The Gold Standard for
Intervention Planning
The Ziggurat Model and The Comprehensive Autism Planning
System (CAPS) capture the three keys in designing and
implementing a comprehensive intervention plan:
Characteristics
• The Underlying
Characteristics Checklist
(UCC) helps you see the
ASD.
• *Individual Strengths
and Skills Inventory
(ISSI) shows you an
individual’s strengths
and skills.
*ISSI is found in The
Ziggurat Model.
Intervention
• The Ziggurat Model
shows you how to
design interventions
using evidence-based
strategies.
Implementation
• The Comprehensive
Autism Planning
System (CAPS)
shows you how to
effectively incorporate
comprehensive
interventions into a
student’s day.
A Comprehensive
Planning Process
for Students with
Autism Spectrum Disorders
and Related Disabilities:
The Ziggurat Model and
Comprehensive Autism
Planning System
Autism Asperger Publishing Company
Autism Asperger Publishing Company
P.O. Box 23173
Shawnee Mission, Kansas 66283-0173
877-277-8254 • www.asperger.net
A Comprehensive
Planning Process
for Students with
Autism Spectrum Disorders
and Related Disabilities:
The Ziggurat Model and
Comprehensive Autism
Planning System
Autism Asperger Publishing Company
Autism Asperger Publishing Company
P.O. Box 23173
Shawnee Mission, Kansas 66283-0173
877-277-8254 • www.asperger.net
©2008 Autism Asperger Publishing Company
P.O. Box 23173
Shawnee Mission, Kansas 66283-0173
877-277-8254 • www.asperger.net
All rights reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or
used in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or
by any information storage and retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.
Articles in Appendix A reprinted with permission.
Table of Contents
The Importance of and Need for Comprehensive Planning
for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders........................................................... 1
Overview of the Ziggurat Model and
the Comprehensive Autism Planning Systems (CAPS)......................................... 2
The Ziggurat Model............................................................................................. 3
The Comprehensive Autism Planning System............................................ 6
Summary.................................................................................................................. 7
Applications....................................................................................................................... 8
School ...................................................................................................................... 8
Home......................................................................................................................... 8
Employment and Higher Education Settings............................................... 9
Mediation................................................................................................................ 9
Methods of Implementation.......................................................................................10
Individual-Focused...............................................................................................10
Systems-Focused .................................................................................................11
Training Parameters......................................................................................................14
Global Training....................................................................................................14
Specific Training..................................................................................................15
Assessment.......................................................................................................................16
Summary...........................................................................................................................16
References.........................................................................................................................17
Appendix A: Published Articles on the Ziggurat-CAPS Process......................19
Appendix B: Sample Assessment Instruments......................................................37
The Importance of and Need
for Comprehensive Planning
for Students with
Autism Spectrum Disorders
S
tudents with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) have historically been among the most challenging students to
teach due to their unique characteristics. As the prevalence of ASD continues to increase, the pressure on professionals to meet the complex needs of these students has increased in equal measure.
Despite the efforts of educational professionals, the potential
of these students is often not realized. This occurs for a myriad
reasons, including failure to identify students with ASD early
on, lack of one methodology that is appropriate for all students on the autism spectrum, use of individual interventions
that do not match student needs, and failure to develop a
comprehensive plan that addresses the multiple and complex
needs of the individual on the spectrum (National Research
Council, 2001; Tsatsanis, Foley, & Donebower, 2004).
What is needed to ensure the best possible services for individuals with ASD is a framework for incorporating best practices
that match student needs. Two recent models, The Ziggurat
Model (Aspy & Grossman, 2007, 2008) and the Comprehensive Autism Planning System (CAPS; Henry & Myles, 2007),
developed by researchers and practitioners, offer the solution
to this long-standing dilemma by allowing educational teams
to efficiently and effectively determine the needs of the individual with ASD, select interventions that match his or her individual needs, and develop a daily plan that indicates when
and by whom the interventions are to be used.
Despite the
efforts of
educational
professionals,
the potential of
students with
ASD is often not
realized.
This manual offers an overview of the Ziggurat Model and
CAPS followed by a description of how they can be applied in
various settings, an overview of training parameters, and how
the process can be used for one student or adopted by an entire system. The manual ends with a brief overview of assessment instruments that can be used to assess the impact of the
Ziggurat Model and CAPS on an individual and on a system.
1
Overview of the
Ziggurat Model and the
Comprehensive Autism
Planning Systems (CAPS)
The Ziggurat
Model and the
Comprehensive
Autism Planning
System (CAPS)
provide a unique
process and
framework
for designing
comprehensive
interventions for
individuals of all
ages with ASD.
T
he Ziggurat Model and the Comprehensive Autism
Planning System (CAPS) provide a unique process and
framework for designing comprehensive interventions
for individuals of all ages with ASD. They are valuable resources for school professionals who must remain in compliance with federal, provincial, and/or state guidelines. Specifically, recent trends in special education emphasize the use of
scientifically based research approaches. In addition, there is
a strong push for incorporating positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) based on a functional behavioral
assessment.
The Ziggurat Model and CAPS are consistent with these practices. Both also emphasize a proactive, positive approach to programming by requiring reinforcement and antecedent-based
interventions. Finally, the Ziggurat Model and CAPS promote
collaboration and communication among parents and professionals, leading to broad-based, comprehensive outcomes.
The Ziggurat Model and CAPS are compatible with current
educational mandates and trends, including
• No Child Left Behind
• Response to Intervention (RtI)
• Positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS)
In the following, we will take a brief look at each of the two
models.
2
The Ziggurat Model
The Ziggurat Model is a comprehensive intervention and
assessment tool that is designed to address the true needs
or underlying deficits in individuals with ASD that result in
social, emotional, and behavioral concerns. The centerpiece
of the Ziggurat Model is the Intervention Ziggurat. The Intervention Ziggurat contains five levels that make up a hierarchical structure: (a) sensory and biological needs, (b) reinforcement, (c) structure and visual/tactile supports, (d) task
demands, and (e) skills to teach.
Starting with the foundation level – Sensory Differences and
Biological Needs – each level represents an area that must be
addressed in order for an intervention plan to be comprehensive. Further, each level contributes to the effectiveness
of the other levels. The key premise of the Ziggurat Model
is that underlying needs and characteristics related to ASD
must be addressed.
The key premise
of the Ziggurat
Model is that
underlying
needs and
characteristics
related to
ASD must be
addressed.
Intervention Ziggurat
Skills to Teach
Address skill deficits
•
•
•
Social
Restricted patterns
Communication
• Sensory
• Cognitive
• Motor
• Emotional
Task Demands
Ensure appropriate level of task demand
•
•
•
Social
Restricted patterns
Communication
• Sensory
• Cognitive
• Motor
• Emotional
Structure and Visual/Tactile Supports
Create predictability
• Preparation for change
• Provide routine
• Walk through new activities Use visual supports
• Video
• Create stories and cartoons
• Visual schedules and checklists
• Graphic organizers
Reinforcement
Provide reinforcement
• Contingent on expected behavior
• Frequent and consistent
• Self-selected
• Gradually decrease use
Provide range of reinforcers
• Concrete, activities, privileges
• Use of restricted interests
• Pair social reinforcement with tangible
Sensory Differences and Biological Needs
Provide a sensory diet
Monitor and address environmental stressors
• Sound, light, proximity/personal space, textures
• Movement needs
Monitor and address
• Appetite/hunger
• Arousal/activity level (e.g., fatigue, hyper)
• Medical needs
3
To date, no other model specifically matches student needs and
characteristics to intervention. As a result, programs for individuals with ASD focus on strategies that a teacher, facilitator,
job coach, and so forth, knows rather that strategies that target
underlying deficits that can have a negative life impact. To that
end, the Ziggurat Model includes two assessment tools – the
Underlying Characteristics Checklist (UCC; High-Functioning
and Classic) and the ABC-Iceberg.
To date, no other
model specifically
matches student
needs and
characteristics to
intervention.
The UCC provides a snapshot of how ASD is
expressed for an individual. It is comprised
of eight areas. The first three represent the
autism spectrum triad – social, restricted
patterns of behavior interests and activities, and communication. Characteristics often associated with ASD are
addressed in the next four areas: sensory differences, cognitive differences,
motor differences, and emotional
vulnerability. Finally, the eighth underlying area is known medical and
other biological factors. Together,
these categories represent a comprehensive empirical investigation
of the characteristics of individuals with ASD.
G
IONIN
UNCT
F
IGH F
___
UCC-H ECKLIST-H.D.
______
__
__
Y:
S CH . Grossman, Ph
TED B
MPLE
yG
RISTIC
E
CO
Barr
______
., and
RACT
______
G CHARuth Aspy, Ph.D
______
______
RLYIN
UNDE
______
______
______
______
:
DATE
LETED
COMP
______
: ____
DATE
W-UP
_
______
____
BY: __
rh the pe
ork wit
e
d/or w
ho is th
know an
dual w
rs who
NT:
e indivi
E
he
th
M
ot
e
SS
of
SSE
includ
ctive
IAL A
perspe
am may
G INIT
er, the
, the te
ers.
LETIN
; howev Additionally
disord
COMP
vidual
ectrum
timal.
S FOR
an indi
N
op
the be
by
is
IO
tism sp
T
ed
UC
a team
with au
describe
mplet
s
as
co
to
al
INSTR
e.
n
ng
be
du
at
ki
vi
ri
lum
C may
al. Wor
by indi
approp
Notes co
The UC
gs, etc.
benefici lopmentally
hibited
se the
in
is
ex
U
tt
s
.
se
cu
be
al
y,
fo
ve
nc
vidu
at may
son of
C as de
freque
the indi
stics th
the UC
ply to
indicate
aracteri
focus of
ples, or
ently ap
s or ch
at curr
c exam
havior
items th
e specifi
-Up
ribes be
id
sc
LL
ov
A
de
em
Follow
tail, pr
beside
Each it
check
more de
place a
stics in
Please
aracteri
ch
d
an
___
havior
otes
ssmates
______
hen cla
Y N
date: __
gnize w
ow-up
not reco r up”
d Foll
• Does
me, she
et he
Projecte
Y
se or “s corrected at ho s if they are
tea
being
parent
g the
• After ively asks her
Item
gnizin
identify
lty reco ts of others
Area
repetit y
curately
difficu
gh
still angr ays, she can acout of 10 times
1. Has ings and thou
pl
4
le
rs
s)
ro
feel
he
es
• In
lindn
gs of ot
lin
db
fee
in
e
(m
th
______
: ______
FOLLO
L
NAME
The second assessment tool is the
ABC-Iceberg, which incorporates
a traditional functional behavior
assessment (FBA) and helps to
illustrate behavior patterns, as illustrated on the following page.
SOCIA
ers’ hair
SOCIA
L
pe
t
• Sniffs
contac
Y
or eye
rsonal
Uses po
If item
ning pe hers
2.
ai
nt
ai
anges.
ot
culty m
cate ch
udes on
to indi
Has diffi ysically intr
below.
3.
ph
ptors or
trated
space,
as illus
r descri
n,
he
rt
m
T:
fu
add
p colu
MEN
-Up
llow-u
mn to
SSESS
Follow
the Fo
es colu
-UP A
ges in
LLOW
the Not
rted
n chan
s. Use
tely repo
FOR FO
d explai
• Accura e was being
IONS
ked item
an
T
ec
k
C
ch
U
ec
sh
un
e ch
that
INSTR
d and
st week
ugh th
ssmates
Notes
checke
teased la ays, she
hen cla
ke thro
Y
w
ri
e
st
iz
s,
Review
gn
pl
ie
not reco r up”
• In role w accurately
er appl
e
• Does
no long
home, sh
“set he
e
can no others’
Y
tease or g corrected at rents if they ar
identify 6 out of 10
bein
pa
ing the
• After ively asks her
Item
y
cogniz others
tif
feelings
re
en
tit
y
id
pe
lt
Area
y
re
curatel times
y
difficu thoughts of
gr
ac
times
as
n
an
H
ca
ll
sti
1.
and
s, she
t of 10
ay
gs
ou
pl
4
in
le
el
rs
s)
ro
fe
• In
of othe
lindnes
gs
lin
db
fee
in
(m
the
s
t
2.
ntac
eye co
Also contained within the
model is the Ziggurat Worksheet – the mechanism by
which priorities for the individual with
ASD are established and where student/individual/client
underlying characteristics are matched to team-identified interventions on each of the five levels: (a) sensory and biological
needs, (b) reinforcement, (c) structure and visual/tactile supports, (d) task demands, and (e) skills to teach.
or
onal
ng pers
aintaini on others
culty m
udes
Has diffi ysically intr
ph
space,
Uses po
3.
iff
nger sn
• No lo . Follows
others r respecting
rules fo space of
personal
others
Y
• Sniffs
ir
peers’ ha
opied
© 2008
4
AAPC
ed, in
ts reserv
All righ
slation.
g tran
cludin
No part
of this
form m
otoc
ay be ph
ed.
produc
rwise re
or othe
ABC-I
Antecedent(s)
Behavior
Consequence(s)
1
3
4
2
•
n
•
•
n
•
•
n
•
•
n
•
•
n
•
Specific Behaviors
5
Underlying
Characteristics
#
#
#
#
#
Ziggurat Worksheet
BEHAVIOR/AREAS OF
CONCERN
FOR SPECIFIC
INTERVENTION PLAN
(Operationalized Behaviors)
n
n
n
Sensory/Biological
2.
Intervention:
1.
• For specific interventions,
transfer behavior concerns from the ABC-I
• For global interventions,
list prioritized
areas of
Reinforcement
concern
#
#
#
#
• For specific interventions, transfer descripbehaviors from
the ABC-I
Underlying Characteristics
tion of
Addressed:
Sensory/Biological Needs
PRIORITIZED UCC ITEMS
#
#
#
#
Reinforcement Intervention:
3.
• For specific interventions,
list UCC items from the
bottom of the ABC-I.
• For global interventions,
list prioritized items from
UCC categories listed
under “areas of concern”
CHECK ALL THAT APPLY
A
6.
B
C
Three points of
intervention –
antecedent,
behavior, and
consequence
Underlying Characteristics
Addressed:
Structure & Visual/Tactile
Support Intervention:
Underlying Characteristics
Addressed:
4. For each level of the Ziggurat, select prioritized
UCC items to address (from the list above)
Structure & Visual/Tactile
Supports
Task Demand Intervention:
Underlying Characteristics
Addressed:
Task Demands
Intervention:
All fiveSkill
levels
of the Ziggurat
are represented
5. Create and describe interventions for each
level that address operationalized behaviors
and prioritized underlying characteristics
(specific intervention) or prioritized underlying characterisitcs (global intervention)
Underlying Characteristics
Addressed:
Skills to Teach
5
The Comprehensive Autism Planning
System
The CAPS is
unique in that it
clearly delineates
what supports are
needed for each
activity.
Once the Ziggurat Worksheet is completed, information is
ready to be transferred into the Comprehensive Autism Planning System (CAPS). According to National Association of
State Directors of Special Education’s (NASDSE) in Forum
(Müller, 2006), CAPS is designed to provide an overview of a
student’s daily schedule by time and activity, as well as the
supports she needs during each period.
Following the development of the student’s IEP, all educational professionals who work with the student develop the
CAPS. Thus, the CAPS allows professionals and parents to
answer the all-important question for students with an ASD:
What supports does the student need for each activity?
The CAPS is unique in that it clearly delineates what supports are
needed for each activity. Often, teachers know that priming, a
visual schedule, or a self-regulation strategy is needed, but have
no specific sense of when that particular support is needed.
In addition, the CAPS includes space for making notations about
data collection and how skills are to be generalized to others settings. Finally, the components that make up the CAPS are developed from evidence-based best practices for students with ASD.
Comprehensive Autism Planning System (CAPS)
Child/Student: ____________________________________________________
Time
6
Activity
Targeted Skills
to Teach
Structure/
Modifications
Reinforcement
Sensory
Strategies
*ss=state standard
Communication/
Social Skills
Data
Collection
Generalization
Plan
Summary
Together, the Ziggurat Model and CAPS provide a proactive,
positive, evidence-based approach to developing programs
for individuals with ASD. One of the many strengths of this
process is its collaborative nature. Parents and professionals
work together to determine individual needs and characteristics through completion of the UCC, match these needs
and characteristics to interventions using the Ziggurat Worksheet, and integrate interventions into the individual’s day
using the CAPS.
This process ensures that high-quality instructional and behavioral supports are provided throughout the day using
research-based interventions implemented by qualified personnel. In addition, the Ziggurat Model and CAPS establish
procedures whereby student progress is continuously monitored using meaningful data.
Together, the
Ziggurat Model
and CAPS provide
a proactive,
positive, evidencebased approach
to developing
programs for
individuals
with ASD.
Overall, these comprehensive planning tools:
• ensure that individual needs are met throughout the
school day;
• recognize the complex needs of students with ASD;
• provide an individualized, systematic, yet flexible program;
• facilitate transition from one grade/one job/one placement to the next; and
• identify professional development needs.
Planning and implementation using this process ensures
that more time is spent on providing instruction and fostering independence for individuals with ASD and less time is
spent addressing behavioral issues that often result from not
having supports in place and not understanding individual
needs.
Appendix A includes two brief articles that provide further
information on the Ziggurat Model and CAPS with a particular emphasis on their use in school settings. The articles are
reprinted with permission.
7
Applications
One of the many
advantages of
the Ziggurat and
CAPS process
is its broad
application
capabilities.
O
ne of the many advantages of the Ziggurat and CAPS
process is its broad application capabilities. These
models have the flexibility to (a) be used across the
spectrum to meet the needs of those with a classic presentation of ASD characteristics as well those who are identified as
higher-functioning; (b) be used effectively for planning in a
myriad environments, including school, home, and work and
higher education settings; and (c) serve as mediation tools.
School
Multidisciplinary school teams, including parents, can use the
models to plan thorough, individualized programs for students
with ASD and related disabilities. In addition, the Ziggurat Model and CAPS can serve as a functional behavioral assessment
(FBA) that links together student core deficits, behavior, and interventions.
On occasion, programs or school districts employ or contract
with experts in ASD. These autism consultants, special education directors, advocates, behavior specialists, and psychologists
may all use the approach for program evaluation, development,
and improvement. This may prevent the need for mediation
(see below).
Home
The models also work well in the home setting. For children receiving intensive home programs, they can be used
to ensure that multifaceted needs are addressed and that
interventions are tied to student characteristics to promote
generalizable outcomes. Further, parents can use the process
to structure after-school and weekend hours to boost interactions among siblings and promote acquisition of daily living
and other skills that foster independence.
8
Employment and
Higher Education Settings
As students with ASD and related disabilities transition to
adulthood, the Ziggurat Model and CAPS can help supervisors, fellow employees, instructors, and professors understand
their needs and, therefore, can help ensure that worksites and
college, university, or technical programs are tailored to meet
their unique needs. In addition, the models can facilitate selfawareness and help an individual with ASD obtain the supports he needs. Thus, the Ziggurat Model and CAPS can also
serve as self-determination tools.
Mediation
The Ziggurat Model and CAPS can also be used to mediate
differences among those who are planning programs for individuals with ASD and related disabilities. These tools are
ideal for this sensitive and often challenging task because (a)
the focus is entirely on the student and her needs; (b) they
delineate the entire program in such a manner that all concerned are aware of the student’s needs, understand which
interventions are necessary to address those needs, and
know when the interventions will be used; and (c) the process requires input from all parties and disciplines to develop
the individual’s program.
9
Methods of
Implementation
Implementation
of the Ziggurat
Model and
CAPS can be
individual- or
systems-focused.
I
mplementation of the Ziggurat Model and CAPS can be
individual- or systems-focused. The former occurs when
training options are limited, when one professional or a
small group elects to use the process for a particular individual
who may be experiencing problems in her current setting, or
when a team who receives training decides to use the Ziggurat
Model and CAPS with all individuals on its caseload.
Systems-focused implementation occurs when an entire staff
adopts the model after receiving intensive training on its use
and support during initial implementation. Several variations
of each have been used successfully, as briefly outlined below.
Individual-Focused
As the term implies, this approach provides instruction and
support for teams, including parents, to design a comprehensive plan. It is often used with a student with challenging
needs or a student around whom lack of agreement occurs
among team members regarding the type of programming
needed.
Training. Two days of training by a facilitator who thoroughly understands and has used the process typically allows
enough time for a team to learn the process while planning
a program for a student. Training can also occur over a single
day if participating teams comprise experienced educational
professionals who have a high degree of expertise in ASD.
However, the latter is not typically recommended because the
Ziggurat Model and CAPS present a novel way of looking at
ASD and intervention that requires teams to assimilate and
accommodate “new” information.
Training covers the use of the Ziggurat and CAPS models,
including (a) completion of the Underlying Characteristics
Checklist (UCC; High-Functioning and Classic), (b) interventions that can be used on each of the five levels of the Inter-
10
vention Ziggurat, (c) design of comprehensive interventions,
and (d) how to implement the intervention using the CAPS.
PowerPointTM slides on the model are available through the
Autism Asperger Publishing Company when a textbook and
manual are purchased (http://www.aapctextbooks.net).
Systems-Focused
Professionals undertaking systems-focused implementation
have as a goal integration of the Ziggurat Model and CAPS
into schools, school boards, districts, departments, cooperatives, agencies, communities, ministries, and so on. Adopted
at this level, the Ziggurat Model and CAPS become a part
of everyday functioning as programs for students/clients/
patients are automatically created in the same way that an
individualized education program (IEP) is developed for each
student with special needs in the United States. Indeed, the
Ziggurat Model and CAPS may be used as part of the IEP planning process, rather than as an add-on. That is, rather than
creating extra work, adopting this process makes IEP development and implementation much more effective and efficient.
This process can occur in many ways, as illustrated below.
Team training model. As its name implies, using this approach, teams in each school, district, and so on, receive two
to three days of training on the comprehensive planning
tools during which they complete an Underlying Characteristics Checklist, a Ziggurat Worksheet, and a CAPS for a specific student with special needs. Team members subsequently carry out the program they designed for a full academic
year. During this time, they have access to a facilitator for
brainstorming, updating the student’s program, and targeted
professional development.
At the end of the year, team members can take the process to
other teams they serve, either by (a) providing the training
themselves or (b) having outside facilitators do so. Several
states and districts have adopted this model, as illustrated in
the following.
11
Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence (OCALI)
OCALI provides large-group training to teams serving individuals from ages 3
to 21 comprised of multiple disciplines, including, but not limited to, a general
educator, special educator, parent, and administrator, who volunteer to learn the
process. Each team is assigned an OCALI facilitator who has training and experience using the model. They meet with the facilitator monthly or bimonthly in
person or using technology (i.e., WebEx, interactive video, Skype) for consultative support and professional development. At each meeting, team members are
provided a brief inservice workshop on interventions that relate to each level of
the Ziggurat and CAPS. Presentations can consist of the Autism Internet Modules
(www.autisminternetmodules.org), DVDs, or traditional lecture formats. Team
members with expertise in particular areas are encouraged to train their colleagues. Teams participate in an additional mid-year training on how to apply
the Ziggurat Model and CAPS as an FBA tool.
The Autism Programs at the University of New Mexico’s Center for
Development and Disability (CDDC)
The CDDC uses team training to address the needs of individuals with ASD post
high school graduation. Following a two-day training on the Ziggurat Model and
CAPS targeted to teams of Department of Health providers across the state, the
CDDC provides six weeks of follow-up. Specifically, each team receives one and
one-half to two hours of coaching, mentoring, and video feedback using a face-toface or telehealth/interactive video-facilitated meeting. The goal of this first meeting is for the CDDC facilitators to get to know the client via video, to get to know
the team, and to introduce project logistics. CDDC staff visit the groups at their
sites on a second visit to facilitate a team UCC and a global intervention plan for
each team. The next six sessions focus on group coaching and mentoring around
the client. Teams are asked to provide three videotapes over the six-week sessions
to show progress on implementing their global intervention plan. The CDDC facilitator provides feedback, targeted professional development, and brainstorming
based on the videotape. Department of Health providers can then serve as facilitators to support the use of the Ziggurat and CAPS models with others. The states of
Kentucky and Illinois are using a similar process.
Train-the-trainer model. Potential trainers are generally
volunteers within a district, school, and so on, who are considered highly qualified in ASD and have some interest in
providing training. They receive intensive training on the
Ziggurat and CAPS models from individuals experienced in
using the process as well as information on how to lead training. They are typically provided with training materials that
provide consistent information to new trainees, making it
simple and time efficient to conduct training.
12
Kansas
The state of Kansas uses a train-the-trainer model. Individuals considered highly
knowledgeable in ASD are recruited to participate in intensive three-day training. Potential trainers then conduct a book study focusing on the comprehensive training tools, coaching, and mentoring under the guidance of the Kansas
Instructional Support Network (http://www.kansasasd.com/KSASD/Home.html).
Trainers are then charged with supporting teams who attend intensive training
and implement the Ziggurat Model and CAPS.
Administrator-directed model. In this model, a school
principal, head of school, school board, superintendent,
district coordinator, and so on, leads implementation of the
process for all of the students/clients under his or her supervision. This generally includes intensive training(s) on the
comprehensive planning process, regular meetings during
the process, access to targeted professional development using in-house or contracted professionals, and training to parents on the process.
Ohio
A group of principals who attended an intensive training on the Ziggurat Model
and CAPS decided to use the process to address job targets for their staff. The group
initiated a book study among teams in their school to introduce the process. Following the book study, the principals sponsored an intensive training for teams
in their schools. A facilitator, employed by one of the state’s special education resource centers, provides ongoing support in each participating building.
Preservice model. This model targets individuals training to
be educational professionals. Coursework is built around the
process typically using the Ziggurat Model (textbook edition,
Aspy & Grossman, 2008), PowerPointTM slides, and supplemental materials provided by AAPC to textbook users (http://www.
aapctextbooks.net).
Arizona, Minnesota, and Kansas
University training on comprehensive planning is provided to potential special
educators. Coursework is presented around the models, and undergraduate or
graduate students implement the Ziggurat Model and CAPS throughout their
coursework and field placements. The three state universities in Arizona use this
model. A similar pilot is taking place at universities in Kansas and Minnesota.
13
Training Parameters
The majority of
educators view
comprehensive
planning as
important,
but most find
it difficult to
implement.
A
ccording to Zionts, Shellady, and Zionts (2006), the
majority of educators view comprehensive planning
as important, but most find it difficult to implement.
In the same manner, educators view it as important to know
how to develop, select, adapt, and use strategies, evaluations
procedures, planning tools, and management methods, yet
they indicate that challenges exist in doing so (see Figure 1).
As a result, according to Zionts and colleagues, these program essentials are not being used consistently. The authors
cite many reasons, including lack of training, little buy-in by
model users, and lack of support in implementation.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Important
Difficult to
Implement
Comprehensive
Planning
Strategies and
Materials
Evaluation,
Planning, and
Management
Procedures
Figure 1. Teacher report of importance and difficulty of using
effective practices.
Training on the Ziggurat Model and CAPS and support for their
use is key to effective implementation. Depth and length of
training is dependent of the expertise of those implementing
the process.
Global Training
Generally, two days of training is needed to familiarize implementers with the process. This two-day training (called
the Global Training because it focuses on planning an entire
program for an individual) presents an overview of each of
the materials. Training also provides time and coaching for
application of the process with one individual.
14
For team members who are novices at working with individuals with ASD, additional training sessions on interventions
within each level of the Ziggurat Model and CAPS are needed. These can occur monthly in one- to three-hour segments
depending on how much time is available. It is essential,
however, that team members, in addition to understanding
the Ziggurat Model and CAPS, have a working knowledge
of the characteristics of ASD, evidence-based interventions,
data collection, and data-based decision making. Further, a
basic understanding of collaboration and effective communication skills can help facilitate team cohesion.
Specific Training
Many teams also benefit from an additional one- to two-day
training on how to use the Ziggurat Model ABC-Iceberg as an
FBA tool (also known as the Specific Training because it generally focuses on one specific issue [e.g., behavior, social] an
individual is experiencing). Trainees typically need time to
practice skills learned during the Global Training before they
participate in the Specific Training.
Buy-in by implementers, time to implement, and resources
to facilitate Ziggurat Model and CAPS usage are essential for
success. Teams using the process, as well as their administrators, must see it as essential for providing a successful program for an individual with ASD. If it is seen as an “add-on”
or as unnecessary, the process will not be fully implemented,
and therefore not be successful.
Buy-in by
implementers,
time to
implement,
and resources
to facilitate
Ziggurat Model
and CAPS usage
are essential for
success.
Time for implementation and the need for resources are also
important ingredients for success. Unless time is scheduled
for a team to participate in the process, it will not be used as
intended. Allocation of resources must be carefully considered, including the need for substitute teachers, additional
compensation, childcare for parents, materials (such as a
projection system to allow everyone on the team to see the
worksheets as they are being completed), a quiet place to
meet, in-common planning time, and so forth.
Finally, methods for measuring change must be considered.
How will data be collected to measure student academic
or social change? work performance for the adult? systems
changes for the school using the model? Answers to these
changes and others are also essential to ensuring that the
Ziggurat Model and CAPS remain a part of the system.
15
Assessment
Multidisciplinary
teams using the
Ziggurat Model
and CAPS focus
on working
together to help
students with
ASD meet their
potential while
complying with
federal, state, and
local mandates
and upgrading
their professional
development.
I
mplementers often wish to use specific instruments to
measure student progress and/or systems change. For districts, provinces, and schools that wish to introduce new
or additional tools, Appendix B contains four measures that
can be used or adapted for use. Measures include self-reports
as well as observational tools.
The Effective Programming Checklist is based on the work of
Iovannone, Dunlap, Huber, and Kincaid (2003). This instrument can be used as a self-report or observational tool. The
Effective Implementation and Support of an Educational Program
for Autism Spectrum Disorders measure, a self-report, asks respondents about their current level of implementation and
need for improvement, and is considered a systems-change
measure. The Student Assessment provides basic demographic
and skills information and can be used to measure skill acquisition and behavior change. Finally, Individual Training
Needs, another survey, can be used to document the need for
targeted professional development.
Summary
T
he Ziggurat Model and CAPS are comprehensive planning tools that can help ensure that the complex needs
of students with ASD are met. These tools incorporate
best practices that match individual needs and promote the
provision of an appropriate education across the day. Multidisciplinary teams using the Ziggurat Model and CAPS focus
on working together to help students with ASD meet their
potential while complying with federal, state, and local mandates and upgrading their professional development.
16
References
Aspy, R., & Grossman, B. G. (2007). The Ziggurat model: A framework for designing comprehensive interventions for individuals with high-functioning autism and Asperger Syndrome.
Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
Aspy, R., & Grossman, B. G. (2008). Designing comprehensive interventions for individuals with
high-functioning autism and Asperger Syndrome: The Ziggurat Model: Textbook edition.
Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
Henry, S. A., & Myles, B. S. (2007). The Comprehensive Autism Planning Systems (CAPS) for
individuals with Asperger Syndrome, autism and related disabilities: Integrating best practices throughout the student’s day. Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing
Company.
Iovannone, R., Dunlap, G., Huber, H., & Kincaid, D. (2003). Effective educational practices
for students with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental
Disabilities, 18, 150-165.
Müller, E. (2006, December). State approaches to serving students with autism spectrum
disorders. in Forum: Brief Policy Analysis. Alexandria, WV: National Association of
State Directors of Special Education.
Myles, B. S., Henry, S. A., Coffin, A. B., Grossman, B. G., & Aspy, R. (2007, September). The
CAPS and Ziggurat Models: Planning a comprehensive program for students with autism spectrum disorders using evidence-based practices. Autism Advocate, 16-20.
Myles, B. S., Grossman, B. G., Aspy, R., Henry, S. A., & Coffin, A. B. (2007). Planning a
comprehensive program for students with autism spectrum disorders using evidencebased practices. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 42, 398-409.
National Research Council. (2001). Educating children with autism. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Tsatsanis, K. D., Foley, C., & Donebower, C. (2004). Contemporary outcome research and
programming guidelines for Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism. Topics
in Language Disorders, 24, 249-259.
Zionts, L. T., Shellady, S. M., & Zionts, P. (2006). Teachers’ perceptions of professional standards: Their importance and ease of implementation. Preventing School Failure, 50(3),
5-13.
17
18
Appendix A
PUBLISHED ARTICLES
ON THE ZIGGURAT-CAPS
PROCESS
19
B?>C;867C
1H1A4=30B<8C7<H;4B?73B70F=074=AH<B0<H18G;4A2>558=<B10AAH66A>BB<0=?730=3ADC70B?H?73
CWT 20?B
IXVVdaPc
<^ST[b
?[P]]X]VP2^\_aTWT]bXeT?a^VaP\U^aBcdST]cbfXcW
0dcXb\B_TRcad\3Xb^aSTabDbX]V4eXST]RTQPbTS?aPRcXRTb
In recent years, far-reaching changes have occurred in the special education system (which was
framed by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1975), beginning with the
2001 No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, which was designed to increase student achievement
through accountability and scientifically based instruction provided by highly qualified and effective
teachers (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). Compatible with NCLB are the (a) Response
to Intervention (RTI) movement, which emphasizes data-based decision making and problem
solving, evidence-based interventions, student performance and continuous progress; and (b)
Statewide Positive Behavior Supports (SWPBS), whose goals are to support (a) students’ social
and academic competence, (b) student behavior, (c) staff behavior and (d) decision making
(Sugai & Horner, 2007). Fundamental to these recent educational mandates and movements
are comprehensive planning, participation of all stakeholders, including parents, in program
planning, program implementation, and monitoring of student progress (Mesibov & Shea, 2006;
National Research Council, 2001). In addition to the aforementioned, parent involvement in
planning their child’s education programs has become an integral part of all special education
legislation and has itself become best practice (National Research Council, 2001).
%
20
0dcXb\0Se^RPcTC78A3438C8>=!&
To date, no system has existed that can accomplish these
T
allows users to see how “autism” impacts the everyday functionlofty goals. The purpose of this article is to introduce two linked
ing of the individual on the autism spectrum.
comprehensive planning models that meet the rigor required by
NCLB, R
RTI and SWPBS: the Ziggurat Model (Aspy & Grossman,
834=C85H8=6BCA4=6C7B)C748=38E83D0;
BCA4=6C7B0=3B:8;;B8=E4=C>AH
2007) and the Comprehensive Autism Planning System (CAPS;
The Individual Strengths and Skills Inventory (ISSI) accompanies
Henry & Myles, 2007a). These two models represent a “design
the UCC and parallels its first seven areas. The ISSI goes beyond
and build” approach to comprehensive program planning for
identifying the student’s special interests and ensures that
children and youth with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and
underlying strengths and skills are incorporated throughout
related disabilities. In effect, the use of these models results in
the student’s daily program.
a transformation of a child’s individualized education program
(IEP) into a multidimensional document that is useable by all
C748=C4AE4=C8>=I866DA0C
stakeholders. More specifically, this article (a) briefly
The Intervention Ziggurat, the centerpiece of the
describes the program planning frameworks and
Ziggurat Model, is comprised of evidenced-based
how they converge to build a complete
B:8;;BC>C4027
levels structured into a hierarchy:
program that directly addresses the
1. Sensory Differences and Biological Needs
individual’s underlying characteristics,
C0B:34<0=3B
(c.f., Baranek, 2002; Di Martino, Melis,
and (b) shows how the models can be
Cianchetti, & Zuddas, 2004). The impact
applied in a classroom setting.
BCAD2CDA40=3
of each of the seven sensory systems on
E8BD0;C02C8;4BD??>ACB
the student with ASD is considered
in this section of the Ziggurat. In
A48=5>A24<4=C
addition, biological considerations, such as medication,
allergies and sleep needs, are
B4=B>AH38554A4=24B0=318>;>6820;=443B
The Ziggurat Model is
factored
into this model.
a guide for designing
FWPc8bcWT
IXVVdaPc
<^ST[.
3
4
5
1
2
),*85(7KH)LYH/HYHOVRIWKH,QWHUYHQWLRQ=LJJXUDW 2. Reinforcement (c.f.,
comprehensive interventions for individuals with ASDs. The premise of this model
Horner, Carr, Strain, Todd, & Reed, 2002). Student preferences
is that underlying needs and characteristics related to ASDs
are identified and integrated into the Ziggurat framework. “Remust be addressed. The Ziggurat Model is designed to utilize
inforcement is more than just a reward; it is a powerful tool for
students’ strengths to address true needs or underlying deficits
teaching and maintaining desirable academic, communicative,
that result in social, emotional and behavioral concerns. The
and social behaviors” (Downing, 2008, p. 45).
Ziggurat approach centers on a hierarchical system, consisting
3. Structure and Visual/Tactile Supports (c.f., Nikopoulos &
of five levels that must be addressed for an intervention plan to
Keenan, 2004; Sansosti, Powell-Smith, & Kincaid, 2004).
be comprehensive (see Figure 1). A discussion of components of
Classroom layout, home base, visual schedules, choice boards,
the model follows.
boundary markers, communication systems, learning style,
34C4A<8=8=6=443B)C74
D=34A;H8=6270A02C4A8BC82B2742:;8BC
The Underlying Characteristics Checklist (UCC) is an informal
assessment designed to identify ASD characteristics for the
purpose of intervention. The UCC is comprised of eight areas:
social, restricted patterns of behavior interests and activities,
communication, sensory differences, cognitive differences,
motor differences, emotional vulnerability, and medical and
other biological factors. It may be completed by parents, teachers
or other service providers, individually or as a team. This form
0dcXb\0Se^RPcTC78A3438C8>=!&
and modes of expressing and receiving language as well
as academic/preacademic modifications are examples of
interventions that address the need for predictability and
challenges with communication.
4. Task Demands (c.f., Frederickson, Warren, & Turner, 2005;
Vygotsky, 1978, as cited in Miller, 1993). Task demand interventions are designed to ensure that students are not required
to participate in activities or complete assignments that exceed
their abilities. A reduction of demands and the addition of
supports are required to facilitate success.
&
21
B?>C;867C
5. Skills to Teach (c.f., Barry et al., 2003). Finally, this Ziggurat
area includes the skills, tasks and/or behaviors in which the
student requires direct instruction in order to experience success.
Each of the levels contributes to the effectiveness of the
others. Thus, if all levels are not addressed, the intervention
will not be as effective and skills will not develop.
The Ziggurat Worksheet guides the development of a comprehensive intervention plan and is based on underlying needs
from the UCC and strengths from the ISSI. This provides
a safeguard from developing a plan that addresses only surface
issues. The Ziggurat Worksheet promotes collaboration by
helping parents and professionals to understand their part in the
larger intervention picture. After completion of the worksheet,
the team is ready to complete the CAPS.
FWPc8bcWT2^\_aTWT]bXeT
0dcXb\?[P]]X]VBhbcT\
20?B.
Based on information from the Ziggurat Model, the CAPS is
a list of student tasks and activities, the times they occur and
a delineation of the supports needed for success (see Figure
2). Also, the CAPS includes data collection and generalization
columns. The CAPS answers the question: What supports does
the student need for each activity?
C7420?B2>=C08=BC745>;;>F8=62><?>=4=CB)
1. Time. This section indicates the clock time of each activity
that the student engages in throughout the day.
2. Activity. Activities include all tasks and activities throughout the
day in which the student requires support. Academic periods,
nonacademic times and transitions are all considered activities.
3. Targeted Skills to Teach. This may include IEP goals, state standards and/or skills that lead to school success for a given student.
4. Structures/Modifications. Structures/modifications can consist
of a wide variety of supports, including visual supports, peer
networks and instructional strategies.
5. Reinforcement. Student access to specific reinforcers as well
as reinforcement schedules are listed here.
6. Sensory Strategies. Sensory supports identified by an occupational therapist or others are listed in this CAPS area.
7. Communication/Social Skills. Specific communication goals
or activities as well as supports are delineated in this section.
Supports may encompass language boards or augmentative
communication systems.
'
22
8. Data Collection. This space is for recording the type of data as
well as the behavior to be documented during a specific activity.
9. Generalization Plan. This section of the CAPS was developed to
ensure that generalization of skills is built into the child’s program.
When students transition to middle and high school, they
may have as many as nine teachers in nine different classrooms.
Despite their movement across classrooms, the activities in each
class are similar: (a) independent work, (b) group work, (c)
tests, (d) lectures and (e) homework. From this standpoint, the
activities in English class and geometry are the same; therefore,
the M(odified)-CAPS was developed (Sue Klingshirn, personal
communication, April, 2006). For a high school student who
spends extensive time in general education, each academic
teacher shares the same document.
5a^\IXVVdaPcc^
20?B)02PbTBcdSh
A case study of Michael, a 16-year-old sophomore diagnosed
with Asperger Syndrome, can be found at www.texasautism/
CaseExample.html. This website contains Michael’s Underlying Characteristics Checklist, Individual Strengths and Skills
Inventory, Ziggurat Worksheet, and an M-CAPS for his general
education classes and a traditional CAPS for PE. For Michael,
implementation of the Ziggurat Model and CAPS resulted in (a)
increased time in the general education setting, (b) greater access
to the general education curriculum, (c) increased participation
with peers and teachers, and (d) skill acquisition.
Bd\\Pah
The Ziggurat Model and CAPS provide a unique way to develop
and implement a meaningful and comprehensive program for a
student with ASD. The structure fosters consistent use of supports
to ensure student success as well as data collection to measure that
success. Use of information gathered through the Ziggurat and
CAPS process may be used to develop a truly individualized
educational plan based on individual assessment and evidencedbased practices. Use of these models ensures that underlying needs
are addressed and provides checks and balances to ensure that
the carefully designed plan is faithfully implemented.
Compatible with current trends in education, including
NCLB, RTI and SWPBS, the Ziggurat Model and CAPS
are also easy to use. That is, the framework, designed to be
user-friendly for all members of the multidisciplinary team,
including parents (Henry & Myles, 2007b), does not require
0dcXb\0Se^RPcTC78A3438C8>=!&
CX\T
BT]b^ahBcaPcTVXTb
0RcXeXch
CPaVTcTSBZX[[b
c^CTPRW
BcadRcdaT
<^SXÀRPcX^]b
ATX]U^aRT\T]c
BT]b^ah
BcaPcTVXTb
B^RXP[BZX[[b
2^\\d]XRPcX^]
3PcP
2^[[TRcX^]
6T]TaP[XiPcX^]
),*85(7KH&RPSUHKHQVLYH$XWLVP3ODQQLQJ6\VWHP&$36:RUNVKHHW
specialized training and can be used across student ages in a
variety of settings. The end result is a program that addresses
the student’s multifaceted strengths and needs.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Brenda Smith Myles, Ph.D., is chief of programs and
development for the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence (OCALI), an associate professor at the University of
Kansas, and a member of ASA’s Panel of Professional Advisors.
Shawn A. Henry is executive director of OCALI.
Amy Bixler Coffin is the education autism administrator
for OCALI.
Ruth Aspy, Ph.D., and Barry G. Grossman, Ph.D., are
licensed psychologists with the Ziggurat Group, which specializes
in assessment and intervention for individuals with ASD.
REFERENCES
Aspy, R., & Grossman, B. G. (2007). The Ziggurat model: A
framework for designing comprehensive interventions for individuals with high-functioning autism and Asperger Syndrome. Shawnee
Mission, Kan.: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
0dcXb\0Se^RPcTC78A3438C8>=!&
Baranek, G.T. (2002). Efficacy of sensory and motor interventions for children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32 (5), 397-422.
Barry, T. D., Klinger, L.G., Lee, J. M., Palardy, N., Gilmore, T.,
& Bodin, D. (2003). Examining the effectiveness of an outpatient
clinic-based social skills group for high-functioning children
with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33
(6), 685-701.
Di Martino, A., Melis, G., Cianchetti, C., & Zuddas, A. (2004).
Methylphenidate for pervasive developmental disorders: Safety
and efficacy of acute single dose test and ongoing therapy: An
open-pilot study. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, 14 (2), 207-218.
Downing, J. (2008). Reinforcement. In S.A. Henry and B.S. Myles
(Eds.), The Comprehensive Autism Planning Systems (CAPS) for
individuals with Asperger Syndrome, autism and related disabilities:
Integrating best practices throughout the student’s day. (pp. 45-56).
Shawnee Mission, Kan.: Autism Asperger Publishing Co.
Frederickson, N., Warren, L., & Turner, J. (2005). “Circle
of friends”: An exploration of impact over time. Educational
Psychology in Practice, 21, 197-217.
(
23
B?>C;867C
Henry, S.A., & Myles, B.S. (2007a). The Comprehensive Autism Planning Systems (CAPS) for individuals with Asperger Syndrome, autism
and related disabilities: Integrating best practices throughout the student’s
day. Shawnee Mission, Kan.: Autism Asperger Publishing Co.
Henry, S.A., & Myles, B.S. (2007b). Parents’ guide to the Comprehensive Autism Planning Systems (CAPS) for individuals with Asperger Syndrome, autism and related disabilities. Shawnee Mission,
Kan.: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
National Research Council. (2001). Educating children with autism. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nikopoulos, C.K., & Keenan, M. (2004). Effects of video modeling
on social initiations by children with autism. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 37, 93-96.
Sansosti, F.J., Powell-Smith. K.A., & Kincaid, D. (2004). A
research synthesis of social story interventions for children with
autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19 (4), 194-204.
Horner, R.H., Carr, E.G., Strain, P.S., Todd, A.W., & Reed, H.K.
(2002). Problem behavior interventions for young children with
autism: A research synthesis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32 (5), 423-446.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2007, March 9). Statewide positive behavior
supports and response to instruction: Lessons being learned. 4th
Annual Conference on Positive Behavior Supports, Boston, Mass.
Mesibov, G.B., & Shea, V. (2006). Evidence-based practice, autism
and the TEACCH program. Manuscript in preparation.
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind: A
desktop reference. Washington, DC: Education Publications Center.
Miller, P. (1993). Theories of developmental psychology (3rd ed.).
New York: W.H. Freeman & Co.
03E4AC8B4<4=C
You want your child to learn to play Sardines.
Not smell like one.
+PVTQFWEKPI1OGIC%WTGVJGQPN[ WNVTCHTGUJ
CNNPCVWTCNRWTGHKNVGTGFQOGICQKNCXCKNCDNGKP#OGTKEC
+VµUEQNFGZVTCEVGFUQKVJCUCDUQNWVGN[PQHKUJVCUVGQTUOGNN
OCMKPIKVFGNKIJVHWNN[GCU[VQFTKPMQTOKZKPCPFGXGPGCUKGT
VQNKXGYKVJ9JCVµUOQTG1OGIC%WTGKUVJGQPN[HWNNURGEVTWO
QOGICUWRRNGOGPVQPVJGOCTMGV
PQVCUKPINGOQNGEWNG
JCUDGGPUMKOOGFQTDQKNGFCYC[CPFVJG QPN[ QOGIC
DTCPFYKVJCFCKN[FQUG
VURUOI'2#&*#
UGVCVVJGGHHKECE[NGXGNUWUGFKPYQTNFYKFGOGFKECN
UVWFKGUVJGXGT[QPGUVJCVJCXGIQVVGPVJGTGUWNVUYGCNNHKPFUQRTQOKUKPI
(QTOQTGKPHQTOCVKQPQTVQRNCEGCPQTFGTIQVQQOGICEWTGEQO
1OGIC%WTG'XGT[NKVVNGDKVJGNRU
&T#PPG/CTKG%JCNOGTU/&&T$Q/CTVKPUGP/&
(QWPFGTU#ODQ*GCNVJ..%1URTG[(.
%QPVCEVWUVQNNHTGG " !
24
0dcXb\0Se^RPcTC78A3438C8>=!&
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 2007, 42(4), 398 – 409
© Division on Developmental Disabilities
Planning a Comprehensive Program for Students with Autism
Spectrum Disorders Using Evidence-Based Practices
Brenda Smith Myles
University of Kansas
Barry G. Grossman and Ruth Aspy
The Ziggurat Group
Shawn A. Henry and Amy Bixler Coffin
Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
Abstract: This article outlines two compatible models of planning and implementing programs for students with
autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The Ziggurat Model begins the process with an assessment of student
strengths and concerns related specifically to ASD and identifies interventions across five tiers that match these
strengths and concerns: (a) sensory and biological, (b) reinforcement, (c) structural and visual/tactile supports,
(d) task demands, and (e) skills to teach. Content from the Ziggurat Model is then placed with the
Comprehensive Autism Planning System (CAPS) to allow the student’s day to be operationalized and matched
to student goals, state standards, and related benchmarks. This article overviews this process and offers a brief
case study as an example.
As educators and parents strive to develop
meaningful educational opportunities for individuals with autism spectrum disorders
(ASD), it is important to begin with a thorough understanding of the student’s needs,
especially those related to the underlying
characteristics of ASD. Next, a comprehensive
daily schedule for the student is critical. A
schedule should embed the supports needed
for success as well as continual development
of student skills and measurement of those
skills with a vision of how this will affect the
student now and in the future (Mesibov &
Shea, 2006; National Research Council, 2001)
This is achieved through well-organized planning with clearly defined objectives and goals.
Far-reaching changes have occurred in the
educational system in recent years, beginning
with the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act.
This legislation was designed to increase student achievement through accountability and
scientifically based instruction provided by
highly qualified and effective teachers (U.S.
Department of Education, 2002). Compatible
with NCLB are the (a) Response to Instruction (RTI) movement, which emphasizes data-based decision making and problem solving, evidence-based interventions, student
performance, and continuous progress; and
(b) Statewide Positive Behavior Supports
(SWPBS), whose goals are to support (a)
students’ social and academic competence,
(b) student behavior, (c) staff behavior, and
(d) decision making (Sugai & Horner,
2007).
Fundamental to these recent educational
mandated movements is comprehensive planning, program implementation, and monitoring of student progress. To date, no system
has existed that can accomplish these lofty
goals. The purpose of this article is to introduce two linked comprehensive planning
models that meet the rigor required by NCLB,
RTI, and SWPBS: the Ziggurat Model (Aspy &
Grossman, 2007) and the Comprehensive Autism Planning System (CAPS; Henry & Myles,
2007). Figure 1 depicts the process of comprehensive planning using the Ziggurat Model
and CAPS.
Correspondence concerning this article should
be addressed to Brenda Smith Myles, Ohio Center
for Autism and Low Incidence, 5220 N. High Street,
Building C1, Columbus, OH 43221.
What Is the Ziggurat Model?
398
/
The Ziggurat Model is a guide for designing
comprehensive interventions for individuals
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-December 2007
25
Figure 1. The process of comprehensive planning for students with autism spectrum disorders using the
Ziggurat Model and CAPS.
with ASD. The premise of this model is that
underlying needs and characteristics related
to the autism spectrum must be addressed.
Therefore, the Ziggurat Model is designed to
utilize students’ strengths to address true
needs or underlying deficits that result in social, emotional, and behavioral concerns. The
Ziggurat approach centers on a hierarchical
system, consisting of five levels that must be
addressed for an intervention plan to be comprehensive (see Figure 2).
When designing a comprehensive program,
it is essential to consider the context of the underlying autism spectrum disorder. This is overlooked all too often. Targeting underlying
needs leads to interventions that are more
proactive and fundamental. In comparison,
interventions that are solely designed to address surface behavior without consideration
of the underlying ASD are potentially less effective and less likely to result in sustained
behavior change.
As mentioned earlier, the process of intervention design should begin with an assessment of the presenting characteristics of ASD
(see Figure 1). A thorough assessment of underlying characteristics helps parents and professionals to plan a program that takes into
account the individual’s strengths and needs.
Further, assessment of underlying characteris-
Figure 2. The five levels of the Intervention Ziggurat.
Planning
26
/
399
tics provides insight into which skills should
be taught and how to design instruction in
order to facilitate learning and bring about
meaningful and long-lasting change. The Underlying Characteristics Checklist (UCC) offers a comprehensive perspective as a basis for
program planning.
The Underlying Characteristics Checklist
The UCC is an informal assessment designed
to identify ASD characteristics for the purpose
of intervention. There are two versions of the
UCC, one intended for use with individuals
who are high functioning (UCC-HF), including those with Asperger Syndrome (AS), and
one for use with those with a more classic
presentation (UCC-CL) in cognition and
speech-language skills. The UCC is comprised
of eight areas. The first three represent the
autism spectrum triad, social, restricted patterns of behavior interests and activities, and
communication. Characteristics often associated with ASD are addressed in the next four
areas: sensory differences, cognitive differences, motor differences, and emotional vulnerability. The eighth underlying area is
known medical and other biological factors.
Based on the results of completing the
UCC, a comprehensive intervention plan is
developed that targets ASD characteristics by
incorporating each of the five levels of the
Ziggurat. The UCC may be completed by parents, teachers, or other service providers, individually or as a team.
The Individual Strengths and Skills Inventory
The Individual Strengths and Skills Inventory
(ISSI) was designed to accompany the UCC.
The ISSI parallels the first seven areas of the
UCC. The purpose of this tool is to ensure
that underlying strengths and skills are incorporated in the intervention design process.
For example, one student may have a strength
in imitation whereas another has an intense
interest in and knowledge of animals. These
assets can easily become keys to addressing
underlying skill deficits. An example of a completed ISSI is provided in the case example of
Michael.
400
/
The Intervention Ziggurat
The Intervention Ziggurat (IZ) is the centerpiece of the Ziggurat Model and is the framework on which comprehensive interventions
are built. The IZ is comprised of five critical
levels structured into a hierarchy: Sensory Differences and Biological Needs, Reinforcement, Structure and Visual/Tactile Supports,
Task Demands, and Skills to Teach (see Figure 2). The first level, Sensory Differences and
Biological Needs, addresses basic internal factors that impact functioning. The second level
addresses motivational needs prerequisite to
skill development. The third level draws on
individuals’ strength of visual processing and
addresses their fundamental need for order
and routine. The final two levels of the IZ
emphasize the importance of expectations
and skill development in light of the characteristics of individuals with ASD.
The IZ helps parents and educators avoid
overlooking critical areas that impact the effectiveness of any intervention plan. Each of
the levels is essential and contributes to the
effectiveness of the others. Thus, if needs on
all levels are not addressed, the intervention
will not be as effective and skills will not develop. The following is a brief discussion of
the five levels of the Intervention Ziggurat.
Sensory differences and biological needs. The
first level of the IZ represents what is, in one
sense, the basis of all behavior— biology. Consideration of biological factors is especially
important in the case of ASD due to the strong
genetic and neurological underpinnings of
this disorder. Unmet sensory and biological
needs will result in changes in behavior, highlighting the importance of including strategies to address these needs.
While sensory differences and biological
needs are not included as symptoms of ASD in
the current diagnostic manual (Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the
American Psychiatric Association [APA],
2000), they often present some of the greatest
challenges for individuals on the spectrum.
For example, anxiety (Pfeiffer & Kinnealey,
2003), distractibility, overactivity, impulsivity,
perseveration, delayed receptive and expressive language skills, poor social skill development, and poor eye contact have all been
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-December 2007
27
related to impaired sensory functioning
(Stackhouse, Graham, & Laschober, 2002).
Research exists on sensory interventions for
individuals with ASD. In 2002, Baranek identified 22 studies conducted on sensory and
motor interventions. Additional studies have
been conducted since then (cf., Kaplan, Clopton, Kaplan, Messbauer, & McPherson, 2006).
Much of the research on biological interventions has centered on the use of medications. There is support for three classes
of drugs, including antidepressants (cf.,
Namerow, Thomas, Bostic, Prince, & Monuteaux, 2003); antipsychotics (cf., Erickson, Stigler, Posey, & McDougle, 2005); and stimulants
(cf., Di Martino, Melis, Cianchetti, & Zuddas,
2004).
Reinforcement. All intervention plans ultimately target the development or increase of a
behavior or skill. This goal can only be accomplished by incorporating reinforcement into
the comprehensive plan. Without reinforcement, there is no intervention. Because of its
fundamental nature, reinforcement is included as the second level of the Intervention
Ziggurat.
It may be necessary to think creatively about
reinforcement for students with ASD. While
social opportunities are often reinforcing for
typically developing students, these may be
some of the most challenging situations the
same is usually not the case for students with
ASD for whom social competence presents
challenges. In seeking to identify effective reinforcers, it is often helpful to consider the
student’s preoccupations (Sakai, 2005). Indeed, research has found that activities or objects related to obsessions are often more effective reinforcers than food (cf., CharlopChristy, Kurtz, & Casey, 1990) for individuals
on the autism spectrum.
The principles of effective reinforcement
are well established in the research literature.
At times there seems to be an unfortunate
tendency within the education system towards
“stinginess” in providing reinforcement. Hesitation to deliver reinforcers may be related to
a concern about “fairness”; that is same-aged
peers have already mastered the skills andtherefore, are not reinforced for exhibiting
them. However, these and similar concerns
are short-sighted and unfair to the student
with ASD, who will only gain new skills when
effective reinforcement systems are in place.
Other students may suffer as well due to the
time spent addressing behavioral difficulties
in the classroom that would be prevented if
replacement behaviors were mastered. Effective intervention programs deliver reinforcement for positive behaviors and limit access to
reinforcement of problem behaviors (cf., Horner, Carr, Strain, Todd, & Reed, 2002).
Structure and visual/tactile supports.
The
third level of the IZ is a direct response to the
core characteristics of ASD. That is, individuals with ASD function best when predictability
is established across the school day, including
schedules, routines, environments, behavioral
and academic expectations, and interpersonal
interactions. If changes in routine occur,
preparation for such change should be incorporated into the intervention plan. In addition, verbal communication deficits are primary characteristics of ASD, leading to a
disadvantage in the school setting where most
communication takes place through talking
and listening. In contrast, visual processing is
often a strength for students with ASD; therefore, visual supports are critical aspects of intervention plans. Tactile supports are an additional alternative to verbal communication
and should be considered, especially for students with a vision impairment.
The areas of structure and Visual/Tactile
Supports often overlap. Visual supports such
as pictures, written schedules, and task strips
may be used as tools to clarify the structure of
an activity. For example, visual schedules have
been shown to be effective for improving the
speed of transitions (cf., Dettmer, Simpson,
Myles, & Ganz, 2000); decreasing behavior
problems during transition (cf., Dooley, Wilczenski, & Torem, 2001); increasing on task
behavior (cf., Bryan & Gast, 2000); and enhancing independence (c.f., Pierce & Schreibman, 1994). There is substantial research support for other visual strategies, such as Social
StoriesTM (cf., Sansosti, Powell-Smith, & Kincaid, 2004) and video modeling (cf., Nikopoulos & Keenan, 2004).
Task demands. Task Demands with the IZ
include academic demands but go beyond, to
include social, communication, organizational, sensory, and other demands. For example, recess may be exceedingly difficult given
social and communication requirements (e.g.,
Planning
28
/
401
Figure 3. Three levels of task demands and applications. From The Ziggurat Model: A Framework for Designing
Comprehensive Interventions for Individuals with High-Functioning Autism and Asperger Syndrome (p. 77),
by R. Aspy & B. Grossman, 2007, Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
Copyright 2007 by AAPC. Reprinted with permission.
join activities, initiate conversations, resolve
peer conflict). For the purpose of designing
quality interventions, expectations must be
reasonable; that is, an individual must be capable of succeeding either independently or
with assistance. This is known as the zone of
proximal development (ZPD; Vygotsky, 1978,
as cited in Miller, 1993). The ZPD refers to
skills that can only be accomplished with assistance. By acknowledging and carefully adjusting task demands, we can often prevent
problems. Thus, it is essential to match the
demand of a task to the ability of a student.
The ZPD represents an optimal level for new
learning (challenging with assistance). As depicted in Figure 3, there are three levels of
Task Demands: easy, challenging/emerging,
and too demanding. Tasks that are too easy
are appropriate when independent function is
desired; however, it must be kept in mind that
skills will not expand. At the other extreme, if
a task is too demanding, the individual will fail
or become overwhelmed and quit. Behavior
problems are often observed when task demands exceed the student’s ability. In either
case, skills will not expand.
One aspect of intervening at the Task Demands level, therefore, is to identify skill deficits to target for skill development. Once deficits have been identified, decisions can be
made on how to match demands to ability. For
example, a team may recognize that because a
student lacks the skills to negotiate peer con-
402
/
flict, he will be provided a trained peer
“buddy” during group activities until he is able
to master strategies for compromise. Numerous evidence-based interventions reduce demands. For example, peer networks
(cf., Kamps, Dugan, Potucek, & Collins,
1999), circle of friends (cf., Frederickson,
Warren, & Turner, 2005), and peer buddies
(cf., Laushey & Heflin, 2000) have been
found to be beneficial in promoting social
skills.
Skills to teach. The first four levels of the
Ziggurat set the stage for skill acquisition. It is
possible to resolve many behavior concerns
using strategies on the first four levels without
ever teaching skills. Indeed, many improvements may be seen as a direct result of attending to an individual’s biological needs, providing meaningful reinforcers, addressing the
need for structure and predictability, and
carefully matching demands to ability. Comfortable with behavior gain, intervention
teams may overlook this crucial last level.
However, such a “partial” approach to intervention will have negative long-term outcomes
because it does not allow for independence or
promote generalization or growth. It is for this
reason that the authors view Skills to Teach as
the ultimate goal of any intervention plan.
Several approaches to teaching skills to individuals with ASD have been supported in
the literature, including priming (cf., Zanolli,
Daggett, & Adams, 1996); formal social skills
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-December 2007
29
groups (cf., Barry et al., 2003); and pivotal
response training (PRT; cf., Koegel, Carter, &
Koegel, 1998).
Ziggurat Worksheet
The Ziggurat Worksheet guides the team
through the development of a comprehensive
intervention plan. With a new understanding
of the student’s needs based on completion of
the UCC and the information on strengths
and current skill level provided through completion of the ISSI, the team is now prepared
to design an intervention plan that is targeted
to the individual student. Areas of the UCC
are prioritized and specific UCC items are
selected. All interventions incorporated into
the plan must address underlying needs from
the UCC. This provides a safeguard from developing a plan that addresses only surface
concerns or from recycling interventions that
have been used with other students with ASD
without careful consideration of the specific
student. Further, the Ziggurat Worksheet promotes collaboration by helping parents and
professionals to understand their part in the
larger intervention picture.
An intervention plan is truly comprehensive
when interventions address each of the five
levels of the Intervention Ziggurat, three
points of intervention—antecedent, behavior,
and consequence—and when each intervention strategy addresses underlying characteristics from the UCC. The Ziggurat Worksheet
provides a structure for verifying that the intervention plan is indeed comprehensive. Interventions that are not comprehensive leave
unnecessary “holes” where difficulties may occur and begin to undermine the effectiveness
of the intervention techniques that are put
into place. After completion of the Ziggurat
Worksheet, the team is ready to complete the
CAPS. While the Ziggurat Worksheet allows a
team to know that the intervention plan is
thorough and targeted, the CAPS provides a
structure for implementation.
What Is the Comprehensive Autism Planning
System (CAPS)?
CAPS provides an overview of a student’s daily
schedule by time and activity and specifies of
supports that he needs during each period.
Thus, the CAPS enables professionals and parents to answer the fundamental question:
What supports does the student need for each
activity?
Once a multidisciplinary team, including
the parents, has identified the student’s needs
through completion of the UCC (CL or HF)
and ISSI and has developed interventions
across the six areas of the Ziggurat that match
the student’s UCC- and ISSI-identified
strengths and concerns, the team is ready to
complete the CAPS. That is, based on information developed using the Ziggurat Model,
the CAPS is a list of a student’s tasks and
activities, the times they occur, along with a
delineation of the supports needed for success. In addition, the CAPS includes a place
for recording the results of ongoing data collection and consideration of how skills are to
be generalized to others settings.
Components of CAPS
The CAPS contains the following components:
1. Time. This section indicates the clock
time of each activity that the student engages in throughout the day.
2. Activity. Activities include all tasks and
activities throughout the day in which
the student requires support. Academic
periods (e.g., reading), nonacademic
times (e.g., recess, lunch) as well as transitions between classes are all be considered activities.
3. Targeted Skills to Teach. This may include
IEP goals, state standards, and/or skills
that lead to school success for a given
student.
4. Structure/Modifications. Structures/modifications can consist of a wide variety of
supports, including placement in the
classroom, visual supports, peer networks and instructional strategies (e.g.,
priming, self-monitoring).
5. Reinforcement. Student access to specific
types of reinforcement as well as reinforcement schedules are listed here.
6. Sensory Strategies. Sensory supports and
strategies identified by an occupational
therapist or others are listed in this CAPS
area.
7. Communication/Social Skills. Specific com-
Planning
30
/
403
munication goals or activities as well as
supports are delineated in this section.
Goals or activities may include (a) requesting for help, (b) taking turns in
conversation, or (c) protesting appropriately. Supports may encompass language
boards or augmentative communication
systems.
8. Data Collection. This space is for recording the type of data as well as the behavior to be documented during a specific
activity. Typically, this section relates directly to IEP goals and objectives.
9. Generalization Plan. Because individuals
with ASD often have problems generalizing information across settings, this section of the CAPS was developed to ensure that generalization of skills is built
into the child’s program.
When students transition to middle and
high school, the daily structure of school
changes. Students may have as many as nine
teachers in nine different classrooms. Despite
their movement from classroom to classroom,
the activities in which the students participate
in each academic class is similar, however.
That is, in each class students are likely to be
required to participate in (a) independent
work, (b) group work, (c) tests, (d) lectures,
and (e) homework. From this standpoint, the
activities in English class and geometry are the
same.
Due to the fundamental differences between the structure of elementary school and
middle/high school, the CAPS must be modified accordingly. The Modified Comprehensive Autism Planning System (M-CAPS) is an
effective means of communicating to educators who teach academic subjects the types of
supports that students need during each activity (Sue Klingshirn, personal communication,
April, 2006). The multidisciplinary team that
plans the program for a high school student
with ASD who spends extensive time in general education classrooms develops the student’s program using the M-CAPS. As a result,
each of the student’s academic teachers shares
the same document. The M-CAPS used in biology is the same as the M-CAPS used in sociology. Likewise, the supports for a given student are the same.
404
/
Case Study for Michael: From Ziggurat to
CAPS
Michael is a 16-year-old young man diagnosed
with AS. He lives with his mother and two
younger brothers; one is diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
and obsessive-compulsive disorder, and the
other has learning disabilities. Michael is currently taking medication. Although Michael’s
mother noticed already when he was 3 years
old that he was developing differently from his
same-age peers, it was not until Michael
turned 6 that he was diagnosed with AS.
Throughout elementary school he received
special education services including speech
and language therapy focused on pragmatic
language, and social skills and occupational
therapy. After transitioning to middle school,
Michael no longer received direct therapy services. Michael is currently in the second quarter of his sophomore year of high school. He
attends all general education classes, including biology, history, English literature, algebra, composition, and physical education
(PE). His schedule also includes a daily support period where he is given assistance with
organizational skills and social skills.
Michael is motivated by things, not by people. He does not process what is said to him as
well as when things are presented to him visually, and he has difficulty reading facial expressions and body language. Although he is
very bright, Michael receives mostly C’s on his
report card due to the fact that 25% of grades
for all academic classes are based on homework assignments that he often forgets to
record in his planner, and therefore fails to
complete and turn in. In addition, he does not
bring home materials needed to complete assignments.
Michael prefers looking at sports magazines
over interacting with peers. Due to excellent
rote memory skills, Michael can quickly memorize the most recent statistics of any Major
League baseball player and can easily recall
those statistics in conversation.
Michael excels in math and in history; however, he struggles in literature and composition class. His fine-motor skills are delayed,
and writing is laborious for him. He also has
difficulty interpreting concepts covered in his
literature class. Both subject-area teachers re-
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-December 2007
31
Figure 4. Michael’s ISSI. From The Ziggurat Model: A Framework for Designing Comprehensive Interventions for
Individuals with High-Functioning Autism and Asperger Syndrome by R. Aspy & B. Grossman, 2007,
Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing Company. Copyright 2007 by AAPC. Reprinted
with permission.
port that he is anxious in their classes. Michael
also has difficulty tolerating mistakes. He often gets upset when he receives a poor grade
on a test and frequently argues with his teachers over the reasoning behind the grade.
Over the past several weeks, Michael has
Planning
32
/
405
Figure 5. Michael’s UCC-HF (partial view only). From The Ziggurat Model: A Framework for Designing Comprehensive Interventions for Individuals with High-Functioning Autism and Asperger Syndrome (p. 77), by R.
Aspy and B. Grossman, 2007, Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing Company. Copyright 2007 by AAPC. Reprinted with permission.
become increasingly anxious in PE class where
the noise level is often extremely loud. When
participating in team contact sports, he removes himself from the game and sits on the
406
/
sidelines. When his teacher approaches him
to discuss the situation, Michael frantically
tells him that his peers are intentionally trying
to hurt him. In such situation, Michael’s be-
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-December 2007
33
Figure 6. Michael’s Ziggurat Worksheet (Task Demands and Skills to Teach only). From The Ziggurat Model:
A Framework for Designing Comprehensive Interventions for Individuals with High-Functioning Autism and
Asperger Syndrome (p. 77), by R. Aspy and B. Grossman, 2007, Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism
Asperger Publishing Company. Copyright 2007 by AAPC. Reprinted with permission.
Figure 7. Michael’s M-CAPS (partial only).
Planning
34
/
407
Figure 8. Michael’s CAPS for physical education.
havior typically is to leave the gym. His teacher
thinks that Michael is a “sore loser.”
Michael’s multidisciplinary team, including
his parents, met to develop his program. They
completed a UCC-HF (see Figure 4 for a portion of Michael’s UCC) and ISSI (see Figure
5). Using information from these activities,
Michael’s team completed the Ziggurat Worksheet (see partial copy in Figure 6). Finally,
they created a M-CAPS for his general education classes (see partial copy in Figure 7) and
a traditional CAPS for his PE class (see Figure
8).
Summary
The Ziggurat Model and CAPS provide a
unique way to develop and implement a
meaningful program and comprehensive for a
student with ASD. The structure fosters consistent use of supports to ensure student success as well as data collection to measure that
success. Compatible with current trends in
education, including NCLB, RTI, and SWPBS,
the Ziggurat Model and CAPS are also easy to
use.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic
and statistical manual for mental disorders (4th ed.,
text revision). Washington, DC: Author.
Aspy, R., & Grossman, B. G. (2007). The Ziggurat
model: A framework for designing comprehensive interventions for individuals with high-functioning autism
and Asperger Syndrome. Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
Baranek, G.T. (2002). Efficacy of sensory and motor
408
/
interventions for children with autism. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32, 397– 422.
Barry, T. D., Klinger, L. G., Lee, J. M., Palardy, N.,
Gilmore, T., & Bodin, D. (2003). Examining the
effectiveness of an outpatient clinic-based social
skills group for high-functioning children with
autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33, 685–701.
Bryan, L. C., & Gast, D. L. (2000). Teaching on-task
and on-schedule behaviors to high-functioning
children with autism via picture activity schedules.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30,
553–567.
Charlop-Christy, M. H., Kurtz, P. F., & Casey, F.
(1990). Using aberrant behaviors as reinforcers
for autistic children. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 23, 163–181.
Dettmer, S., Simpson, R. L., Myles, B. S., & Ganz,
J. B. (2000). The use of visual supports to facilitate transitions of students with autism. Focus on
Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 15, 163–
169.
Di Martino, A., Melis, G., Cianchetti, C., & Zuddas,
A. (2004). Methylphenidate for pervasive developmental disorders: Safety and efficacy of acute
single dose test and ongoing therapy: An openpilot study. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, 14, 207–218.
Dooley, P., Wilczenski, F. L., & Torem, C. (2001).
Using an activity schedule to smooth school transitions. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3,
57– 61.
Erickson, C. A., Stigler, K. A., Posey, D. J., & McDougle, C. J. (2005). Risperidone in pervasive
developmental disorders. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 5, 713–719.
Frederickson, N., Warren, L., & Turner, J. (2005).
“Circle of friends”—an exploration of impact
over time. Educational Psychology in Practice, 21,
197–217.
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-December 2007
35
Henry, S. A., & Myles, B. S. (2007). The Comprehensive Autism Planning Systems (CAPS) for individuals
with Asperger Syndrome, autism and related disabilities:
Integrating best practices throughout the student’s day.
Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Strain, P. S., Todd, A. W.,
& Reed, H. K. (2002). Problem behavior interventions for young children with autism: A research
synthesis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32, 423– 446.
Kamps, D. M., Dugan, E., Potucek, J., & Collins, A.
(1999). Effects of cross-age peer tutoring networks among students with autism and general
education students. Journal of Behavioral Education,
9, 97–115.
Kaplan, H., Clopton, M., Kaplan, M., Messbauer, L.,
& McPherson, K. (2006). Snoezelen multi-sensory
environments: Task engagement and generalization. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 27, 443–
455.
Koegel, R. L., Carter, C. M., & Koegel, L. K. (1998).
Setting events to improve parent-teacher coordination and motivation for children with autism.
In J. K. Luiselli & M. J. Cameron (Eds.), Antecedent
control: Innovative approaches to behavioral support
(pp. 167–186). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.
Laushey, K. M., & Heflin, L. J. (2000). Enhancing
social skills of kindergarten children with autism
through the training of multiple peers as tutors.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30,
183–193.
Mesibov, G. B., & Shea, V. (2006). Evidence-based
practice, autism and the TEACCH program.
Manuscript in preparation. Miller, P. (1993). Theories of developmental psychology (3rd ed.). New
York: W. H. Freeman & Company.
Namerow, L. B., Thomas, P., Bostic, J., Prince, J., &
Monuteaux, M. (2003). Use of citalopram in pervasive developmental disorders. Developmental and
Behavioral Pediatrics, 24, 104 –108.
National Research Council. (2001). Educating children with autism. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nikopoulos, C. K., & Keenan, M. (2004). Effects of
video modeling on social initiations by children
with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37,
93–96.
Pfeiffer, B., & Kinnealey, M. (2003). Treatment of
sensory defensiveness in adults. Occupational Therapy International, 10, 175–184.
Pierce, K. L., & Schreibman, L. (1994). Teaching
daily living skills to children with autism in unsupervised settings through pictorial self-management. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 471–
481.
Sakai, K. (2005). Finding our way: Practical solutions
for creating a supportive home and community for the
Asperger Syndrome family. Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
Sansosti, F. J., Powell-Smith. K. A., & Kincaid, D.
(2004). A research synthesis of social story interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 194 –204.
Stackhouse, T. M., Graham, N. S., & Laschober, J. S.
(2002). Occupational therapy intervention and
autism. In R. L. Gabriels & D. E. Hill (Eds.),
Autism –From research to individualized practice (pp.
155–177). Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2007, March 9). Statewide
positive behavior supports and response to instruction:
Lessons being learned. 4th Annual Conference on
Positive Behavior Supports, Boston, MA.
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left
Behind: A desktop reference. Washington, DC: Education Publications Center.
Zanolli, K., Daggett, J., & Adams, T. (1996). Teaching preschool age autistic children to make spontaneous initiations to peers using priming. Journal
of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 26, 407– 422.
Planning
36
/
409
Appendix B
Sample Assessment
Instruments
37
38
SPP
*Comprehensive Planning Tools
(CPT)
Individualized Supports and
Services
 No evidence of comprehensive planning tools
 Comprehensive planning tools exist but not
implemented
 Uneven implementation of CPT
 CPT are used regularly
Components
Circle the rubric number and rank the implementation level.
*Only for teams trained in Comprehensive Planning Tools: Ziggurat Model and CAPS.
  
E I O
E=emerging, I=intermittent, O=often
Effective Programming Checklist
Notes
This document was designed as a tool to assist educators and parents in assessing and designing an effective educational
program for students with autism spectrum disorders. The topics emphasized are based upon the National Research
Council’s Committee recommendations and organized based upon an article entitled “Effective Educational Practices
for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders” (Iovannone, R., Dunlap, G., Huber, H., & Kincaid, D., Focus on Autism
and Other Developmental Disabilities, 2003, 18(3), 150-165). This tool’s predecessor, developed by Laura Maddox, utilized
adaptations of the Consultation Checklist from the Kentucky Autism Training Center (http://louisville.edu/education/
kyautismtraining).
Office of Exceptional Children, Ohio Department of Education
Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
39
Visual Supports
Prompting
  
  
 Adult over- or under-uses prompts
 Adult uses narrow scope of prompts (reactive)
 General prompts are used to achieve positive
behavior, as well as correct inappropriate
behavior (proactive/reactive)
 Clear continuum (least-most invasive) of
individualize prompts exists, including natural
prompts, fading, etc.
None is present
Visual is present but rarely used
Visual is present but not individualized
Visual is used to support learning and
communication
Individualized Planning
  




 None is evident
 No evidence of individualization exists
 Some evidence of ongoing individualization is
present
 Program includes IEP, preferences, etc., data, and
individualized plans for meaningful activities
IEP/IFSP
  
 IEP/IFSP does not reflect student current
strengths/ needs.
 IEP/IFSP is carried over from previous year(s)
w/no data support
 IEP/IFSP is written to fit current needs
 IEP/IFSP is objective and complete; addresses
student needs w/assessment
No schedule is posted
Classroom schedule is posted
Individual schedule w/o modifications is evident
Individual schedule is used regularly
Components
Individualized Student Schedule
Individualized Supports and
Services
  
SPP
Circle the rubric number and rank the implementation level.




E I O
E=emerging, I=intermittent, O=often
Effective Programming Checklist
Notes
40
 Does not provide instructions or relies on other
sources to provide instructions
 Uses unclear or verbose instructions
 Uses clear instruction relevant to task or activity
 Uses clear, concise instructions relevant to task;
individualized to needs of the student
Active Engagement
Systematic Instructions
  
  
0-25% of time
26-50% of time
51-75% of time
76-100% of time




Structured Planning
  
 No written daily teacher plan exists
 Written plan is not specific to IEP goals and
objectives
 Written plan incorporates individual objectives,
lacking details such as implementer, location,
time, etc.
 Written daily plan links student objectives with
general education curriculum/daily schedule, and
is detail specific
Data Collection
  
Systematic Instruction
 None
 Infrequent data are collected
 Data are collected monthly, not used for
individual programming
 Data are collected weekly, graphed, and used for
individualized programming
Components
Motivation/Reinforcement
Individualized Supports and
Services
  
SPP
 Motivation/reinforcers not evident
 Focus is on extinguishing inappropriate behavior
 Mix of positive and negative reinforcement of
behaviors exists
 Interests/reinforcement used to support learning
and communication
E I O
Notes
41
 Team roles are not defined/distributed
 General roles are defined but do not provide
opportunities for generalization, distribution of
responsibilities
 Team members know roles and responsibilities
 Team members plan together and roles are
defined for staff members, peers, target student
 Team meetings are scheduled to meet minimal
legal requirements
 Regular team meetings are scheduled but
perceived to be unproductive; attendance is
inconsistent
 Regular team meetings occur with consistent
attendance; agenda and data are not included
 Regular team meetings occur with consistent
attendance and clearly defined agenda; pertinent
data utilized to facilitate changes in student
programming; changes are presented to all team
members to enhance consistency and delineate
roles
Clearly Defined Roles/
Expectations
Scheduled Meetings
  
  
Components
Consistency
Systematic Instruction
  
SPP
 Team members are not informed about
individualized plans, purposes of activities and
procedures used
 General explanation of procedures provided
 Team members are informed of plans, purpose
of activities and procedures; consistency is not
monitored
 Team members are informed and updated
regularly; team leader monitors consistency
E I O
Notes
42
 Physical structure is not evident
 Limited structure is evident; prompting is usually
necessary; distractions are evident
 Student exhibits some understanding of
boundaries; distractions are evident
 Student predicts and anticipates requirements of
setting
 Student is physically prompted through
environmental and activity processes
 Student shows some understanding of
environmental/activity changes; no evidence of
self-management strategies being used
 Self-management strategies are used
inconsistently
 Student independently plans for/regulates
environmental change
 No sensory-based or emotional regulation
strategies are observed
 Equipment/supplies/strategies for sensory and
emotional regulation are present but rarely used
or used inconsistently/inappropriately
 General sensory-based interventions/emotional
regulation strategies are used for the whole class,
but not specific to student or activity
 Student-specific sensory/emotional regulation
strategies are appropriately incorporated into
activities when needed
Comprehensible Classroom
Self-Management
Sensory/Emotional Regulation
  
  
  
Components
Clear Curriculum
Environmental/Program
Structure
  
SPP
 Activities do not reflect clear goals
 Activities are carried over from previous year(s)
w/no data support
 Activities are written to fit current needs
 Objectives are clear and functional and activities
are meaningful
E I O
Notes
43
 Nonverbal communication is misunderstood/
interpreted inconsistently
 Team members discuss possible student
communication attempts; no consistent
knowledge of student’s communication
repertoire
 Student’s communication repertoire is shared
inconsistently among team members
 Student’s communication repertoire is
documented regularly and shared among team
members
 Communication skills are not addressed
 Communication skills are addressed on IEP, no
specific programming
 Communication skills are addressed on IEP, few
planned opportunities are present for student to
practice
 Specialized communication curriculum utilized
to address social engagement skills; many
opportunities are present for student to practice
and generalize
Knowledge of Communication
Skills
Communication Instruction
  
  
Components
Communication System
Communication Skills
  
SPP
 Student does not have a conventional
communication system
 Student uses a communication system during
certain times of the day
 Student uses a conventional communication
system to express basic wants and needs
 Student uses a communication system
throughout the day that allows him to effectively
express and understand communication;
communication opportunities are integrated into
daily activities
E I O
Notes
44
 Social skills are not addressed
 Social skills are addressed on IEP; no
specific programming evident
 Social skills are addressed on IEP; few
planned opportunities are present for student
to practice
 Specialized social skills curriculum utilized
to address social engagement skills; many
opportunities are present for student to
practice and generalize
Social Skills Instruction
  
 Absence of written design AND
implementation of behavior plan
 Written design created; only reactive
strategies addressed
 Written design created by educational team;
proactive strategies incorporated, but not
fully implemented
 Written design by educational team;
proactive strategies are designed and full
implementation of program
 Absence of FBA
 List of target behaviors with subjective data
(descriptions, notes)
 Individual target behavior defined with
objective data
 FBA completed
Written Plan
Functional Behavior Assessment
(FBA)
  
  
Functional Behavioral
Approach
Components
Peer Interactions
Social Skills
  
SPP
 Student has no opportunities for interactions
with peers
 Student has limited opportunities for
interactions with peers
 Student has planned activities with peers
without planned goals
 Student has planned activities with peers and
goals for interactions
E I O
Notes
45
Family Role
Evaluation
  
  
 Plan has never been reassessed
 Plan is sporadically reassessed
 Plan is reassessed at regular intervals without
input from entire team
 Plan is reassessed at regular intervals with
input from entire team
Data Collection
  
 Family is not involved in planning and
implementation of educational program
 Family is notified of decisions made
regarding student’s educational program
 Family attends planning meetings and is
provided information about child’s program
 Family is active on the educational team,
including decision making, planning, and
implementation; receives training
 Replacement behavior(s) for target
behavior(s) not evident
 Replacement behavior for target behavior
exists; plan or procedure is not evident
 Replacement behavior for target behavior
identified; design of plan present;
implementation in place w/o data
 Replacement behavior for target behavior
identified; design of plan present;
implementation in place with data
Family Involvement
Components
Variety of Strategies
Functional Behavioral
Approach
  
SPP
 Only reactive strategies exist
 Several strategies identified, not based on
FBA
 Proactive/teaching/consequence strategies
selected based upon FBA with inconsistent
implementation
 Consistent implementation of variety
of individualized proactive/teaching/
consequence strategies based upon FBA
E I O
Notes
Effective Implementation and Support of an
Educational Program for Autism Spectrum Disorders
Adapted from Effective Implementation and Support of Illinois Educational
Program for Autism (adapted from EBS Self-Assessment Survey, version 2.0; Sugai, Horner, Todd, Educational and Community Support, University of Oregon;
http://www.pbssurveys.org).
School: ____________________­­__City: ___________________ Date: ____/____/____
Staff Completing: ______________________Title:_____________________________
If school observation, observer:____________________________________________
Definitions:
Current status = Perceived status of the feature as of the day the rating takes
place: In Place = Perceived to be 100% in place, Partially In Place = Perceived to
be 50-99% in place, Not in Place = Perceived to be 0-49% in place.
Priority for Improvement = Perceived status of the importance or impact of implementing the feature as it relates to the student and/or team’s process: High =
Perceived priority of extreme to total importance to implementation feature,
Medium = Perceived priority of moderate importance to implement feature,
Low = Perceived priority of minimal to no importance to implement feature.
46
SchoolWide Systems
Current Status:
Level of Implementation
In
Partial
Not in
Place in Place Place
Feature
Schoolwide is defined as involving all students,
all staff and all settings.
1) There is agreement schoolwide on strategies
and practices involving students with autism
spectrum disorders (ASD).
2) Resources are available for materials and
curriculum.
3) School staff have had an opportunity to
attend workshops on many aspects of educating
children with ASD.
4) Staff have opportunities to participate in
ongoing training in and out of school.
5) Parents are a formal part of the planning,
evaluation and support process.
6) A team and system exists for behavior support
planning and problem solving.
7) All staff are involved directly or indirectly in
supporting students with ASD.
Need for Improvement
High
Medium
Low
Non-Classroom Setting Systems
Current Status:
Level of Implementation
In
Partial
Not in
Place in Place
Place
Feature
Non-classroom settings are defined as
particular times or places where supervision
is emphasized (e.g., hallways, cafeteria,
playground, bus).
1) Strategies and supports for students with ASD
are utilized in non-classroom settings.
Need for Improvement
High
Medium
Low
47
Non-Classroom Setting Systems (continued)
Current Status:
Level of Implementation
Feature
In
Partial in Not in Non-classroom settings are defined as particular
Place
Place
Place times or places where supervision in emphasized
(e.g., hallways, cafeteria, playground, bus).
2) Supports are utilized to assist students with
ASD in transitioning from place to place.
3) Behavior plans are in place and generalized to
non-classroom settings.
4) Typical students in non-classroom settings
have received training on how to interact with
students with ASD in non-classroom settings.
5) Physical features are modified to limit (a)
unsupervised settings, (b) unclear boundaries
and traffic patterns, and (c) ability of students
with ASD to inappropriately leave school or
non-classroom settings.
6) Scheduling of student movement is designed
to increase consistency and reduce problems
with high noise, confusion, crowding, and
other occurrences that could be problematic for
students with ASD.
Need for Improvement
High
Medium
Low
Classroom Systems
Current Status:
Level of Implementation
In
Partial in Not in
Place
Place
Place
Feature
Classroom settings are defined as instructional
settings in which teacher(s) supervise and teach
groups of students.
1) Specific classroom areas are clearly defined.
2) Classroom expectations and routines are
clearly defined.
3) Classroom expectations and routines are
taught directly.
4) Expected student behaviors are clearly
defined.
5) Expected student behaviors are taught
directly.
6) Students with ASD receive direct instruction
in math, reading, and written language.
7) Students with ASD receive direct instruction
on social skills and communication.
48
Need for Improvement
High
Medium
Low
Classroom Systems (continued)
Current Status:
Level of Implementation
In
Partial in Not in
Place
Place
Place
Feature
Classroom settings are defined as instructional
settings in which teacher(s) supervise and teach
groups of students.
8) Classroom teachers fully participate in
planning for support and in assisting with
accommodations for students with ASD.
9) Related service personnel work closely with
classroom staff at all levels of support.
10) Structured reinforcement is built into
classroom schedule.
11) Instruction for students with ASD uses
grade-level curriculum.
12) Learned skills are being practiced to
maintain skill.
13) Instruction for students with ASD is
designed to allow for maximum interaction
with typical students.
Need for Improvement
High
Medium
Low
Individual Student Systems
Current Status:
Level of Implementation
In
Partial in Not in
Place
Place
Place
Feature
Individual student systems are defined as
specific supports designed for the individual
student with ASD.
1) Student has individual workspace designed
according his/her needs.
2) Student has an individual daily schedule
placed for use throughout day.
3) Changes in student’s schedule are planned
for and on schedule prior to the change.
4) Student’s instruction includes grade-level
instruction with modifications and supports
individually designed.
5) Student can access sensory supports and
breaks as needed.
6) Student has a reinforcement system that is
used and understood by student, other students,
and all staff.
7) Student’s communication system is available
at all times.
Need for Improvement
High
Medium
Low
49
Individual Student Systems (continued)
Current Status:
Level of Implementation
In
Partial
Not in
Place in Place Place
50
Feature
Individual student systems are defined as
specific supports designed for the individual
student with ASD.
8) Student’s communication system is
understood and used by all staff and other
students.
9) Task organizers are used to maximize
understanding throughout day.
10) Assessments are conducted regularly to
identify problem behaviors.
11) Behavior Support Team includes an
individual skilled at conducting functional
behavior assessments for students with ASD.
12) Family members and/or community
members are involved with planning,
evaluation, and support.
13) School includes formal opportunities for
families to receive training on behavioral
support and home strategies.
Need for Improvement
High
Medium
Low
51

Echolalia

Understood only by
familiar people

Other (specify)
Student Gender

Entering kindergarten
What percent of time does the student spend in general
education? (5,6)
%

Entering postsecondary education

Entering
preschool

Entering employment

Entering
high
school

No

Other (specify)

Augmentative
communication
device
Does the student participate in alternate assessment? (3) 
Yes

Entering
middle
school

F

Understood by
unfamiliar people

M

OCALI Staff

Time 7 
Time 8

Changing 
NA
residence

Short

Sentences
phrases

Institution

Time 6

Team Member (specify)

Time 5
If the student has a major
transition next year, which
describes the transition:

One word 
Two
words
If the student is verbal,
communication can best be
described as (check all that
apply):

Group
Home
Student DOB

Time 4

Sign language

Foster
Care

Natural
Home
Student Residence

Team

Time 3
If the student is nonverbal, communication 
Gestures, eye gaze,

A form of picture
methods can best be described as (check all
pulling toward objects,
communication
that apply):
body position
Student ID
Student Name

Parent/Caregiver
Assessment 
Baseline 1 
Time 2
Period
Form Completed By
Date
STUDENT ASSESSMENT
OHIO CENTER FOR AUTISM AND LOW INCIDENCE
52
Sensory issues
Vocational/prevocational skills
Learning challenges
Self-care/adaptive skills
Challenging behaviors
Leisure skills
Toileting/bathroom/hygiene
Socialization
Communication skills
Fine-/gross-motor skills
Feeding/eating/nutrition
Areas
No Difficulty
Mild Difficulty
Moderate Difficulty
Severe Difficulty
Please select the descriptor that best describes the student’s life skills and behavioral issues. Place an X in the column that matches the correct rating.
53
3
3
3
Cheats
Steals
Abuses alcohol, drugs
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
Note. *=State Performance Plan Indicators.
Difficulty following
routines
Difficulty with
transitions
Destroys property
3
3
Respects adults in
authority
Bolts or runs
Refuses to follow rules
Refuses requests
Refuses consequences
Tantrums/meltdowns
Self-stimulatory
behaviors
Aggressive behavior
toward others
Aggressive behavior
toward self
Verbally aggressive
Externalized
Behaviors
Repetitive behaviors
SPP*
COMMUNITY
Always
Never Sometimes
Frequently Always
HOME
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
Always
SCHOOL/WORK SITE
DIRECTIONS: Please indicate the frequency with which the following occur in the community,
home, and school.
54
SPP*
7
7
7
7
7
7
Withdrawn
Limited motivation
7
Distorted thoughts
Depressed
Avoids others
Internalizing
Behaviors
Anxious
Does not respond
7
emotionally like peers to
adverse situations
Unaware of danger
Laughs inappropriately
Easily frustrated
Inattentive
Easily distracted
Seeks attention
inappropriately
Difficulty with selfcontrol
Hyperactive
Externalized Behaviors
(cont)
Lacks social inhibition
7
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
COMMUNITY
Always
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
HOME
Always
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
SCHOOL
Always
55
7
Is not accepted by other
children
Has limited value for
friendships
7
7
7
7
7
7
Has few or no friends
Social Relationships
Difficulties initiating
conversations
Does not know how to
ask for help
Does not know when to
ask for help
Difficulties maintaining
conversations
7
Difficulty
communicating
Problems reading others’
intentions
Problems understanding
nonverbal
communication
Unresponsive to others
7
7
SPP*
Lacks social reciprocity
Communication
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
COMMUNITY
Always
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
HOME
Always
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
SCHOOL
Always
56
Uses visual schedule
independently (if
needed)
Uses communication
system with peers and
adults across settings
throughout the day
School/Work/Daily
Living Behaviors
Attends school/work
regularly
Works independently
Parent participates
as equal partner in
educational decisions
Seizures
Poor self-help skills
Poor leisure skills
Motor issues
Feeding problems
Toileting problems
Sensory challenges
Other
8
SPP*
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
COMMUNITY
Always
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
HOME
Always
Never
Sometimes
Frequently
SCHOOL
Always
57
Completes tasks
independently
Completes tasks with
supports
School/Work/Daily
Living (cont)
Follows directions
independently
Follows directions with
supports
Follows same routine as
peers with supports
Follows same routine as
peers independently
Participates in
discussions
Transitions between
activities and
environments
independently
Transitions between
activities and
environments with
supports
Pays attention
SPP*
Never
Frequently
COMMUNITY
Sometimes
Always
Never
Frequently
HOME
Sometimes
Always
Never
Frequently
SCHOOL
Sometimes
Always
58
Sometimes
Frequently
Always
COMMUNITY/WORK SITE
Never
Never
Frequently
HOME
Sometimes
Always
Never
Sometimes
SCHOOL
Frequently
Always
Note. For students ages 16 and older, please attach a copy of the student’s IEP goals and transition services (SPP 13).
Completes homework
on time
Participates in work
14
experiences (high school
only)
Engages in transition
13
experiences as dictated
on the IEP
Earns passing grades/
satisfactory work
evaluation
Engages in expected
behavior with adult
support
Needs individualized
classroom/work/
home support
Needs individualized
behavioral supports
Performs commensurate
with ability
Passes quizzes and tests
School Behaviors (cont)
SPP*
Individual Training Needs
Adapted from Illinois Technical Assistance Center, 2007; http://tac.uiuc.edu; used with permission.
Assessment Period
Student Name

Baseline 1

Time 5

Time 1

Time 6

Time 2

Time 7

Time 3

Time 8

Time 4

Time 9
Name and Position
Please check the appropriate column below for each area of training need.
RESPONSE
Need
High
Somewhat
Strength
Somewhat
High
Training Needs
Introduction to autism
Introduction to Asperger Syndrome
Comprehensive planning
Assessment for identification
Assessment for program planning
Developing, selecting, adapting, and using strategies and materials
Developing, selecting, adapting, and using management procedures
Developing, selecting, adapting, and using evaluation procedures
Visual supports
Circle of Friends
Communication systems
Social skills and related issues
Home and community living
Literacy
Parent-professional partnerships
Using assistive technology
Peer programs
Data collection
Sensory interventions
Reinforcement
Functional behavior assessment
Behavior intervention plans
Applied behavior analysis
Curriculum modifications
Paraprofessional training
Supervising paraprofessionals
TEACCH model
Transition from early intervention to preschool
Transition from preschool to elementary school
Transition from elementary to middle/high school
Transition to adulthood
Classroom structure
Behavior management strategies
Other:
Other:
59
Autism Asperger Publishing Company
P.O. Box 23173
Shawnee Mission, Kansas 66283-0173
877-277-8254 • www.asperger.net
The Gold Standard for
Intervention Planning
The Ziggurat Model and The Comprehensive Autism Planning
System (CAPS) capture the three keys in designing and
implementing a comprehensive intervention plan:
Characteristics
• The Underlying
Characteristics Checklist
(UCC) helps you see the
ASD.
• *Individual Strengths
and Skills Inventory
(ISSI) shows you an
individual’s strengths
and skills.
*ISSI is found in The
Ziggurat Model.
Intervention
• The Ziggurat Model
shows you how to
design interventions
using evidence-based
strategies.
Implementation
• The Comprehensive
Autism Planning
System (CAPS)
shows you how to
effectively incorporate
comprehensive
interventions into a
student’s day.
A Comprehensive
Planning Process
for Students with
Autism Spectrum Disorders
and Related Disabilities:
The Ziggurat Model and
Comprehensive Autism
Planning System
Autism Asperger Publishing Company
Autism Asperger Publishing Company
P.O. Box 23173
Shawnee Mission, Kansas 66283-0173
877-277-8254 • www.asperger.net