training, treatment. And so what does it look like if we start this in my particular instance where I've come into a clinic and I'm training on existing clients, and so we'll be very curious to see, like, what our data looks like at that point. I don't. Do you have other thoughts on what's next?

[W]

All kinds of ideas and continuing these same clients to see how their progress or how their. They continue to progress through therapy?

[D]

Well, I'm a huge fan of the. I'm seeing a problem. Let's sit down, talk it out, make something new, and then see how it goes. I think that's. It's so excellent. So I appreciate you taking the time. And it's also nice to know I didn't totally miss, like, 50 papers about this, and I'm way behind. So. Something brand new. I was here on the ground floor. Very exciting.

[E]

Yes, you were.

[D]

Oh, thank you. Thank you both very much.

[B]

Oh, sorry.

[G]

No.

[E]

All right.

[D]

So I'm here with. Sorry, I forget I asked how to pronounce your name. Alina. Alina. Sorry, Alina. I'm here with Alina and Tabitha, and I see anything about DCBA consultation in schools, that's like, my jam. So if you have any great new tips or anything else you want to add to my own practice, I want to hear it.

[B]

So tell me about your.

[D]

Your poster on consultation in reducing disruptive and unsafe behavior and increasing communication.

[G]

I probably won't have any new tips for you. Why we wanted to highlight this is in New York state, we have a lot of schools that are used to behavior specialists as their interventionists, and our training and education is very different. So we're excited to be BCBAs in the public schools and bringing them Something different and you know, increasing their knowledge and skill set. So we didn't do anything extra that a BCBA wouldn't normally do, which is looking at the function of the behavior. We do really quick assessments. We do a lot of the things that Greg said not to do, like a qabf. But we also take our data.

[K]

Shame.

[G]

We take our data. We have to teach the teams how to take the data. And we do a lot of partial interval data collection for feasibility.

[D]

That's okay. I'll sign off on that one.

[G]

Thank you. Observations. And then we at times overlap our FBAs with a VB map. Right. Usually after we've built reports as student. And then we, if it's appropriate, recommend a behavior intervention plan. A lot of our students are lacking in communication, so that's a goal for them. For our second student, he also. I added toleration for him as well. We also a difference between behavior specialist and our approaches. We have functional definitions for our behaviors and not topographical people. So that's just a change for them. And for these two students, we really saw a significant decrease in the unsafe or disruptive behavior and an increase in communication and filleration. I had a nice reversal with this student. Like what we were talking about. It just happened.

[D]

That sounds like. That sounds like a school research project. It just happened. You got to sub that day.

[G]

It looked like the substitute was a former corrections officer.

[D]

Oh, the kindest of people.

[F]

I'm sure.

[D]

I don't want knock all crashes off. I know you'd assume less. Less of the bring the joy than we've been talking about at the conference.

[G]

That's the following the kids lead. It's I'm the adult, you're the child. You do as I say. And this child did not bode well with it at all. So we saw an increase in the disruptive behavior, increase in unsafe behavior. After a few days of that, his teacher came back to school and we. It took a little bit of time for things to taper back out, but they did and he continued making progress. So he'll be going on next year without a one to one. We started baiting the one to one towards the end of the school year

[D]

in preparation that he will not have

[G]

a one to one next year. Yeah, so that's the. That's student number two. But student number one was Alina's student.

[H]

Okay. So for my student, we had a kiddo in pre K. When we came in, he was exhibiting what they said was unsafe behavior. So he was going under a table

[C]

and kicking it up.

[H]

What we found was he had no communication, so completely non verbal. And he had no way to say like, hey, I just don't want to do this or I need a break. And he really didn't want to be with his peers. He really liked to be in his own space. So our biggest thing was actually getting the teachers to kind of understand what was happening, getting them on board of like, he's not just doing this because he wants to just not do it, that there was a reason for it. So it was a lot of training, the teachers, getting them to buy in and wanting to be engaged in this and then really pairing with our kiddo, playing with him, wanting him to be around us. And then from there we were able to kind of build up and pair and we implemented pecs and that's kind of where it took off. One of the barriers we did have is his related services were not with us, so they were their own company.

[C]

So yes.

[H]

So getting kind of that collaboration was hard. But once he got his pecs, he, he really shot up and realized like, wow, this is getting me what I want. I can get things out of this and I don't need to run away. And as you see, we kind of went down and what happened was he started to want to engage with his peers so he was no longer staying away from them. He was no longer trying to escape. He was like, oh, I can just run up and play with them. So that's kind of what we saw with him.

[D]

All right, so. So I mean, overall we're seeing a lot of what we'd expect to see, say if this had been a clinic based setting in terms of assessment, full

[B]

function based treatment, building rapport.

[D]

I'd love to ask both of your opinions as like New York's had wonky

[B]

criteria of what BCBAs can and cannot

[D]

do for a long time. I know that's shifting now. What was the experience just of saying, hey, I'm a BCBA consultant. Like were teachers sort of like, I don't think I need you because I had a behavior specialist, I maybe like them or didn't like them. Did you find you have to do a lot of sort of like I brought snacks kind of, you know, rapport building with the adults to get them to even allow you to start, you know, helping them out or working with the client? Like, what was that process like?

[G]

Yes. Yeah. So I yesterday I mentioned in one of the workshops that I do first and foremost build rapport with the staff, especially if I'm new to them and that often looks like coming in before school when they're there. Teachers are always going to be there before school. I don't requirement because union, but I try to slide into the times when they have free time just to, you know, talk about things that aren't school related, get to know them a little bit, and then that goes a long way for treatment. I was saying earlier, the schools where we have the least amount of hours, I have found I tend to use that time so preciously and efficiently. Then the schools where we have more hours, our caseloads tend to get stronger, stretched. We get really thin. So the rapport building actually. And that's like one of the barriers that I found in the workshop yesterday that I saying I need to build rapport with this person more. It's, it's a, it's a situation like that. It's a school where we're, we're both stretched so thin and, and so I feel like I'm less effective in those settings. But to your, to your other question, it's not so much that they didn't have positive experiences. Their experiences were firefighting, where mental health treatment. So it's, it's just a whole new scope of treatment for the teens and an understanding. We actually just made graphics to share with our schools about what is a bcba, what is aba? Because we found that, that we were

[D]

answering that question a lot.

[B]

They had no idea.

[D]

Gee, yeah. All right, well, you know, it's, it's always nice to hear because I feel

[B]

like New York sort of, I don't,

[D]

New York's not behind the times. But in terms of just what the role of the BCBA consultant is so novel, it seems like here compared to some of the other, some of the other states where this has been like a, you know, an ongoing concern is consultation in the schools from a bcba. Although I got to be honest, it's not like it always goes so smoothly in every other state that's been doing this for a while. So.

[M]

Yeah.

[G]

And we're actually across five different districts.

[D]

Oh, Lord.

[G]

Yeah, that's the reaction we got. So we really like, our time is usually in the primary elementaries, but we really have really limited time. So we have to use our consultation skills very efficiently.

[N]

School to rework.

[D]

All right, well, thank you both very much for your time. I really appreciate it. All right, I'm here talking with Victoria and. Oh, and Carmen, you're. You're going to be doing this as well.

[G]

Awesome.

[D]

I love having. There's a lot of pairs in the Posters this year. Year. I love to see that, like in collaboration, friendship. But on their poster on, I see integrated therapeutic approach. And that's always interesting because therapy is one of those terms that sometimes I hear and it scares me. Sometimes I hear it and I say, that's awesome. I'm excited. So I'm. I really want to hear. I see pfa, I see EFL looking at verbal behavior. Okay, so I see a lot of words I love here on this poster. So I'd love to get a little bit more information about the poster.

[R]

Yes. So I was particularly interested in kids who had had a history of ABA. 10 years. 4 years. 10 years. And after 10, 4 to 10 years, what were our verbal testing capabilities looking like? And so you'll see them in yellow. Y' all won't see them, but I'm showing him they're very minimal. After 10 years, we don't have the fluent speaker, we don't have fluent listener. We don't have unidirectional naming. We don't have any of these. So I started looking at can I use PFASBT to start building quality cooperation, building trust? And can I bring in events using event based teaching? And will these verbal behavior tests happen naturally? And they did. So my girl Girly Pop started to be able to be in a room with peers. Previously, she'd been isolated in school, she was isolated in clinic. But she was able to come together. And we could bake and cook together, we could do art together. We were really looking at how to make more meaningful outcomes. So my boy Crash was able to to start participating with peers. He started choosing peers out as a source of reinforcement, which wasn't the history for him. And my boy Barry's had been in services for 10 years and did not have a manned repertoire, which was wild. So, okay, how can I make life more meaningful? So for him, he started looking at, can he cooperate? Can he be with us while we do something? Can we kind of help not prevent him from self isolating? But will he start choosing us? And he did start choosing us. And so I was on also looking at social validity with the families. So my girl Girly Pop didn't like music. We started playing music during our fun time, see if she'd like it. Her mom told me, you know, it's weird. She didn't turn off the radio the other day when we were in the car.

[D]

I said, that is so weird.

[P]

Right?

[R]

My boy Crash started cooking with his mama. So they were from Louisiana, and she would put them on her hip so they could cook together. And it was so meaningful. And then my boy Barry's dad texted it in a parent training. He said, you know, he's found his joy. He's talking so much more at home. You know, we were able to go to the movies for the first time in five to six years as a family. I said, wow, that's amazing.

[Q]

That is great.

[R]

And then these are our events. So we garden together, we cooked together, we had scrapbooking club, library club. We did everything together. So all my kids got the events, but I was seeing especially for my kids who had histories of ABA and not really trusted adults, it started to help build that relationship.

[J]

Okay.

[C]

And then like, so we took them away from the table, right? And so we stopped the drill and kill history. And then we completely changed the environment. So then natural opportunities just kept presenting itself. And so they were just naturally reinforced. And the social validity of this is absolutely astonishing because the little boy Crash, he had a very intense behavior of playing with trash can. And instead of trying to figure out why he was doing that, you know, they were just trying to block and trying to do all that. Turns out he likes strong scents. Guess what? They grew an herb garden and made herb play.

[O]

D'oh.

[C]

So guess who got to smell all the time.

[B]

Okay, are you.

[D]

So you're telling me you just made a bunch of like really fun activities that were engaging and kind. You didn't force anyone to do them and that just changing context sort of worked magic in some ways.

[R]

Yeah, they started choosing us. So, like here my girl would typically isolate with her iPad because people would take her stuff, but she started leaving her iPad to come do diamond art to come do photography with this bird watching. And it was amazing.

[J]

Okay.

[C]

And the other reason why it's so meaningful is because they were learning these skills in the context in which it was occurring. So the whole contextualization of it is so reinforcing. So the environment just became the reinforcer.

[D]

So one question. I mean, I love, I love the event based teaching. I love. I know you're citing the EFL a lot. I'm a huge fan of that as kind of a nice guidepost curriculum. In terms of the students, at what point?

[B]

Or is there a point at which.

[D]

And now it's time for the crappy academic skills. Now it's time for the other activities. You know, when that shoe is going to drop, is there? You know, are you sort of think. What part are you sort of thinking ahead of? All right, is that relevant? Should that be relevant?

[B]

Because I think that's sometimes the question

[D]

of, should that be relevant? My answer being like, not always, but

[B]

has that come up yet?

[Q]

Of.

[D]

And now I want them to do something super horrible and boring that might not lend itself to some of these skills.

[B]

Or is that just.

[D]

It's not on the. Not kind of on the skill building radar for.

[E]

For.

[D]

For some of the clients yet?

[R]

Well, I would think so because we did the events with all of my kids, right. Three to 15. All of them experienced it. I would say that as we start filling in our verbal behavior cusps, as we start working on cooperation, they can do harder things, but they don't necessarily have to do those harder things with me. They can go to school now, and they could cooperate in the school. I don't have to sit and kill and like, what is it? Skill, kill, whatever, drill, drunk Al. I don't have to do that. I'll get my kids be able to be an active.

[H]

I'm sorry.

[R]

A fluent listener, fluent speaker. They can go to school. They can go do something there.

[C]

There were enough carryover effects.

[D]

Okay.

[C]

So it was powerful enough of a change in the environment for it to carry over and generalize somewhere else.

[D]

That's good. It certainly sounds like with the families, they were seeing a lot of. A lot of great changes, a lot of great new activities. And to some extent, I, you know, I. I know I've been in schools

[B]

for so long that my.

[D]

My thoughts always go to, like, well, why don't they learn multiplication? And, you know, you.

[B]

No, don't.

[D]

Not always do.

[F]

It's not fun.

[D]

I mean, it can be fun. Not always fun, right? Oh, excellent. So kind of. What's next?

[B]

More.

[D]

More replications? Just. This is going to be a part of your package of instruction from here on out. Because it was such a blast for everybody involved.

[C]

This is how we practice.

[F]

Okay?

[C]

This is what we do.

[D]

This is it.

[C]

This is it.

[D]

All right. And now you get to make a poster and show what you're all doing. That's great.

[R]

I'm working on my team PhD now, so I'm looking at teaching empathetic, responding to direct care staff. But, yeah, this is it. I'm just going to keep pedaling this

[P]

stuff as long as they'll let me.

[D]

Sounds good. Well, thank you both very much for your time. I appreciate it.

[C]

Thank you. You're welcome.

[B]

And here we go.

[D]

All right. I'm here talking with Danielle. I know. Danielle, I'm sorry. We're getting to the end of the poster session. I'm sure you've done This a thousand times. But I see dental exams, I see anything related to dental, basically descents. You know, I feel like that's, that, that's the old term for it. But I'm always fascinated because oh boy, going to the dentist is hard. So I would love to hear a little bit more about your, the work you did here.

[A]

Sure.

[T]

So I'm Danielle Badger, I'm a VCBA at Rome Tradelands Upstate Caring Partners and my poster is on teaching the skills required to undergo a dental exam to adults with profound autism utilizing a communication and reinforcement package. So I know for me going to the dentist is uncomfortable, not very fun. So as you can imagine with the people that we support, dental exams can often evoke the challenging behavior. So we have three participants all diagnosed with autism. They also have additional diagnoses. Language ability varies from one to two word utterances all the way up to full fluency. All of them contained a 613.5 self contained private special education school. And they also lived in residential group homes on campus. And all three participants required either the use of a mechanical restraint, a pharmaceutical pre sedate or display challenging behaviors while at dental exams. So we started with a baseline with all three participants and treatment started at that lowest step. In baseline we taught them a functional communication response so that they had a way to request a break during the TAP finalysis. So we started with whatever that step was. If the individual completed the step successfully, they were given a one minute break with access to the reinforcement dental stimuli and the implementer took a step back. The reinforcement was determined by their BCBA or by the staff who works closely with them. If they admitted the fcr, they were provided a five second break where the dentist stimuli was removed. If they had any lower level problem behavior emerge then we would prefer prompt the fcr. So all three participants were able to complete all the steps of the task analysis without using traditional escape extinction. We honored requests for breaks and we are also we wrote a paper about this so hopefully you guys can keep your eyes peeled. It will be published soon. We are hoping.

[D]

We did a whole episode about dental dental exam packages a while while back, but it's been a little while so we always love to come back as we see new research. What changed? You know what were some of the new new techniques that were used?

[B]

Was it different?

[E]

Right.

[D]

I and I'm sorry, I'm looking here and Daniel, if you said it I

[B]

apologize but who was doing the exams?

[D]

Was it like a dental student? Was it one of your staff serving as the dentist with.

[T]

Yeah, so it was actually the vcba. So I did two of these and then my colleague Yvonne was the, the implementer for the third one. So we actually wore all the, the scrubs and masks and we had all the dental stimuli. We also had an analog dental exam room within the school building that the sessions took place in.

[D]

All right. And so next is, they went, have gone to the dentist since then.

[T]

One of our participants has gone to the dentist and had a success, successful exam. She was very proud of herself, giving everybody a thumbs up, like, look how good I'm doing. So, yeah, we're continuing, continuing with more participants currently. We have some right in the middle

[D]

right now of treatment. Excellent. Any points of friction or any areas that you like, you know, that always happens. You run some the first time and even though you're successful, you're already thinking about version two is going to be way better, I swear.

[T]

Yeah, so we actually had our second participant there. We, you know, you have a plan and it never goes the way that you.

[D]

No, it does not.

[T]

So we saw that a lot with our second participant where we had to add in a lot of approximations for him because we would get him close

[D]

to the treatment room and he'd take

[T]

a peek in and as soon as

[I]

he saw that dungeon chair, he was

[T]

like, no, thank you, and would walk away. So we added in a lot of approximations for him and had to change our plans quite a few times for.

[P]

Okay, yeah, all right.

[D]

But that's the standard individualization kind of process. Nothing too, you know, out of the blue in terms of that just didn't go as fast as you always are hoping once you get past that hump, you know. Oh, it's the chair. Don't worry.

[K]

Yeah.

[J]

Okay.

[B]

Excellent.

[D]

Very good. Well, congratulations on submitting the paper. That's got to have been a fun process to put that all together.

[B]

Yeah, but it very needed, very needed,

[D]

very needed process to, to be looking at dental. What, what, what should I call it? I feel like I just keep defaulting to dental descents and that feels like the wrong turn these days, saying the same thing.

[T]

I feel like I default to that as well. Well, but wait, it's a task analyze.

[D]

That's a terrible name you got to come up with. What's the marketable term?

[Q]

Right.

[B]

Where's Greg Hanley?

[D]

He's always good at this stuff, right? Ask it.

[F]

Okay.

[B]

I don't know.

[D]

We got, we'll think of any. We, we, we'll, we'll come back. We know the fun name for the package. I Think then. Then you'll really have something.

[F]

Yeah, exactly.

[D]

It's got to have an acronym. You know, something fun, Bring the dental joy. Maybe. I don't know, something good. All right, well, Daniel, thank you so

[B]

much for your time. I appreciate it.

[T]

Thank you for stopping by.

[D]

Recording it. There we are. Now we are recording. All right, so I'm here talking with Alicia about skill based treatment for a student who engages in some severe self injurious behavior. Alicia, you were saying you are. I'm finding this really cool. I don't think I mentioned it, even

[B]

though I talked to a few RBTs, but this is your.

[D]

Your poster. And as an RBT, we don't see that too often in the field. It's nice to know. I'm assuming that you're an RBT and you're going to.

[B]

Are you studying?

[M]

Yes.

[G]

Okay.

[U]

I'm in my undergrad right now doing psychology and then I'll be doing my master's in aba.

[D]

Okay. All right, so you're doing your undergrad and you still got a poster out here. That's awesome. Well, I'd love to hear about your. Your work here.

[U]

Okay, so our learner here, he is a 12 year old male, he's a day student and his primary diagnosis is autism. He's non verbal and uses a low tech textbook for communication. So we're talking about his severe sib. His SIB was specifically head related. So hands to the head, knees to the head. And for his baseline, we saw about 107 per day.

[F]

Wow.

[U]

Yes. Yes. So before we started SVT, we wanted to see what the staff in the room were most uncomfortable with working about this. So the three things we got from our B social validity scores was our staff felt comfortable taking the iPad away from him, telling him no, and also giving him difficult instructions. So they three treatment scores, very low. So for our post treatment scores, all of our staff will feel completely comfortable having him relinquish the iPad and telling the student no. So this graph right here, this line is generalization within the classroom. So we'll talk about treatment space first. When we started off in the treatment space, we saw a lot of archings. So when Dr. Hanley was speaking about SVT earlier, he had mentioned that we shouldn't be so quick to just reinforce those R2s. And I completely agree. That's why we see R2s are higher than our R1s. R1s, you want to reinforce those especially because depending on what problem behavior they have, nine times out of ten it is dangerous either for the learner or staff involved.

[D]

And R2 are the non dangerous kind of minor problem behaviors just for folks. I can never keep them separate myself. I always forget which is which.

[U]

Yes, it's so R twos are those non dangerous. So specifically for this learner, his R2s were when he was frowning, when his face got scrunched up, and he would have mobile outbursts. So that's when I knew we were kind of teetering onto the point of we could start seeing R1s. Sometimes I would reinforce those R2s. Other times it's just using your clinical discretion to know when am I going to reinforce this.

[D]

Were you, were you like, were you clear with the student, like, oh, I know this is the worst is hard. I bet you got this. And then you'd kind of get 2, 3, 4 correct responses or responses. Whatever you were doing is, you know what, let's cut it here. This was amazing. You powered through.

[U]

So something with this student, even though he's a young boy, he really liked that. Over the top, enthusiastic.

[A]

Oh my God.

[D]

Great job.

[U]

You did so good.

[M]

Good.

[D]

My favorite.

[U]

So when he was having a hard time, I'd be like, yeah, if this sucks, like, you know, you want to kind of try and relate to. I hate coming to work. I know you don't want to do your math sheet right now. Let's try it. And then if we, if I still saw push back at that point, then I'm back.

[D]

Yeah.

[F]

What's.

[D]

What are you missing in the steps? Yeah.

[U]

So in November, In December of 2025, we saw, saw no R1s. So that's when we decided, okay, we are going to generalize into the classroom. So when we started generalizing into the classroom, it was still just one implementer. And we did see an increase in both R1s and R2s. That kind of freaked me out a little bit. But when you are going from a treatment space with just one implementer and then the one learner to then a classroom with five other kiddos and. And then also you have about three staff in there and all the unplanned EOs that are coming up, you are more than likely going to see that spike. I wanted to wait until we had no problem behavior to bring a second implementer. In February, we dropped down March, April, May, and then I can say for sure, June and July, we have had no problem behavior within session. We brought a second implementer in in June. June and July is also zero for this student as well.

[D]

Okay, great.

[U]

Yes. One of my favorite Things about this specific case, not only it being my first case I mentioned before, he is non verbal and uses low tech pecs. Since generalizing within the classroom, we have been seeing spontaneous vocal verbal responses from the student. So he will verbally say no, he will say 1, 2, 3, and he will, if I say ready, set, he will say go. So that to me, communication is everything. I think, you know, when you're verbal and you're neurotypical, we sometimes take that for granted. So just hearing him, you know, speak those spoken words, especially spontaneously with no prompting, has been absolutely amazing. Another one of my favorite things during it's not on this poster, but during his IEP meeting in March, I wasn't there for it. I really kicked myself for not going to it. But his parents had mentioned the change they've seen at home. So he caregivers, mom and dad, they are not implementing at home. However, the skills that we have taught him in SBT have carried over to home.

[D]

Excellent.

[U]

So in December, when we had again, zero problem behavior obsession, they brought him to Disney over the winter break and he was able to wait in lines. If his parents said no to getting something, he accepted that. And he also did not have his iPad during that trip and he still had no problem behavior and had an amazing time.

[D]

That's always great to hear.

[U]

So even though we don't have his caregivers implementing, it still carried over. So. So to me, that just truly shows, okay, he's got it. This is impactful and he has had a socially acceptable outcome.

[B]

That's excellent.

[D]

I do want to ask social validity scores, did you collect that information or was that just collected as part of. Let's see where we are with this. Because you were running the majority of this treatment up until the past few months and we also you're working at UCP at the end of the day. Hey, listen up, staff. I'm sorry you're scared about challenging behavior. That's why you're here. Were there any other kind of thoughts to maybe would be more palatable for them to engage in the generalization treatment or. That was a concern that was raised. And so this was just kind of part of the process of making sure everyone felt supported. Like I was kind of curious or it was just you were curious. Hey, social validity. I wonder what it'll look like when we're done.

[U]

Yes. So the main idea behind the social validity scores was to see what we were going to focus on within session.

[D]

Okay.

[U]

When we did his fba, obviously we saw the contingencies behind his problem behavior. However, you know when you have four other staff working with him, plus myself, even I'm the main implementer, so I knew, like, kind of what I felt uncomfortable with. But these are one of the staff that took a social validity score test is some. Is the second implementer. The other two are going to be second implementers. So for us, me and my clinician, it was important to see what they were uncomfortable with, because nine times out of 10, what they're uncomfortable with is what the student is struggling with. And in this case, it turned out to be true. He had a really hard time relinquishing if you told him no to the iPad, a snack, going outside to play. It was a huge behavior. And then if you are addressing a difficult instruction that he probably hasn't done before, again, another big behavior because we he has not been taught how to properly handle that response given to him.

[B]

Gotcha.

[D]

Okay, so it was a little bit of looking.

[B]

Where's the friction?

[D]

Probably going to be in the implementation ahead of time. Although they seem all pretty happy just watching you do all the work.

[U]

Yes. But now, even though we only have two implementers, myself and then another staff, when it comes to relinquishing things and then also telling the student no and being like, hey, dude, not right now. They feel very comfortable with it. And that is something I have observed to where if they are doing these specific things, that it is working. Because again, he has not been having any problem behavior, which is super cool.

[D]

Excellent. All right, well, thank you very much. Listen for your time. We appreciate it.

[J]

Thank you.

[D]

All right, there we go. Looks like we're starting. All right, so we're here at the UCP conference, and I have Jeff and Mara and Kaya talking about reducing unsafe behavior. Oh, no, Victoria. Sorry, I'm looking at the titles. That's my bad. Victoria's here and talking all about reducing unsafe behavior and increasing successful transitions, which is so important because the transition part, usually the transition is something good to something crappy. So how'd you do it? What was the secret?

[K]

So we had a student who lives with us or works.

[A]

Hang on.

[K]

Start over. You're editing this.

[D]

We could certainly edit that part out if you like. I think sometimes it brings the fun of the real life conference feel.

[P]

Yeah.

[K]

So we have a student in our school who lives residentially with us about six miles away in a different residential facility. And he was having a lot of difficulties. He would walk out to the van. Not. He was then engaging in a lot of challenging behavior when his preferred Staff was not available to him in the van. So engaging in physical aggression, property destruction, self injury. And this was in the middle of winter when it was zero degrees outside Fahrenheit and he would drop on the ground and just was not, you know, transitioning into the van. When we found out that Kaya here was very strong reinforcement to him, she was able to turn that off, get him into the van. And we leveraged that and created a task analysis to. With a changing criterion design to help him successively get closer and closer to the house. So at the end of each step, we have nine steps in our task analysis here. It was walking to the van, getting in the van. Say, like step two. Kaia was in the van waiting for him. So he had to physically get in the van. And then she provided that reinforcement. And then we went a little further and further away, providing him with some prompts throughout the day that Kaya needed to be picked up. She was going to be waiting for him and she can talk about how she did that part. Were you?

[A]

Yeah. So we started just around the corner. I was at a stop sign. I. I would tell him throughout the day, hey, buddy, I am really busy this afternoon. I have to leave. I need you to come pick me up, wherever it was. And I would. I would always let him know. I didn't want him to have anxiety around the situation.

[P]

We would do it.

[A]

We'd have at least three days that we were at one spot. Once he got in the van with. Usually I was pairing with Victoria mostly and some of his other classroom staff. I would have them ride and once he got over to where I was, I would be waving and smiling and I would provide that reinforcement. Be like, good job.

[O]

Thank you so much for picking me up.

[A]

I am so proud of you. We eventually got to a point where he could enter the residence and stay safely for three minutes.

[V]

It took 30 days for.

[P]

Yeah. To figure out.

[J]

Yep.

[D]

And we generalized that to other staff.

[P]

And now we incorporate another student to

[D]

ride with him as well. And he's independently transitioning without any problem behaviors now. Okay, good. Just a good kind of change of criterion.

[K]

Solid studies to zero challenging behaviors to zero during intervention and generalization. It went smoother than we could have ever imagined. And it's just been tremendous to help this student be able to transition safely from school to home.

[D]

Now, was there concern before of other vehicles? Like, he was just not a fan of the vehicles? Was it more to do with this van in particular, going to school between the school and residents?

[K]

So the one thing that we kind of figured out was that his day was filled with rich, rich reinforcement and attention available at school only for the fact that there was 42 staff. He's very social individual with some limited. Limited vocal or verbal skills. He has iterations of words, you know, like. Like very. But he would go. He goes around the staff all day long just for that attention. Just. Just to talk to them.

[D]

Yeah.

[K]

You know, when he gets that reinforcement from people saying, oh, yeah, you went here yesterday, you did this. And he had 42 staff to encounter going to a home. When they're seven staff and they're assigned to one on one residents, he doesn't get the rich attention that he gets in school. That's what we kind of narrowed it down to. It wasn't that it was immersive. He just wasn't accessing the level of reinforcement.

[D]

Stay where you all were.

[K]

Because he came to school, no problem. He'd go out in the community. He'd go do work, you know, vocational work, go to sites where he could talk to people. I think it just not that rich reinforcement at the house.

[Q]

Yeah.

[K]

Nothing against the house. It's. They're part of us, so I'm not talking negatively against them. It's just. That's just the fact that we kind of figured out.

[B]

Excellent.

[D]

Was there any. Was there any concern in terms of the pairing process or any. Any bumps or. It was sort of just standard pairing of like, doing it together and generalization. I mean, from the graph, it came really good.

[A]

She made clear expectations to the other

[P]

staff on how to be positive and compassionate with him the way that she was. And so she transferred that stimulus control to other staff, and that's how she was able to generalize it.

[J]

Okay.

[A]

I would also let him know throughout the day, I'd be like, hey, Victoria, my really good friend, she wants to come hang out with us after school. Like, would that be okay with you? And he's a very social kid, so he apparently course was happy for more. And I just made sure that he was getting that same positive reinforcement from another staff that he was getting from me so that he could. Yeah. You know, just work with other people and be able to safely make it home.

[K]

Correct me if I'm wrong, you worked on pairing in the school when he was in a good place rather than, like, when he. Before he got to this.

[D]

You're in a bad mood. Here's my friend. I'm sure they'll help you too.

[A]

Good mood. I would let him know it was usually Victoria that was pairing with Me. We then started implementing more his classroom

[J]

staff

[A]

and that worked really well with him too. But yeah, I would just let him know throughout the day, like, what was going on. I'd be like, hey, my friend wants

[T]

to hang out with us.

[D]

Do you feel okay with that?

[A]

And he's always happy about it. And then, you know, once I was, you know, going to be farther and farther away, I'd be like, hey, buddy body, I am going to be a little farther today. I have stuff to do. I need you to ride and come pick me up.

[N]

Okay.

[A]

And like, once he got there, I would just be like, great job.

[D]

Thank you so much for picking me up. And yeah, a lot of things at play. It sounds like some, some pairings, some rules, some, you know, reinforcement at the end of the process.

[J]

Yeah.

[B]

So a lot.

[D]

It's funny how some of these simple, simple seeming treatments, they have a lot of layers in there, but he's going

[B]

where he needs to go.

[D]

It sounds like he's got a lot more opportunities to, to, you know, enjoy.

[B]

Enjoy being on the van with folks

[D]

now, which is great.

[B]

Excellent.

[D]

Well, thank you all so much for your time. I really appreciate, appreciate it. Just bring us in and then we'll gets like, we're recording. All right, so I'm here with Charles and Rex. One thing I haven't, I kind of quickly mentioned, we have skill based treatment plan, but I haven't seen stereotypy mentioned very much. So I, you know, almost feels like

[B]

it's one of those things.

[D]

Like we used to see a lot more stereotypy treatment and it's sort of been one of those, if it's not being a problem, let's not worry about it. So whenever I see it, I'm like, well, hey, what's going on? What's going on here? That we wanted to look at it a little more closely. So I'd love to hear, hear about your poster here.

[Q]

Yeah, I think what's really cool about what we did with this flying is that we did not directly target stereotypy. So what we did is we implemented the enhanced choice model into where even before skill based treatment started, if he chose, he self described it as flying. He would say, I want to fly, fly. And we would honor that at any time. And so on average, we could see up to 200 minutes of stereotypy. And so once we implemented skill based treatment, we kept that contingency in place. Typically with skill based treatment, we encourage persistence during precursors. Right. During evocative context, we kept that same contingency and so what we saw over time was an increase in cooperation, reduction in dangerous behavior and a 98% decrease from baseline in engagement of motor stereotypy just through skill based treatment.

[D]

Yeah, so, so in terms of the, you know, like let's, hey, let's push through. I know this is tough, let's keep going sort of, you know, prompting that never was a component in terms of the asking for flying or correct.

[Q]

And still isn't now. During our evocative context with our challenges of spt. Yes, if we line persisted, advocated for himself, we would still encourage that persistence. We always kept the same contingency. And what we saw here is that that engagement with his staff was so reinforcing for him that he was not using this as an outlet to escape. And also too, when we talk about stereotypy, a lot of times stereotypy is a coping mechanism.

[E]

Right.

[Q]

The regulating. And so I think earlier in our treatment we're seeing these high rates of dangerous behavior, lack of indicators of ascent. He's regulated. As we built trust over time with him, we started to see a decrease in that desire to engage in that, you know, stereotypy for regulation and also more socially significant and appropriate engagement.

[D]

You want to talk about a little

[Q]

bit of what that engagement looked like?

[F]

Yeah. So the way that we engaged with him was, you know, being a 12 year old and he was fully verbal, there were some challenges in the way we engage with him in the sense that there was negative attention seeking behavior. So the way we addressed it this, the first branch that we did was adult led leisure. But there'd be a lot of adapt components to it as well. And so we would have that as well as we would have negative attention components in some of the rewards you get from the challenges. But I'll start with the leisure. It was a lot of imaginative play play and we would use that as a vehicle from which we initiate that negative attention. So it'd be some imaginative game in a total play context that he understands.

[D]

No, don't do that.

[K]

No, don't do that.

[F]

And then he does it or whatever. Oh, that's crazy. How dare you. Yada, yada yada. Instead of inappropriate sexual, you know, advancements or whatever, you know, so that's kind of how that looks. But then with certain, when he gets to a new branch, there'd be a component of, of oh, you just got to the next level. We kind of gamified it a little bit and it's like, oh, you just got to the next level. And he would have a Challenge for me. Like, you have to walk around the building twice or you have to go stand behind the dumpster. And so I would go and I would literally stand behind the dumpster and film myself, like, looking all angry. Oh, I can't believe you did that. Like, good for you for hitting the Cab 6 challenge. But that's crazy. How dare you? It stinks back here. And he got such a kick out of that. So we're also not only addressing the reduction of motor stereotypy indirectly, but we also, throughout the leisure branch, there would be other things, and we would directly address that negative attention seeking behavior as well.

[E]

Okay.

[D]

All right. So you had to do a lot of walking around the building standing behind dumpsters to get to get this to work. He put us to work. Okay.

[F]

Yeah.

[U]

All right.

[D]

Kudos to you for staying flexible with that. I know. I, I, I don't know if I'm just getting to that point in my career where if I have to, I can play like I'm good for about an hour and then the hour and a half go behind the dust like, oh, can we just do a math sheet for a while, buddy? Like, I'm just done with it. Okay, so just fascinating. I. Any thoughts kind of on, like, further directions or just.

[Q]

Yeah. So outside of our scope of data from when we submitted for this poster, he's now generalized across four practicum students providing direct therapy. He's transferred supervision to a third bcba. Now that's following the the same game plan that we have in place. And what we've also seen is we introduced a third SBT branch for diverted staff attention. So now he has to tolerate durations of his preferred people being unavailable, and he has to engage in appropriate activities. So he's not just sitting around waiting for that person to come back. Oh, yeah, hey, dude, need you to do this worksheet or whatever it may be. I'll be back in a minute. And on that variable interval schedule, how much is he telling me? And furthermore, we're not seeing the flying, as he calls it, during those instances either. He's waiting because of how reinforcing and powerful that SR context is.

[D]

So not even seeing that, that cue, hey, man, I'm be back a little bit.

[B]

Not seeing that as a cue of

[D]

like, oh, wait, before you go, could I please do flying? Because otherwise I'm bored out of my mind.

[Q]

He's still advocating, he'll be like, no, come back or whatever. No, we're not seeing the flying in those contexts.

[D]

Oh, my goodness. Okay, now I Don't know. In terms of, like, other colleagues who

[B]

are, you know, doing.

[D]

Doing SBT work, are other people seeing kind of the same correlative response where just stereotypes going down? Because I think one of the. I can't remember which speaker might have been. Might have been. Greg mentioned that they'd seen it some, but I think this is the first today, right? Yeah, I think so.

[Q]

We actually discovered the trend somewhere around here, Right. As we started to see the dangerous behavior go down. Like, hold on a second. Something's going on here. See that inverse correlation, Right. One's going up, the other's going down, and then you just see the socially significant change.

[H]

Yeah.

[Q]

This appropriate because we've all lessened a lot of that negative attention.

[F]

Right.

[Q]

We're not hanging out by the dumpsters anymore. You're seeing that more appropriate social interaction, socially significant change. And it just. It means a lot to both Rex and I of, like, the progress for this client and how it's impacted his life.

[D]

Oh, that's excellent. Well, you know, again, it's good to see sir ot be in such a positive context, all these other good skills being learned as well, and just kind of getting that natural decrease in it as it's just not. Perhaps just not as reinforcing as everything else y' all are doing. All the dumpster walking and fun videos you're sending. You know what?

[K]

That's.

[D]

Yeah, very true. Well, thank you both so much. I appreciate your time. All right, I think we're. Yeah, it looks like we're recording. All right, so I'm here with Atara talking about one of. One of our favorite topics, medical exam preparedness. Such an important skill and not one that everybody loves to do. So I would love to hear about your poster and sort of what results you found in terms of, you know, what treatment did you use, how did it go?

[V]

Sure.

[I]

So the purpose of this was to utilize the task analysis in order to teach the skills that are needed to go through a medical exam. So we had three participants so far, and we have an analog medical setting that includes a waiting room and the treatment space. And we have all of the medical tools that you would find in the doctor's office. So before we began the task analysis, we taught. We ran through the baseline, and then we taught a functional communication response, so that way the student could opt out at any step without engaging in any challenging behaviors. We had a 46 step test analysis that went through all of the steps, broke everything down that you would see in the doctor's office. So in the waiting room, going on the scale, waiting for the doctor in the exam room, getting your blood pressure taken, listening to your heart and lungs, temperature, everything you would seed, and the student would come in, and we would run through up to the current step they were on. And then each step was broken down so they would complete the step. They would have access to their preferred items, and then we would run the next trial. And after three times of successful trials, through each step, it was considered mastered, and we moved on. And then there was probes at certain steps to see if we could move up.

[D]

Okay, I was gonna. Well, I was gonna ask because I know especially 46, and I love the wait for the doctor step. I don't think I've seen that one in the literature.

[F]

It's usually.

[D]

Let's just do the. You know, here's the otoscope, here's the stethoscope. Right. So that waiting around is a huge part of going to the doctor. So I always love seeing the probe, though, because you get those long TAs, you're like, we're gonna go through every single step. Three time. Oh, yeah.

[K]

So in.

[I]

We found for our first participant that once we reached the probe, he went through the rest of the stop. So the only difficulty he had was with the blood pressure. And once we taught that skill, he was able to move through the rest of it.

[D]

Oh, that's. That's so great. I'm always. I'm always curious. I know doctors, usually, they sort of do their same. Their same procedure, but, you know, what if they just did. Did the blood pressure last or whichever was the sticking point for the client, you know, move that to the end. Would they be more likely to do it? But, you know, but again, it's one

[B]

of the reasons we have these probes.

[D]

I love that. So good results. I see. Future Streamline 46 is a long, long set of steps.

[I]

So we have all three students that we had. They all completed it, but there was differences in their prerequisite skills. So obviously, this student went through it very quickly. And then we had a student that it took almost 200 trials in order to get to the end.

[L]

So.

[I]

So he had difficulty standing on the scale. We used shaping and approximation, and finally, after talking to physical therapy, realized that that just wasn't a skill he had, so we skipped the scale and we moved on, and he was able to make it through the rest of the task analysis.

[D]

Okay, so without. This sounds like a good example of interdisciplinary collaboration about looking at some of the barriers rather than just going forever

[I]

and Ever at the scale, still would have been there. And this way we were able to move through and teach the rest of the skills that he needed for a medical exam.

[R]

Excellent.

[D]

That's very good. So is there a thought to taking some of this package and, like, training others on it or making this sort of a component for, you know, any clients coming in who have the kind of the medical exam preparedness or lack of that skill?

[A]

Yeah.

[I]

So right now we're going through the process of either asking, like, residential staff or parents to find more participants and see if we can go through and help out more students.

[D]

Excellent. Very good. Well, Tara, I appreciate you sharing, sharing about your very, very needed, very, very needed work here. So thank you so much for talking about it.

[Q]

Oh, good.

[D]

I think I'm actually recording. I always worry I'm not. So I'm here talking with Paige and Ainsley about their poster on behavioral skills training for components of skill based treatment. So BST for sbt.

[V]

Yeah, there's a lot of acronym, so we utilize VST to teach those first three components of sbt. So that simple functional communication response, the complex functional communication response, and the tolerance response.

[D]

The fun. The.

[B]

The fun parts.

[H]

I always.

[G]

Yeah, yeah.

[V]

And then we also wanted to assess, like, the social validity as well, the teaching procedures. So for our baseline, participants were only given those written instructions, which is pretty uncomfortable, and given those five minutes to review. And then they were asked to perform the steps to the best of their abilities of those TAs. After that very uncomfortable session, we then went into those VST training sessions where we utilize that traditional rationale, instruction, rehearsal and feedback modeling. And then we also did an additional component where we repeated that rehearsal and modeling with some trials there. Interesting. We also use video modeling clips, so we only use contrived sessions for this project. Just given SBT being a treatment for severe problem behavior. Just wanted to protect the safety of our clients and our participants, so we acted as the children. But we did show them videos of SBT being implemented with actual students. In baseline, none of our participants met mastery criteria.

[B]

Wait, you gave them a pronoun?

[D]

They didn't just, like, do it?

[O]

Crazy.

[L]

Who would have thought?

[V]

And then once we went into that BST training, all of our participants reached mastery Criterion within those three trials.

[T]

Okay.

[V]

And our training sessions only averaged about 50 minutes in duration from all of our participants. So we did that pretty efficiently, I'd say. And they were also able to maintain those high levels of mastery in our follow up and our two weeks maintenance.

[C]

Follow up. I see.

[G]

Okay.

[D]

Were there Any. Anything kind of happened that you weren't expecting in terms of, like, the response from the staff or areas that you saw more friction than you would have expected in a BST procedure.

[V]

I think that baseline was pretty uncomfortable for people especially. Our participants were behavior technicians who had no formal SB2 training. This is their first exposure to something like this. Also pretty fresh in the field itself. So we're sitting there in a room with brand new people for some of our participants, and you're asking them to do the steps to the best of their ability, and they've got nothing in front of them. And they're just like, help me here, please. But after that, we were like, don't worry. You weren't supposed to know any of this.

[D]

Okay.

[F]

So you did the deeper.

[D]

If you're explaining like this isn't actually how we train every student still here. Okay, that's good.

[V]

You weren't supposed to know this. We're going to teach you everything you need to know. That was planned that way for the

[D]

purpose of our study.

[E]

Okay.

[V]

I think that was probably the most uncomfortable thing for people was just sitting in that pocket of discomfort, not knowing information.

[S]

Sure.

[V]

But then once they got it, they. They reported that they would recommend the procedures again. So that was a pretty significant finding.

[T]

Great.

[D]

Now when you were doing. Because one thing I always is one of my concerns with bst, sort of on whole often the time, which wasn't bad for the study. But then how do you add in the multiple exemplar training component that you might need to have? So is this something that, you know, I see future discussions. You've got to work on those other chains in sbt, which is going to be opening up just such a wide class of behaviors. They'll need to respond to different modalities of communication. For this initial study was a kind of keeping it a little more simple just to get those results. And now is the matter of let's make our giant recipe book of all the different variations. Is that sort of what's coming up next?

[U]

Yeah, for sure.

[V]

I think obviously a goal is definitely to expand out to that entire treatment package in sbt. But yeah, just laying the groundwork, seeing that this is effective for actually training sbt. But also we did use video modeling, so we kind of set ourselves up for success in generalization. Right. So they were seeing FUT being implemented with actual students, so it wouldn't be completely foreign to them once they're actually going into that generalization to students to be able to see what an actual session Looks like what the environment looks like, things like that. So we're trying to program for those components.

[D]

So they were practicing some with you. They were watching the videos as well. So a lot of. A lot of everything. They got to see a lot of examples, at least in that, even though they maybe didn't practice all of them.

[T]

Yeah.

[D]

I'm curious, in terms of future bst, is the thought that based on, you know, you know, being at ucp, you're kind of able to get the time for the training. Were there areas that you're like, let's cut this out. I mean, you're not going to do baseline for every training. I know. So you're going to cut that out at some point, I'm guessing.

[J]

Yeah.

[D]

Were there other components that you saw? We could make this more efficient or I bet this could be quicker while still being effective or that sort of. You got to get to the end of the whole SBT package and then you kind of go back, like.

[V]

Yeah, I think, honestly, like, I think what we could do, as opposed to just running it one person at a time, we could do a whole group of people.

[H]

Right.

[V]

As long as we have the resources of the people that are there to train and we have us available, it doesn't take very long for people to reach that mastery. Only 50 minutes. Like, we can devote an hour to this training.

[I]

Right.

[V]

We do that often with our professional development team, things like that. So I think expanding it to a larger group of people kind of all at once. And then what would that look like? And those elements.

[A]

Yeah.

[U]

Yeah.

[D]

Excellent. Well, thank you very much for. For sharing. I'm a. We're a huge fan of BST on the podcast, so anything bst. We're big. Two thumbs up. And certainly SBT and teaching. That is so important.

[V]

And we were just published in Behavioral Interventions.

[D]

Oh, okay. I want to give it a. When that one come. When that one come out, like, that was like, the most.

[F]

Most recent.

[D]

Oh, okay.

[B]

Okay.

[D]

So really? Really. All right. So I can't remember if that's one of the. One of the free ones we can get.

[E]

I'll.

[D]

I'll find y' all send some emails or WAB. I think I have a. I have

[B]

a WOB's email address. I'll send him one to get that copy.

[D]

Beautiful. Well, thank you both, and congrats, Rats, on the publication as well.

[H]

Thank you.

[T]

Sa.