How to get the most out of behaviour support: an evidence‑based guide for Australian families, schools and support teams
Written by: Rona Castañeda
Professionally reviewed and edited by: Dr Julia Tilling
Clinically reviewed on: 5 June 2026
LinkedIn: Profile
Clinical Content Reviewer | Counselling Supervisor | Behaviour Support and Mental Health Education Specialist
PhD in Educational Psychology, The University of Queensland
Master of Education (Counselling and Inclusive Education), Queensland University of Technology
Bachelor of Adult and Vocational Education (Psychology), Griffith University
Australian Counselling Association — Registered Clinical Supervisor
Julia professionally reviews selected Therapy Near Me content for counselling accuracy, behaviour support relevance, trauma-informed language, consumer readability, practitioner scope-of-practice wording, and suitability for public-facing mental health and behaviour support information.
What “success” looks like
Effective behaviour support is not just fewer incidents. It is better life quality: more choice and communication, safer participation, skill growth, and reduced carer stress—with any restrictive practices reduced and eliminated over time(Gore et al., 2013; NDIS Commission, 2019; NICE, 2015).
The essentials (Australian context)
- Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) integrates functional assessment, skills teaching, proactive environment design and rights‑based safeguarding (Carr et al., 1999; Gore et al., 2013).
- Functional Behaviour Assessment (FBA) identifies the function of behaviour (e.g., escape, attention, access, sensory) using records, interviews, direct observation, and sometimes experimental analysis (Iwata et al., 1994; Beavers, Iwata and Lerman, 2013).
- Behaviour Support Plans (BSPs): interim (for immediate risk) and comprehensive (proactive strategies, skills teaching, reinforcement systems, and response/crisis plans) (NDIS Commission, 2019; NICE, 2015).
- Restrictive practices (seclusion; chemical, mechanical, physical, environmental restraint) require authorisationunder state/territory schemes and reporting to the NDIS Commission, with a documented reduction pathway (NDIS Commission, 2021).
Make the first 30 days count
- Clarify goals that matter: translate “fewer meltdowns” into observable targets (e.g., duration of loud vocalisations; number of task refusals) and quality‑of‑life goals (e.g., hours in preferred activities; independent communication attempts) (Gore et al., 2013; Kiresuk and Sherman, 1968).
- Where feasible, collect two to three weeks of simple baseline data in the settings that matter most. If risk is high or immediate safety concerns are present, safety planning and early intervention may need to begin sooner
- Screen for setting events: pain, sleep, hunger, sensory load, medication effects. Address health issues in parallel with PBS.
- Risk plan now, not later: agree early de‑escalation steps, safe exits, and who calls whom.
Build a right‑sized data plan (and stick to it)
- Choose one primary measure per target (frequency, duration, latency, intensity rating) and keep it feasible.
- Use ABC (Antecedent–Behaviour–Consequence) notes for patterns; add scatterplots to reveal time‑of‑day or activity hot spots.
- Check inter‑observer agreement occasionally so the data are trustworthy (Fortney et al., 2017; Beavers, Iwata and Lerman, 2013).
- A right-sized data plan means collecting enough information to guide decisions without creating an unrealistic burden for families, schools, or support workers. Review data regularly, often every 2-4 weeks during active implementation, and adapt the plan if data show limited progress, new risks, or inconsistent implementation.
Co‑design a plan that fits everyday life
Co-design means developing the plan with the person, family, carers, support workers, school staff, and other relevant providers where appropriate. It should reflect what matters to the person, the environments where support happens, and the strategies that can realistically be used in daily life. High‑impact ingredients, grounded in function:
1) Proactive environment supports (antecedents)
- Predictable schedules and transition cues; first‑then boards; visual timers.
- Task shaping and choices; adjust difficulty and effort.
- Sensory accommodations (quiet spaces, noise‑reducing headphones) when profiles suggest sensory drivers.
2) Teach replacement and independence skills
- Functional Communication Training (FCT) to request a break, help, attention, or items; pair with clear reinforcement (Tiger, Hanley and Bruzek, 2008).
- Tolerance and delay (waiting, accepting “no”) using graduated exposure with dense reinforcement.
- Coping/regulation: brief routines for breathing, movement, or sensory strategies; self‑monitoring checklists.
- Choice‑making and problem‑solving: guided practice across contexts.
3) Reinforce what you want to see
- Identify effective reinforcers via preference assessment; rotate to avoid satiation (Fisher et al., 1992).
- Use differential reinforcement (DRA/DRI/DRO) matched to function.
- Deliver reinforcement immediately and consistently, then fade to natural contingencies.
4) Response and crisis plans
- Least‑intrusive responses that do not accidentally reinforce the problem behaviour.
- Clear, rehearsed safety steps for rare high‑risk moments; document and review.
- Any restrictive element must be authorised, reported, and paired with a reduction plan (NDIS Commission, 2021).
5) Generalisation and maintenance
Plan from day one to transfer skills across people, places and activities and to fade prompts/rewards (Stokes and Baer, 1977).
Train for consistent implementation
Fidelity means checking whether strategies are being used as intended. This may involve observation, brief check-ins, staff feedback, implementation checklists, or review of data to identify where more coaching is needed.
Troubleshoot limited progress and inconsistent implementation across settings
Limited progress means the data are not showing meaningful improvement in safety, participation, quality of life, or target behaviours. Cross-setting drift means strategies are being used differently across home, school, community, or support settings. If data do not improve:
- Revisit the function: collect fresh ABC; consider a more precise analysis (e.g., interview‑informed synthesised contingency analysis) with specialist oversight (Hanley et al., 2014).
- Tighten reinforcement: ensure the replacement skill produces better, faster access to the same outcome.
- Check setting events: medical pain, sleep debt, medication side‑effects, trauma cues.
- Right‑size the skill: teach an easier first step; add more prompts; increase density of reinforcement.
- Strengthen coaching: more in‑situ feedback; simplify the plan; remove rarely used components.
Working across home, school and community
- Use one‑page strategy summaries for each setting.
- Share data snapshots at the same interval (fortnightly) so everyone sees the trend.
- Align language and prompts (same request words; same visuals).
- Nominate a plan lead to chase drift and onboard new staff.
Reducing and eliminating restrictive practices
- Treat any restraint, seclusion, or restrictive element as a temporary, last-resort safety measure that requires appropriate authorisation, reporting, oversight, and a clear reduction strategy. Behaviour support should prioritise function-matched alternatives, environmental redesign, communication access, trauma-informed practice, and strategies that support dignity, choice, collaboration, and trust.
- Where medication may be functioning as a chemical restraint, this should involve appropriate medical oversight, consent, documentation, and a reduction strategy consistent with the relevant regulatory requirements.
Cultural safety, communication access and trauma‑informed practice
- Co‑design with the person and family; use plain‑language and visuals.
- Provide interpreters and communication aids (AAC) as needed; adapt measures accordingly.
- Assume possible trauma histories; prioritise choice, collaboration and trust in how supports are delivered (NICE, 2015).
A 12‑point checklist you can print
- Goals are person‑centred and measurable.
- Baseline data collected in key settings.
- BSP lists antecedents, skills, reinforcement, responses, and safety steps.
- Replacement skills are easier and faster than the problem behaviour.
- Preferred reinforcers identified and rotated.
- One‑page summaries for home/school/community.
- BST training delivered with rehearsal and feedback to all staff.
- Regular data review, often fortnightly during active implementation where appropriate
- Restrictive practices, where present, are authorised, reported, monitored, and subject to a clear reduction plan
- Generalisation plan across people/places.
- Health, sleep and sensory needs addressed.
- The person/family feel heard and see progress in quality of life.
References
Beavers, G.A., Iwata, B.A. and Lerman, D.C. (2013) ‘Thirty years of research on the functional analysis of problem behavior’, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(1), pp. 1–21.
Carr, E.G., Horner, R.H., Turnbull, A.P., Marquis, J., Magito‑McLaughlin, D., McAtee, M., Smith, C.E., Ryan, K.A., Ruef, M. and Doolabh, A. (1999) Positive Behavior Support: Evolution of an applied science. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Bro
okes.
Fisher, W.W., Piazza, C.C. and Roane, H.S. (1992) ‘A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers in the natural environment’, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), pp. 491–498.
Fortney, J.C., Unützer, J., Wrenn, G., Pyne, J.M., Smith, G.R., Schoenbaum, M. and Harbin, H.T. (2017) ‘A tipping point for measurement‑based care’, Psychiatric Services, 68(2), pp. 179–188.
Gore, N.J., McGill, P., Toogood, S., Allen, D., Hughes, J.C., Baker, P., Hastings, R.P., Noone, S.J. and Denne, L.D. (2013) ‘Definition and scope for positive behavioural support’, International Journal of Positive Behavioural Support, 3(2), pp. 14–23.
Hanley, G.P., Jin, C.S., Vanselow, N.R. and Hanratty, L.A. (2014) ‘Producing meaningful improvements in problem behavior of children with autism via synthesized analyses and treatments’, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47(1), pp. 16–36.
Kiresuk, T.J. and Sherman, R.E. (1968) ‘Goal Attainment Scaling: A general method for evaluating comprehensive community mental health programs’, Community Mental Health Journal, 4(6), pp. 443–453.
LaVigna, G.W. and Willis, T.J. (2012) ‘The efficacy of positive behavioral support: A literature review’, Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33(5), pp. 1504–1514.
NDIS Commission (2019) Positive Behaviour Support Capability Framework. Canberra: NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
NDIS Commission (2021) NDIS (Restrictive Practices and Behaviour Support) Rules 2018 — Guidance and Practice Advice (updated). Canberra: NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) (2015) Challenging behaviour and learning disabilities: prevention and interventions for people with learning disabilities whose behaviour challenges (NG11). London: NICE.
Parsons, M.B., Rollyson, J.H. and Reid, D.H. (2012) ‘Evidence‑based staff training: A guide for practitioners’, Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5(2), pp. 2–11.
Sarokoff, R.A. and Sturmey, P. (2004) ‘The effects of behavioral skills training on staff implementation of discrete‑trial teaching’, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37(4), pp. 535–538.
Stokes, T.F. and Baer, D.M. (1977) ‘An implicit technology of generalization’, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10(2), pp. 349–367.
Tiger, J.H., Hanley, G.P. and Bruzek, J. (2008) ‘Functional communication training: A review and practical guide’, Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(1), pp. 16–23.
How to cite this article
Therapy Near Me (2025) ‘How to get the most out of behaviour support: an evidence‑based guide for Australian families, schools and support teams’. Available at: https://TherapyNearMe.com.au
