Untitled

THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Dennis Reid, Marsha Parsons, and Carolyn Green each has over
40 years of experience supervising provision of services for people
with intellectual and developmental disabilities. They have supervised
services in residential centers, schools, adult day-support services,
vocational programs, and community settings. They have also pub-
lished over 140 applied research articles and book chapters in the
human services. Their research has appeared in over 20 peer-re-
viewed journals including the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
Behavior Analysis in Practice, Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage-
ment, American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, and
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. Dennis, Marsha, and Carolyn
have received numerous awards for their respective services from
organizations such as the Association for Behavior Analysis Interna-
tional, American Association on Intellectual and Developmental
Disabilities, Organization for Autism Research, and the Office of the
Governor of North Carolina. They are currently affiliated with the
Carolina Behavior Analysis and Support Center in Morganton, North
Carolina. Additional information about the authors and their work
can be obtained at www.dennishreidau.com.
Published and Distributed Throughout the World by
CHARLES C THOMAS • PUBLISHER, LTD.

2600 South First Street
Springfield, Illinois 62704
This book is protected by copyright. No part of

it may be reproduced in any manner without written
permission from the publisher. All rights reserved.
© 2021 by CHARLES C THOMAS • PUBLISHER, LTD.
ISBN 978-0-398-09360-0 (paper)

ISBN 978-0-398-09361-7 (ebook)
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2021001371 (print)

2021001372 (ebook)
With THOMAS BOOKS careful attention is given to all details of manufacturing

and design. It is the Publisher’s desire to present books that are satisfactory as to their
physical qualities and artistic possibilities and appropriate for their particular use.
THOMAS BOOKS will be true to those laws of quality that assure a good name
and good will.
Printed in the United States of America

MM-C-1
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Reid, Dennis H., author. | Parsons, Marsha B., author. |

Green, Carolyn W., author.
Title: The supervisor’s guidebook : evidence-based strategies for pro-
moting work quality and enjoyment among human service staff /
by Dennis H. Reid, Marsha B. Parsons, Carolyn W. Green.
Description: Second edition. Springfield, Illinois : Charles C Thomas,
Publisher, Ltd., [2021] | Includes index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2021001371 (print) | LCCN 2021001372 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780398093600 (paperbook) | ISBN 9780398093617 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Human services personnel—Supervision of—United
States. | Social work with people with disabilities–United States. |
People with disabilities—Services for—United States. | Human ser-
vices personnel—Training of. | Supervisors—Training of–United
States.
Classification: LCC HV40.54 .R4553 2021 (print) | LCC HV40.54
(ebook) | DDC 361.0068/3—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021001371
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021001372
This book is dedicated to our parents: Charles and Margaret Reid,
Reece and Rachel Bigham, and Charles and Lavada Worley.
If not for their personal devotion and natural abilities to teach and
supervise, we would not have been in a position to write this book.
PREFACE
T he job of a supervisor of direct support staff in the human services is one

of the most important yet unheralded professions. Supervisors are
charged with ensuring support staff deliver quality services for people with
disabilities whose quality of life is heavily dependent on how well those ser-
vices are provided. Supervisors must ensure staff receive necessary training
in their job duties, are actively supported to stay motivated to work profi-
ciently and, at times, effectively assisted to improve their work performance.
Supervisors have to overcome many challenges to fulfill these critical duties,
often involving frequent changes in their staff work force and varying or lim-
ited resources.
Complicating the job of staff supervisors is a lack of formal training nec-
essary to perform their supervisory duties effectively. When supervisors do
receive training in how to supervise staff work performance, the training is
not always very useful. The training is frequently too general to equip super-
visors with knowledge and skills to affect staff work performance on a rou-
tine basis. The training also is commonly based on unproven means of pro-
moting quality staff performance, stemming from current fads or ideology
that has little if any hard evidence to support the training content.
Over the last five decades, a technology for supervising staff work per-
formance in the human services has been evolving, derived from applied
research conducted in many human service agencies. Such research has pro-
vided a sound evidence base to support the effectiveness of the supervisory
strategies constituting the technology to date. We have been fortunate in par-
ticipating in research on effective ways to supervise as well as in applying
the technology in our work as supervisors in the human services. However,
most supervisors have not had opportunities to become aware of these evi-
dence-based means of fulfilling their supervisory duties.
The purpose of The Supervisor’s Guidebook is to describe the existing evi-
dence-based approach to supervision. Description of the approach is sup-
plemented with practical suggestions based on our combined experience
encompassing over 100 years of supervising staff performance in the human
services. The intent is to provide supervisors with detailed information about
vii
viii The Supervisor’s Guidebook
tried and tested means of promoting diligent and proficient staff perfor-
mance and to do so in a way that maximizes staff enjoyment with their work.
It is sincerely hoped the book fulfills this purpose for the reader.
D.R.
M.P.
C.G.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
N umerous people have helped us learn about supervision, far too many
to recognize individually. However, we have learned most from the ded-
icated and sincere staff we have been fortunate to supervise over the years.
They have greatly facilitated our jobs as supervisors and significantly en-
hanced our work enjoyment.
ix
CONTENTS
Page
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
Section I
INTRODUCTION TO SUPERVISION
Chapter 1. The Importance of Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

What is Supervision? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Successful Supervision Involves Promoting Staff Work Enjoyment . . . 7
Evidence-Based Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Purpose of The Supervisor’s Guidebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Intended Audience of The Supervisor’s Guidebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Organization of The Supervisor’s Guidebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Chapter Summary: Key Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Chapter 2. An Evidence-Based Protocol for Supervising Staff

Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Steps Constituting an Evidence-Based Approach to Supervision . . . 13
Implementing Steps of the Supervisory Protocol in Ways to
Enhance Work Enjoyment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A Practical Concern with Evidence-Based Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Section II
CRITICAL SUPERVISORY SKILLS
Chapter 3. Specifying Staff Work Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Three Criteria for Specifying Staff Performance Responsibilities . . . 27
xi
xii The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Strategies for Specifying Performance Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Specifying Performance Responsibilities in Ways Acceptable
to Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Chapter 4. Training Work Skills to Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Basic Goals of Staff Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Behavioral Skills Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Two Main Formats for Training Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
General Considerations When Conducting Behavioral Skills
Training with Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A Qualification with Staff Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Chapter 5. Monitoring Staff Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Formal Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Informal Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Special Considerations with Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Promoting Staff Acceptance of Performance Monitoring by
A Supervisor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Chapter 6. Supporting Proficient Work Performance: Positive

Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
The Power of Positive Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
An Evidence-Based Protocol for Providing Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Special Considerations When Using the Evidence-Based
Feedback Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Different Ways of Providing Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Chapter Summary: Key Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Chapter 7. Supporting Proficient Work Performance: Special

Recognition Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Special Recognition Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Special Recognition Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Using Money for Special Recognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Contents xiii
Chapter 8. Correcting Nonproficient Work Performance . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Prerequisites for Corrective Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
A Serious Misconception About How to Correct Nonproficient
Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Common Reasons for Nonproficient Staff Performance and
Supervisor Corrective Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Performance Problems Due to Reasons Outside of the
Workplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Chapter 9. Promoting Staff Work Enjoyment: Making Disliked

Work Tasks More Enjoyable to Perform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
General Considerations for Making Work Tasks More Enjoyable
for Staff to Perform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
An Evidence-Based Approach for Making Disliked Work Tasks
More Enjoyable to Perform: TEMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
An Example of How TEMP Has Been Used to Make A Disliked
Work Task More Enjoyable to Perform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Special Considerations for Addressing Highly Disliked Work
Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
Section III
RESOLVING COMMON PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS
Chapter 10. Resolving Common Performance Problems: Overview . . . 187

The Basic Premise of Supervisor Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Supervising in Difficult Situations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
Chapter 11. Reducing Absenteeism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200

Reasons for Frequent Absenteeism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
Specifying Acceptable and Unacceptable Absenteeism . . . . . . . . . . 204
Absenteeism-Reduction Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Two Final Considerations for Reducing Absenteeism . . . . . . . . . . . 214
xiv The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Chapter 12. Resolving Problems with Staff Provision of Client-

Teaching Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
Improving Formal Teaching Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
Promoting Naturalistic Teaching During Routine Activities . . . . . . 231
Special Considerations for Overcoming Performance Problems
with Teaching Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
Chapter 13. Reducing Frequent Nonwork Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242

Special Considerations in Applying Certain Steps of Evidence-
Based Supervision to Reduce Nonwork Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . 244
General Considerations for Reducing Frequent Nonwork
Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
Section IV
SUPERVISING FROM A DISTANCE (TELEHEALTH)
Chapter 14. Supervising from a Distance With Telehealth . . . . . . . . . . 259

Supervision via Telehealth: An Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
Telehealth Specifically for Implementing Evidence-Based
Supervisory Procedures from a Distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
Section V
SELECTED READINGS
Selected Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK
Section I
INTRODUCTION TO SUPERVISION
Chapter 1
THE IMPORTANCE OF SUPERVISION
T he most significant determinant of the effectiveness of human ser-

vice agencies is the quality of work performed by direct support
staff. Direct support staff spend more time with agency clients and
provide more services that affect client welfare than any other agency
personnel. In turn, a major determinant of the proficiency with which
support staff fulfill their roles is the quality of supervision they receive.
The importance of supervision on the performance of direct sup-
port staff has long been acknowledged in the human services. Such
importance is due to a number of factors. Most apparently, the major-
ity of people who begin employment in a direct support capacity have
no previous training in how to fulfill their roles. Although newly em-
ployed staff usually receive some agency orientation, most of the re-
sponsibility for training new staff how to perform specific job duties
falls on their immediate supervisors. Relatedly, as new work expecta-
tions arise, such as implementing new teaching procedures with cli-
ents or programs to reduce challenging behavior, supervisors must
ensure staff learn how to perform the new duties.
Because direct support staff usually have multiple performance
expectations to fulfill, supervisors are also responsible for ensuring
staff know what should be done at certain times and that staff have the
resources to do their jobs. Supervisors must likewise intervene with
staff at times to correct problems with work performance. Addition-
ally, supervisors must help staff stay motivated to perform their duties
proficiently on a day-to-day basis.
5
6 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
WHAT IS SUPERVISION?
As just indicated, supervisors of direct support staff have many

responsibilities to fulfill. In addition to the duties illustrated above,
supervisors often have a variety of administrative tasks to perform,
meetings to attend, work schedules to prepare, and documentation to
maintain. However, from the perspective of actually supervising staff
performance, the job of a supervisor essentially involves two basic
responsibilities. First, when staff performance is less than adequate,
supervisors must take action to improve that performance. Second,
when staff performance is of sufficient quality, supervisors must take
action to support and maintain that performance.
Supervisors typically acknowledge the importance of actively
working to improve inadequate job performance of their staff. It is usu-
ally apparent, for example, that a supervisor must take action to re-
duce frequent absenteeism by a given staff person, alter inappropriate
staff interactions with agency clients, or resolve problems with incon-
sistencies regarding how staff carry out client treatment procedures. In
contrast, supervisors are not always cognizant of the importance of
actively working to support appropriate staff performance.
Specific supervisory action is needed to support and maintain
quality work among staff for a variety of reasons. In particular, a some-
what common phenomenon in human service agencies is what is gen-
erally referred to as staff “burnout”. Due to the effortful nature of pro-
viding direct services for individuals with disabilities day after day,
many staff lose their motivation to work diligently and proficiently
over time—they “burn out.” In other cases, new staff begin their jobs
highly motivated but gradually lose their motivation because they are
criticized by more experienced and less motivated staff for their work
efforts. The latter staff resent the apparent motivation of new staff be-
cause it makes their less effortful performance more noticeable. Super-
visors can prevent deterioration in the quality of staff work due to
these and other reasons by actively supporting staff performance that
is of high quality.
Taking action to improve inadequate staff performance and taking
action to support and maintain quality performance represent the
essence of supervision. These are the two supervisory responsibilities
that have the most significant effect on what staff do in the workplace
and correspondingly, the quality of services provided to agency cli-
The Importance of Supervision 7
ents. However, there is a third component of supervision that also war-

rants serious attention if supervisors are to successfully fulfill these two
responsibilities on a consistent basis: the responsibilities must be ful-
filled in ways that are acceptable to staff. Staff acceptance of supervi-
sor actions is a key factor affecting staff work enjoyment, which in turn
directly impacts staff motivation.
The essence of supervision is taking action to im-

prove inadequate staff performance and taking ac-
tion to support and maintain quality performance.
SUCCESSFUL SUPERVISION INVOLVES

PROMOTING STAFF WORK ENJOYMENT
Staff enjoyment with their jobs is a primary indicator of a highly

motivated and quality work force, and should not be taken for grant-
ed by supervisors. Supervisors must actively strive to promote staff
work enjoyment if their supervision is to be successful. Otherwise,
supervisors will likely be working with staff who lack enjoyment with
their day-to-day jobs, which inevitably leads to serious problems in the
work place.
To illustrate, when staff are not enjoying their work, they reduce
their work effort. Instead of directing their attention and effort to per-
forming quality work, time is spent attempting to resolve the source of
their discontent or simply complaining about the job. Relatedly, lack
of staff enjoyment can negatively affect life quality of agency clients
with whom the staff work. When staff are disgruntled about their work
situation, they are less likely to interact in pleasant and positive ways
with clients; their interactions with clients become more negative in
nature.
Staff discontent with their jobs also makes the supervisors’ job less
desirable. Supervisors tend to enjoy their workday more if they are
interacting with staff who are generally upbeat and pleasant versus
staff who are frequently discontented. Additionally, when staff are ex-
periencing frequent discontent with their work, absenteeism tends to
increase as does staff turnover.
For the reasons just noted, as well as others to be discussed later,

supervisors should go about their jobs of working with staff in ways
that are acceptable to staff—that promote rather than impede staff
work enjoyment. This is not to imply that supervision should empha-
size work enjoyment to the detriment of proficient or diligent work
performance of staff. Supervisory actions taken to promote staff work
enjoyment should occur in conjunction with ongoing actions to pro-
mote and maintain quality work performance.
Successful supervision involves supervisors work-

ing with staff in ways that are acceptable to staff and
promote staff enjoyment with their day-to-day work.
EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISION
In describing supervision to this point, an emphasis has been on

actions supervisors should take to improve and support staff work per-
formance, as well as to promote work enjoyment. Supervision of staff
performance is an active process, requiring consistent effort on the
part of supervisors. However, although actively working with staff is
necessary for supervision to be successful, it is not sufficient.
Supervisory actions must also be effective; what supervisors do must
have the desired impact on staff work behavior and enjoyment.
The actions supervisors take to affect staff performance and work
enjoyment are most likely to be effective if the actions are evidence-
based. Evidence-based means that a given supervisory strategy has
been developed and demonstrated through applied research to effec-
tively impact an area of staff work performance. For example, if a
supervisor is concerned about how a staff person interacts with clients,
an evidence-based approach would involve the supervisor working
with the staff person in a way that research has shown to improve staff
interactions with clients. Likewise, if a supervisor is encountering high
absenteeism rates among certain staff, an evidence-based approach
would entail using procedures to reduce absenteeism that research has
shown to effectively decrease how often staff are absent from work.
When supervisors do not rely on evidence-based strategies for

working with staff, their actions are likely to be based on intuition or
guess work. Sometimes intuitive actions and guess work are successful
but often they are not. The lack of success supervisors experience in
such cases is not a reflection of poor intention or effort, only that they
have not had opportunities to become knowledgeable about evidence-
based supervisory practices and skilled in applying the practices. In
this regard, supervisors in the human services often receive little if any
training in how to supervise the performance of direct support staff.
Additionally, the training that supervisors may receive usually does
not focus on evidence-based supervisory approaches. A common
problem inherent in many supervisory training programs in the
human services is a reliance on current fads, clichés, and someone
else’s intuition about what constitutes good supervision. Without
sound evidence to support these various approaches to supervision,
their likelihood of being effectively applied by supervisors is at best
unknown and at worst, nonexistent or counterproductive.
Supervisory strategies for impacting staff work per-

formance and enjoyment are most likely to be effec-
tive if the strategies are evidence-based.
Reliance on evidence-based strategies to improve and maintain

staff work performance and enjoyment represents what is considered
evidence-based supervision. Because evidence-based supervision consists
of supervisory strategies developed through applied research, it is a
continuously evolving approach to supervision. As more research is
conducted and the results disseminated, the approach becomes fur-
ther developed and refined. Nonetheless, a considerable amount of
research on effective ways to supervise has been completed to date. A
very useful technology of supervision currently exists for improving
inadequate work performance, supporting and maintaining proficient
performance, and to a lesser but still important degree, enhancing
staff work enjoyment.
PURPOSE OF THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK
The purpose of The Supervisor’s Guidebook is to describe an evi-

dence-based approach to supervising the work performance of direct
support staff in human service settings. Specific strategies developed
through applied research in typical human service agencies are pre-
sented that supervisors can use to improve inadequate work perfor-
mance of staff, support and maintain quality performance, and con-
currently, promote staff work enjoyment. Step-by-step procedures are
described regarding how supervisors can effectively fulfill these essen-
tial aspects of supervision and ensure a quality and highly motivated
work force.
INTENDED AUDIENCE OF THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK
This book is intended for supervisors of direct support staff, and

aspiring supervisors, in human service agencies for people with dis-
abilities. The content presented in this and the following chapters per-
tains most directly to the supervision of staff in agencies providing
supports and services for people with intellectual and developmental
disabilities, including within community living arrangements (e.g.,
group homes), residential centers, sheltered and supported work set-
tings, and adult day activity and education programs. People who
train supervisors in these types of human service agencies also repre-
sent a primary audience of the book. The content is likewise relevant
for supervisors in agencies overseeing home-based programs for indi-
viduals with autism spectrum disorders that involve paid staff working
in the homes, as well as supervisors in public and private schools. An-
other key audience is university and college faculty who teach stu-
dents who may subsequently function in a supervisory capacity, and
especially faculty in applied behavior analysis, special education, and
general human service programs.
ORGANIZATION OF THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK
This book is organized into five sections. Section I, Introduction to

Supervision, consists of this brief introductory chapter and Chapter 2
that provides an overview of an evidence-based protocol for supervis-
ing staff performance. In Section II, Critical Supervisory Skills (Chapters

3–9), elaboration is provided on each respective step of the evidence-
based approach to supervision summarized in Chapter 2. In Section
III, Resolving Common Performance Problems, Chapters 10–13 provide
specific examples regarding how the supervisory procedures previ-
ously discussed can be applied to resolve some of the most common
problems that supervisors encounter with staff performance in the
human services. In Section IV, Supervising from a Distance (Telehealth),
Chapter 14 describes how traditional, in-person supervision can be
supplemented with supervising from a distance via telehealth when in-
person interactions are logistically difficult or counter-indicated (e.g.,
due to infectious diseases). Finally, in Section V, Selected Readings, over
400 references are provided to sources presenting research and relat-
ed discussion on supervisory strategies in the human services. The
sources referenced in Section V provide the evidence-base of the
supervisory procedures discussed in preceding chapters. The articles,
chapters, and books referenced also provide more detailed informa-
tion for interested readers about respective procedures, as well as for
applied researchers working in the supervision area.
CHAPTER SUMMARY: KEY POINTS
1. The essence of supervision is taking action to improve inadequate staff

performance and taking action to support and maintain quality perfor-
mance.
2. To be successful over the long run, supervision must occur in ways that
are acceptable to staff and promote staff work enjoyment.
3. Supervisory actions to improve inadequate performance, support and

maintain quality performance, and promote work enjoyment are most
likely to be effective if the actions are evidence-based.
Chapter 2
AN EVIDENCE-BASED PROTOCOL FOR

SUPERVISING STAFF PERFORMANCE
A s indicated in Chapter 1, a comprehensive set of evidence-based

strategies exists for aiding supervisors in promoting quality work
among human service staff. The core aspects of these strategies have
been consolidated into an overall protocol for supervising staff per-
formance in the human services. The protocol represents a systemat-
ic, stepwise approach to supervision. The protocol has been used to
improve many important areas of staff performance in human service
agencies, as well as to maintain quality performance over the long run.
This chapter summarizes the steps constituting this evidence-based
approach to supervision. Subsequent chapters (Section II) provide an
in-depth description of each respective step in more detail.
To successfully use an evidence-based approach for supervising
staff performance as described in this and the following chapters, a
basic premise must be accepted by supervisors: supervision is an active
process. Successful supervision requires consistent time and effort on
the part of supervisors. Contrary to some popularly publicized ap-
proaches to supervision, there is no quick and easy way to be an effec-
tive supervisor in the human services. Even if a supervisor is fortunate
to work with staff who are highly skilled and motivated, a supervisor
must still work actively to help maintain their work skills and motiva-
tion over time.
Successful supervision is an active process, requir-

ing consistent time and effort by supervisors.
12
An Evidence-Based Protocol for Supervising Staff Performance 13
In one sense, the time and effort required to successfully practice

evidence-based supervision represents a practical disadvantage of this
approach to working with staff. Nonetheless, it is the most proven way
to effectively impact staff performance and enjoyment on a consistent
basis. On a more encouraging note, however, evidence-based supervi-
sion has two inherent features that reduce the time and effort required
of supervisors when practiced consistently. One feature is that because
evidence-based supervision usually results in the desired impact on
staff work behavior, over time there are fewer areas of staff perfor-
mance warranting supervisor action for improvement.
A second feature of evidence-based supervision that reduces
supervisor time and effort over the long run is that some areas of staff
performance do not always require implementation of each step of the
supervisory protocol. Some steps also do not have to be implemented
in their entirety to have the desired impact on staff performance. How
the steps can be implemented with less time and effort in certain cases
will be discussed in respective chapters that describe each superviso-
ry step in more detail.
STEPS CONSTITUTING AN
EVIDENCE-BASED APPROACH TO SUPERVISION
In Chapter 1 it was noted that the most significant determinant of

the quality of an agency’s supports and services for clients with dis-
abilities is the work performance of direct support staff. Of course,
providing quality supports and services for people with disabilities is
why most human service agencies exist. It is the quality of supports
and services provided that determines if consumers of the agencies’
services attain the desired outcomes that an agency is intended to help
them attain.
Client outcomes that should result from an agency’s supports and
services are determined by the mission of a given human service
agency and the desires of individual clients (as well as their involved
family members and/or guardians). In educationally related agencies,
for example, desired outcomes usually focus on student or client at-
tainment of designated skills and knowledge. In residential agencies,
client outcomes are often more varied, ranging from living safely and
happily to increased independence in daily functioning. Vocational
agencies focus on outcomes associated with obtainment of real jobs

and successful work in those jobs to allow for continued and produc-
tive employment.
Because the primary mission of human service agencies is to pro-
vide supports and services necessary for clients to attain desired out-
comes, the first step in supervision is to identify desired client out-
comes. Subsequently, the second step is to carefully specify what staff
must do to assist clients in attaining the targeted outcomes. The third
step then entails training staff in the skills to perform their designated
duties. The fourth step involves development and implementation of
a system for routinely monitoring staff performance of their designat-
ed duties. The fifth and sixth steps involve using information obtained
from the monitoring to support proficient staff performance and when
applicable, correct nonproficient performance. Finally, the seventh
step involves continuously evaluating how well staff perform designat-
ed job duties and clients attain desired outcomes, again based on
results of systematic monitoring.
A PROTOCOL FOR EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISION
Step 1: Identify desired client outcomes.

Step 2: Specify what staff must do to assist clients in
attaining desired outcomes.
Step 3: Train staff in the performance skills specified in
Step 2.
Step 4: Monitor staff performance.
Step 5: Support proficient staff performance.
Step 6: Correct nonproficient staff performance.
Step 7: Continuously evaluate staff performance and
client outcome attainment.
Step 1: Identify Client Outcomes

Beginning the supervisory process by identifying outcomes that
are desired to be attained by agency clients represents an outcome man-
agement approach to supervision. Successful supervision centers on
identifying those outcomes and then promoting and maintaining staff

performance necessary to assist clients in actually attaining the out-
comes. Most human service agencies have established procedures for
identifying desired client outcomes, usually involving an interdiscipli-
nary or transdisciplinary team process. The outcomes are usually
reflected in targeted goals for clients to attain (e.g., secure a support-
ed job, acquire functional living skills, overcome challenging behav-
ior), supplemented with specific behavioral objectives that must be
met in sequence to attain the overall goals.
Because most human service agencies have mechanisms for deter-
mining desired client outcomes, this initial step of evidence-based
supervision will not be covered in-depth. It is noted, however, due to
its importance. Supervisors should never lose sight of the main mis-
sion of their agency, which again is to help clients attain desired out-
comes.
Step 2: Specify Staff Performance

Once desired outcomes of individual clients are identified, then
what staff should do to assist the clients in attaining the outcomes must
be precisely specified. The focus should be on those areas of staff
work performance that directly impact client attainment of the out-
comes. To illustrate, if desired outcomes involve clients learning cer-
tain skills, then the related staff performance usually pertains to how,
and how often, staff carry out teaching programs with clients. If
desired outcomes relate to prevention or reduction of challenging
behavior, then the related staff performance usually involves how staff
interact with clients and implement formal behavior support plans.
Areas of staff performance that are likely to impede client out-
come attainment also require specification in many cases. For exam-
ple, if staff are frequently late in arriving at designated classrooms or
other teaching settings, then their assigned arrival times must be spec-
ified in order to address the tardiness. Such tardiness can impact client
skill attainment because staff time devoted to teaching is reduced rel-
ative to what should be occurring. Similarly, if staff are doing activities
for clients in contrast to teaching the clients to perform the activities
themselves, then how staff can incorporate naturalistic teaching pro-
cedures into daily activities could be specified to increase teaching
opportunities with clients.
Although human service agencies are often adept at specifying

desired outcomes for clients as indicated previously, specifying relat-
ed areas of staff performance often is not accomplished very well.
Many supervisors have difficulties specifying precisely what staff
should do to fulfill various performance expectations. Unless perfor-
mance expectations of staff are indeed carefully specified, the likeli-
hood staff will perform their duties proficiently decreases substantial-
ly. Likewise, the probability that supervisors will be able to help staff
perform in a proficient manner decreases significantly.
Human service agencies must clearly specify out-

comes intended to be attained by clients as a result
of agency supports and services, and supervisors
must clearly specify staff duties necessary to assist
clients in attaining the desired outcomes.
Step 3: Train Work Skills to Staff

Once it is determined what staff should do to help clients attain
desired outcomes, then a supervisor must ensure staff have the neces-
sary work skills to perform those duties proficiently. Staff should not
be held accountable for performing work tasks if they have not been
trained how to perform the tasks. The importance of staff training is
well recognized within most human service agencies. However, how
staff training is conducted often leaves much to be desired.
If staff training programs are to effectively equip staff with the
skills to perform their expected duties, the programs must be perfor-
mance- and competency-based. Performance-based means staff are: (1)
shown how to perform a certain duty and (2) required to demonstrate
the relevant skills as part of the training process. Competency-based
means the training does not stop until staff are observed to perform
the skills competently. Therefore, the third step of the evidence-based
supervisory protocol is provision of performance- and competency-
based staff training, or what is now generally referred to as behavioral
skills training.
Step 4: Monitor Staff Performance

To effectively supervise staff performance, supervisors must have
up-to-date, accurate information about how well staff are performing
their job duties. Information on the quality of staff performance is nec-
essary for a supervisor to determine if actions are required to improve
the performance of certain staff or to support and maintain ongoing
performance of a quality nature. Such information is also necessary
for a supervisor to evaluate whether supervisory actions are having
the desired effect on staff work behavior.
The best way to obtain accurate information about the quality of
staff performance is to objectively and systematically monitor day-to-
day work behavior of staff. Monitoring of staff performance in this
regard should be an ongoing part of a supervisor’s job routine.
Systematically and objectively monitoring staff work performance rep-
resents the fourth step of the supervision protocol.
Step 5: Support Proficient Staff Performance

The supervisory steps summarized to this point set the occasion
for staff to perform their job duties in a quality manner. Identifying
staff work duties that impact client outcome attainment, ensuring staff
are effectively trained to perform the duties, and routinely monitoring
how staff carry out their work activities are necessary components of
evidence-based supervision. However, these supervisory steps usually
are not sufficient to ensure proficient staff performance. Once staff are
trained in relevant work skills and their application of the skills dur-
ing the daily routine is regularly monitored, supervisors must actively
respond in certain ways to how staff are performing.
One way supervisors should respond to staff performance involves
actively supporting performance that is observed to meet expected
levels of proficiency. This represents the fifth step in the supervisory
protocol, which is often referred to as supportive supervision. This is the
step that promotes maintenance of quality work among staff over time.
Supportive supervision is also the component within an evidence-
based supervisory approach that most readily lends itself to promot-
ing work enjoyment among staff. A supervisor who actively works
with staff to support their quality work almost always has the added
benefit of enhancing staff enjoyment with their work.
Step 6: Correct Nonproficient Staff Performance

In addition to responding to proficient staff performance in ways
that support and maintain such performance, supervisors must re-
spond in certain ways to performance that is nonproficient. Super-
visors must be able to effectively correct work performance that is not
of sufficient quality. This represents the sixth step of the evidence-
based supervisory protocol, or what is generally referred to as correc-
tive supervision.
How supervisors respond to inadequacies in staff performance
must be based on the reasons for the inadequacies. If staff lack some
key skills for performing a given work duty adequately, for example,
supervisors must ensure that staff receive additional training in how to
perform those work skills. Alternatively, if certain staff lack the moti-
vation to consistently exert the effort to perform various duties profi-
ciently, then supervisors must find ways to effectively motivate those
staff. Consequently, supervisors must not only be aware of when staff
are not performing in an acceptable manner, they must be knowl-
edgeable about why performance is not adequate in various situations.
Maintaining an awareness of when staff are not performing certain
job duties adequately and the reasons for such performance is one rea-
son why regularly monitoring staff performance is a key part of super-
vision (i.e., Step 4 of the supervisory protocol). Routinely monitoring
staff performance in an objective and systematic fashion usually
results in supervisors having up-to-date information about problems
with staff performance and the reasons for the problems. Supervisors
can then base corrective actions on the information resulting from
their monitoring.
Step 7: Evaluate Staff Performance

The seventh, and final, step in the evidence-based supervisory pro-
tocol is to evaluate the effects of whatever action supervisors have
taken. The evaluation focuses on the proficiency of day-to-day staff
performance as well as the degree to which clients are attaining the
outcomes expected as a result of staff performance. Actually, this step
within the supervision process is not a final step that terminates the
supervision process but rather an ongoing action on the part of super-
visors.
Evaluating the effects of supervisory actions is another reason why

monitoring of staff performance (and client outcome attainment) is a
critical part of supervision. In this case, information stemming from
monitoring allows supervisors to determine whether the action they
have taken has had the desired effect on staff performance. Such infor-
mation also informs supervisors regarding how they should subse-
quently respond to staff performance. If, for example, staff perfor-
mance improves following a specific supervisory action, then supervi-
sors can actively support that performance. In contrast, if staff perfor-
mance does not improve, supervisors can take other corrective action
to bring about necessary improvement.
IMPLEMENTING STEPS OF THE SUPERVISORY PROTOCOL

IN WAYS TO ENHANCE WORK ENJOYMENT
When implementing the evidence-based supervisory protocol, it is

important for supervisors to carry out each supervisory step in ways
that are acceptable to staff. Staff acceptance of supervisory actions has
a considerable impact on staff work enjoyment, and especially in
terms of their enjoyment associated with working for a particular su-
pervisor. As will be discussed in subsequent chapters, there are specific
ways certain steps can be carried out to enhance staff acceptance of
various supervisory actions. For example, when specifying performance
expectations or assignments of staff in terms of expected work behav-
ior, staff acceptance of their assignments is usually enhanced if they
have input into how the assignments are determined by the supervisor.
There are also certain ways that steps of the supervisory protocol
are sometimes carried out that are not well accepted by staff, and seri-
ously decrease staff enjoyment with their work (and working for a par-
ticular supervisor). A common example is when the supervisor mon-
itors staff performance but does not inform staff about what is being
monitored or why their performance is being monitored. The latter
action often results in varying degrees of staff discontent.
Again, each step of the supervisory protocol should be carried out
by supervisors in ways acceptable to staff. Supervisors should also
actively avoid specific ways of implementing the steps that staff typi-
cally find unacceptable. The latter supervisory actions are likewise dis-
cussed in subsequent chapters that describe each step of the supervi-
sory protocol in more detail.
Supervisors should strive to implement each step of

the evidence-based supervisory protocol in ways
that are acceptable to staff and generally avoid
ways that are unacceptable.
When supervisors consistently follow the guidelines to be pre-

sented regarding supervising in ways staff find acceptable and gener-
ally avoiding ways staff find unacceptable, they will usually be help-
ing staff enjoy their work routine. Often, however, these actions will
not be sufficient to maximize staff work enjoyment. Additional super-
visory actions beyond carrying out the evidence-based supervisory
steps in specific ways are usually needed to maximize staff enjoyment
with their work. Actions supervisors can take to maximize staff enjoy-
ment with their daily work routine, while also promoting work dili-
gence and proficiency, are also discussed in subsequent chapters.
A PRACTICAL CONCERN WITH

EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISION
In considering use of the protocol for evidence-based supervision,

a practical concern warrants noting. The concern pertains to the
numerous and varied work responsibilities that usually characterize
supervisor jobs in the human services as noted in Chapter 1. The con-
cern also pertains to the responsibilities of direct support staff whose
performance is to be supervised. In this regard, the nature of provid-
ing direct support for individuals with disabilities within human ser-
vice agencies entails many types of responsibilities. Direct support
staff are usually responsible for teaching clients, implementing treat-
ment plans for challenging behavior, assisting individuals in complet-
ing personal care routines, and maintaining a clean and orderly phys-
ical environment, just to name a few of the many duties involved in
providing direct support.
Because of the numerous duties expected of supervisors and direct
support staff, supervisors are likely to experience practical limits with
carrying out the evidence-based supervisory protocol for all duties for
which their staff supervisees are responsible. In short, there simply
may not be enough time in a supervisor’s workday or workweek to

approach every performance expectation of staff in a consistent and
systematic way as summarized with the protocol. When supervisors
face this situation, there are two helpful guidelines for determining
how to apply the protocol in an effective manner.
The first guideline is that those performance expectations of staff
that relate most directly to assisting agency clients in attaining speci-
fied outcomes should be a priority for practicing systematic, evidence-
based supervision. The second guideline is that if any (problematic)
performance areas of staff are clearly interfering with completing their
duties to assist clients in attaining desired outcomes, those areas
should also be a priority for applying the supervision protocol. Elab-
oration on these guidelines will be provided in subsequent chapters as
they relate to implementation of specific steps of the protocol. The
point of concern here is that supervisors should strive to approach all
performance areas of staff in a systematic, evidence-based manner but
if such is not practically feasible, supervisors must still ensure that con-
sistent and effective supervision is provided for the two priority areas
just noted.
1. Supervision is an active process, requiring consistent time and effort by

supervisors.
2. A protocol for evidence-based supervision consists of seven basic steps: (1)

identifying desired client outcomes, (2) specifying staff duties necessary to
assist clients in attaining the designated outcomes, (3) training staff in
the skills to perform specified duties, (4) regularly monitoring staff per-
formance, (5) actively supporting proficient staff performance, (6) cor-
recting nonproficient staff performance, and (7) routinely evaluating
staff performance and client outcome attainment.
3. To promote staff enjoyment with their work, supervisors should act in

ways that are acceptable to staff and generally avoid ways that are unac-
ceptable.
4. The multi-varied jobs of supervisors and direct support staff can present
practical limits to applying the evidence-based supervision protocol for
all performance expectations of staff; when such is the case supervisors
should focus their use of the protocol for effectively supervising staff per-
formance that: (1) relates most directly to assisting clients in attaining
desired outcomes and if applicable, (2) is clearly interfering with clients
attaining the outcomes.
Section II
CRITICAL SUPERVISORY SKILLS

Chapter 3
SPECIFYING STAFF WORK RESPONSIBILITIES
A s indicated in Chapter 2, evidence-based supervision from an out-

come management perspective begins with identifying outcomes
for agency clients to attain. It was also noted that human service agen-
cies usually have established means to identify client outcomes. The
most common ways are through goals for individual clients and cor-
responding behavioral objectives developed by each client’s support
team. The mission statements of human service agencies likewise help
establish goals for the agencies’ client populations.
Because agencies typically have ways to identify outcomes for
clients, the supervisory process can then proceed with the next step of
evidence-based supervision: specifying staff performance responsibili-
ties. The focus should be on specifying what staff need to do to ensure
clients attain the desired outcomes. Attention should also be directed
to specifying workplace behavior that at any point in time interferes
with staff completion of the former duties.
Clear specification of staff performance responsibilities is critical
in the supervisory process for two primary reasons. First, staff cannot
be expected to fulfill job responsibilities if they are not certain what
those responsibilities entail; staff must know precisely what they are
expected to do to complete their duties satisfactorily. Second, it is
essentially impossible to supervise staff performance in a way that
consistently promotes diligent and quality work if performance expec-
tations have not been clearly specified.
Previously it was noted that specifying performance responsibili-
ties of staff can be difficult for some supervisors. To illustrate, agencies
serving older individuals with developmental disabilities often stress
the importance of interacting with clients in a dignified manner appro-
25
priate for adults. In turn, supervisors are charged with ensuring staff
interact with adult clients in a dignified manner. However, what it
means—or what staff should actually do—to treat adult clients with dig-
nity is not always specified.
To some staff, treating older clients with dignity means that be-
cause of their adult age, clients should be allowed to spend leisure
time doing whatever they want even if some clients engage in behav-
ior likely to be detrimental to their well being. For other staff, treating
with dignity means they should treat agency clients the same way they
treat their own family members. However, how staff interact with their
family at times may be considered inappropriate when interacting
with adult clients who have disabilities.
Similar concerns sometimes exist when specification is not pro-
vided regarding what should not be done by staff to avoid interacting
with clients in ways that are not dignified. For example, some staff
refer to adult clients as “their kids,” even though the clients are not
children. Relatedly, some staff interact with adults in ways appropri-
ate for children but not for adults, which can cast the adult clients in
an undignified light. Although these ways of interacting with adults
who have disabilities may seem rather natural for some staff, they are
often inappropriate. Staff need to be clearly informed when these
ways of interacting are not acceptable.
In short, if an agency and its supervisors value staff interacting
with older clients with dignity, then they must make it clear specifi-
cally what it means to interact in dignified versus undignified ways. It
may be specified, for example, that staff should refer to adult clients
as adults and not children, and staff should not actively encourage
child-like activities among adult clients. The point is that dignity and
interacting with dignity mean different things to different people.
What an agency means by dignity should be clearly specified for staff
in terms of interactive behaviors they should and should not engage
in while at work.
The purpose of this chapter is to describe how supervisors can
specify performance responsibilities in a clear manner for staff. Again,
without such specification, staff are often uncertain regarding precise-
ly what they should and should not do during the daily work routine.
Lack of clear performance expectations also makes it highly unlikely
that supervisors will be successful in promoting quality staff perfor-
mance on a day-to-day basis.
Specifying Staff Work Responsibilities 27
Clear specification of performance responsibilities

helps ensure staff know exactly what they are
expected to do on the job and facilitates a supervi-
sor’s job of promoting quality work.
THREE CRITERIA FOR SPECIFYING

STAFF PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
Clear specification of staff performance responsibilities can occur

if three criteria are met when delineating work duties for staff. First,
each performance responsibility of concern must be specified in terms
of staff work behavior, or what staff should actually do to fulfill the
responsibility (and at times, what staff should not do). Second, each
performance responsibility must be specified such that it can be read-
ily observed. Third, the responsibility must be defined as work behav-
ior that can be observed to the degree that people consistently agree
when the designated staff behavior is occurring and not occurring.
Criterion 1: Performance Responsibilities Must be

Described in Terms of Staff Work Behavior
Specifying performance responsibilities for staff begins by delin-
eating each responsibility of concern as work behavior in which staff
must engage to fulfill the responsibilities. To illustrate, it is usually
desired for staff to show initiative with their work. Most people have a
general understanding of what “showing initiative” means. However,
such understanding often differs across supervisors and staff to vary-
ing degrees. Unless “showing initiative” is specified in terms of what
staff should actually do, there will be disagreement regarding whether
various staff are showing initiative or not.
Disagreement among agency personnel due to lack of specifica-
tion of performance responsibilities as work behavior can occur in a
variety of situations. For example, a shift supervisor who works week-
days in a group home may believe that staff show initiative because
they usually report to work at the scheduled shift time and always
inform the supervisor when they will be absent from work. In con-
trast, another supervisor, who may supervise the staff on weekends at
times, believes that even though staff reliably report to work they do
not show initiative because they rarely begin certain duties unless
specifically requested to do so by the supervisor. In this case, the two
supervisors will have differing opinions about staff initiative with
work, and will go about supervisory duties (e.g., attempting to support
or correct the performance) in differing and possibly conflicting ways.
To avoid the situation just illustrated, a rather general performance
expectation such as “showing initiative” must be specified as work
behavior. Supervisors must exert the effort in their particular work set-
ting to specify the types of work behavior that reflect initiative and at
times, a lack of initiative. For something as general as “work initiative,”
supervisors usually must identify for staff a variety of work behaviors
such as beginning duties without being instructed to do so, asking
supervisors questions about a duty when they are not sure what to do,
reporting problems to a supervisor as soon as they become aware of
the problems, and persisting with a job duty beyond expected time
periods if more time is needed to complete the duty.
Specifying performance responsibilities as work behavior is also
important when supervisors are concerned about job-related prob-
lems staff may be experiencing that interfere with quality work. To
illustrate, many supervisors have been concerned at times that certain
staff have a bad attitude about work. Everyone has an idea regarding
what constitutes a bad attitude, but everyone’s idea may not be the
same. Some supervisors may believe staff have a bad attitude because
they frequently complain about work assignments. Other supervisors
may believe staff have a bad attitude because they rarely interact with
a supervisor unless specifically addressed by the supervisor.
In the situations just summarized, staff are likely to be given dif-
ferent directions about their attitude, and what should be done to
change or improve it. Staff themselves also may have conflicting views
regarding what constitutes a bad attitude about work and believe their
attitude is just fine. Such differences result in confusion for both super-
visors and staff and impede the likelihood that any supervisor action
to improve the bad attitude will be successful. Again though, if super-
visors specify what is meant by a good or bad attitude as work-related
behavior when there are concerns about staff attitude, the occasion is
set for supervisors to help staff improve their attitude.
Specifying general performance responsibilities like work initiative
and a good attitude as work behavior takes time and effort by super-
visors. Like doing many things, however, it becomes easier with prac-
tice. Some general performance areas that supervisors have delineat-
ed as specific work behavior are presented in the following table. The
examples are not hard and fast rules regarding behaviors that repre-
sent each performance responsibility, only some illustrations that have
proven helpful in certain situations. Each supervisor, perhaps with the
assistance of upper management, must decide what specific work
behaviors are most relevant for given situations and staff.
Specification of performance responsibilities as work behavior is
also important for job duties that are more discrete or circumscribed
than general performance expectations such as showing initiative or a
good attitude. To illustrate, in residential centers many supervisors
spend considerable time arranging staff work schedules to ensure re-
quired numbers of staff are on duty across a 24-hour day. If a staff per-
son unexpectedly fails to report to work, the supervisor must spend
extra time re-arranging the work schedule. In such situations it is usu-
ally critical that staff notify the supervisor prior to when they will not
be reporting to work (due to illness, lack of transportation to get to work,
etc.). Generally, however, simply informing staff that they should noti-
fy the supervisor prior to an absence is not sufficient. Instead, the su-
pervisor should specify that such notification must occur, for example,
at least two hours before the beginning of a staff person’s work shift.
EXAMPLES OF PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES

SPECIFIED AS STAFF WORK BEHAVIOR
Performance Area Work Behavior Specification
Requesting vacation complete “Leave Request Form” and

e-mail to supervisor at least 2 weeks
prior to requested time off
Securing house at night when clients are in bed, lock all

doors, activate alarm system, turn on
outside motion detector, turn off all
indoor lights except bathroom night
lights and staff office light
Preparing client place four chairs around table (one

work table per client), place work materials on
table in front of each chair, place
work-period timer on table, place box
for completed materials beside door
Returning phone return all phone messages before end

messages promptly of work shift
At this point the importance of specifying performance expecta-

tions as work behavior should be apparent. It may also be apparent
though that clearly specifying all performance expectations of staff as
work behavior can be overwhelming. As noted in the previous chap-
ter, in most human service agencies direct support staff have many
responsibilities to fulfill. It is usually unrealistic for supervisors to spec-
ify all duties expected of staff as work behavior. Supervisors should
nonetheless attempt to specify as many of the responsibilities as they
can.
There are also two helpful guidelines for determining which per-
formance responsibilities should be a priority for specification as staff
work behavior. These guidelines are the same as those discussed in
Chapter 2 that pertain to prioritizing use of evidence-based supervi-
sory practices in general due to practical reasons. The first guideline
is that work duties relating most directly to client attainment of iden-
tified outcomes should be a priority for specification.
For instance, if a desired outcome is to help a client overcome chal-
lenging behavior such as aggression, then it should be specified pre-
cisely what staff should do to prevent and reduce aggression—usually
represented by staff carrying out the steps of a behavior support plan
exactly the way each step is written in the plan. If a desired outcome
is to decrease a client’s dislike of performing certain activities of daily
living, then what staff should do to reduce such dislike must be spec-
ified as work behavior (e.g., giving the client a choice regarding how
to do an activity, incorporating specific client preferences into the
activity).
The second guideline is that performance responsibilities should
be specified as work behavior if fulfillment of those responsibilities is
interfering with other duties more directly related to client outcome

attainment. A common situation in some agencies is when staff spend
so much time completing paper work that direct contact time with
clients for teaching or general social interactions is hindered.
Therefore, the latter duties are not completed satisfactorily. In such a
case, precisely when paper-work duties should be completed should
be specified to avoid interference with direct contact time with clients
(and perhaps with specification of the amount of time that should be
devoted to various types of paperwork). Of course, in this situation,
supervisors must ensure the paper work is organized such that it can
be completed in the allotted amount of time.
The most important performance responsibilities

to specify as work behavior for staff are those that:
(1) relate most directly to client outcome attain-
ment, and (2) are interfering with staff completion
of duties relating to client outcome attainment.
Criterion 2: Performance Responsibilities Must be Described

in Terms of Work Behavior That Can be Directly Observed
The second criterion for specifying performance responsibilities is
that they should be presented as work behavior that can be directly
observed. A supervisor should be able to watch staff and readily see
that they are doing what needs to be done to fulfill a performance
responsibility. Describing performance responsibilities as work behav-
ior that can be directly observed ensures that the responsibilities have
been adequately specified. If a supervisor has difficulty determining if
what staff are doing represents fulfillment of a performance responsi-
bility in a given situation, then the responsibility has not been ade-
quately specified.
Specifying performance responsibilities as work behavior that can
be easily observed is also critical for implementing the other steps of
evidence-based supervision. A key part of supervision in this respect
is monitoring staff work performance and responding to how staff are
performing based on results of the monitoring. Performance responsi-
bilities must be described as observable work behavior for a supervi-
sor to objectively evaluate if the work is being performed by staff and

being performed correctly. If performance responsibilities have not
been specified as work behavior that can be readily observed, a super-
visor will be unable to adequately monitor staff work activities.
Correspondingly, the supervisor will be unable to respond appropri-
ately to either support or correct staff performance.
A supervisor generally can be confident that a performance
responsibility has been sufficiently specified as observable work be-
havior if the supervisor can walk into the staff work area and imme-
diately determine if staff are doing what they should be doing. Of
course, making such a determination also requires that the supervisor
know the exact situations in which the specified responsibility should
be fulfilled (see later chapter section on “Work Activity Schedules”). If
a supervisor cannot immediately determine if staff are fulfilling per-
formance expectations in a given situation by quickly observing what
staff are doing, then the responsibilities usually have not been ade-
quately specified as observable work behavior.
An illustrative situation of the benefits of specifying performance
responsibilities as observable work behavior is staff provision of choic-
es in agencies serving people with severe disabilities. Making choices
as part of daily activities increases the control a client has during on-
going routines and promotes enjoyment during daily activities. In-
dividuals with severe disabilities often need specific support from staff
to have choice opportunities and make meaningful choices.
Therefore, staff must know how to provide choices during every-
day activities for individuals who lack skills to tell staff what they pre-
fer. Supervisors could specify for staff how to provide choices during
mealtime, for example, by presenting two types of condiments in
arm’s reach of a client during the meal and requesting the client to
choose one of the items. It could be further specified that staff should
watch what the client points to, reaches for, or touches as an indica-
tion of the client’s choice for one of the items and then provide the
chosen item.
In the situation just referred to, it would be easy for a supervisor
to walk in the dining room and observe to see if staff were providing
choices. In contrast, if the supervisor merely told staff to give choices
during meals without specifying how to provide choices, the supervi-
sor may observe various staff activities but be uncertain if staff were
providing true choice opportunities. To illustrate, the supervisor may
observe staff ask a client what type of condiment was desired and then
see no corresponding response by the client (due perhaps to the client
lacking the skills to respond meaningfully to what staff asked). The
supervisor is likely to be in a quandary over whether that represented
a choice opportunity presented by staff, even if staff believed a choice
opportunity was provided. In contrast, in the former situation that
specified staff behaviors for providing client choices, there would be
no difficulty determining whether a choice opportunity was presented.
Performance expectations of staff should be speci-

fied to the degree that a supervisor can enter a staff
work area and immediately determine if staff are
fulfilling the expectations or not.
Criterion 3: Performance Responsibilities Must be

Specified as Observable Work Behavior Such That
People Agree When the Behavior Occurs
In essence, the bottom-line indicator of whether a performance
responsibility has been sufficiently specified as observable work
behavior is that people can readily agree when the behavior occurs
and does not occur. This represents the third criterion for specifying
performance responsibilities. In the situation just referred to, for
instance, if two supervisors agreed when they saw provision of choice
opportunities by staff and client choices being made, then staff choice
provision has been appropriately specified as observable behavior. If
they do not agree, then more specification would be needed. Efforts
to further specify providing client choices as observable work behav-
ior should continue until the supervisors consistently agree on the
occurrence and nonoccurrence of that particular work behavior.
STRATEGIES FOR SPECIFYING

PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
The examples in the preceding section illustrate how performance

responsibilities can be specified in terms of staff work behavior. There
are also more specific strategies supervisors can use to accomplish this
key component of evidence-based supervision. Two of the most help-
ful are developing performance checklists and work activity schedules.
Performance Checklists
A performance checklist is a written listing of all the key actions
or staff behaviors necessary to perform a certain duty. A performance
checklist is analogous to a task analysis often used when teaching a
learner with a severe disability how to complete a task that has a num-
ber of steps. In this case the list refers to staff actions necessary to per-
form a work duty.
An example of a performance checklist is provided in the follow-
ing illustration. This particular checklist specifies necessary steps for
cleaning the front porch of a group home in a residential neighbor-
hood. This type of checklist was developed because an agency’s man-
agement was receiving complaints from the home’s neighbors that the
porch was often in disarray and detracted from the neighborhood’s
appearance. The process for cleaning the porch as indicated by the
sequence of actions to be completed by staff does not represent a uni-
versally accepted means of cleaning a porch. It is simply how one
home’s supervisors decided that their porch could be adequately
cleaned. In this regard, performance checklists are almost always sit-
uation specific; each supervisor will have to determine what type of
checklist is most helpful for a given responsibility of staff.
EXAMPLE OF A CHECKLIST FOR CLEANING

THE FRONT PORCH OF A GROUP HOME
1. Remove all trash from porch.
2 Remove all nonfurniture items from porch.
3. Arrange porch chairs to face front yard.
4. Sweep porch.
5. Water all hanging plants.

Checklists are especially helpful when there are many actions to

complete such that performing a certain duty represents a rather com-
plex task for staff. Generally, the more complex the duty or task, the
more helpful a checklist will be for staff. Some typical performance
responsibilities for which supervisors have found it helpful to prepare
performance checklists are presented below.
EXAMPLES OF MORE COMPLEX STAFF DUTIES FOR

WHICH SUPERVISORS HAVE FOUND IT HELPFUL
TO DEVELOP PERFORMANCE CHECKLISTS
1. Conducting shift change meetings in residential set-

tings.
2. Dispensing medications to clients who do not adminis-
ter their own medications.
3. Organizing/cleaning a van following a community out-
ing.
4. Conducting a discrete-trial teaching session with a
learner who has autism.
5. Accessing and completing a digital form to document
and describe a client accident.
6. Implementing a client’s behavior support plan.
7. Preparing a recreational outing with an overnight stay.
Performance checklists are likewise helpful when staff actions must

occur in a certain sequence to complete a job task, even if the task is
not very complex. To illustrate, a client with a severe disability at a
day activity center may have trouble managing the transition involved
in going home at the end of the workday. A checklist could be pre-
pared based on an assessment of procedures likely to facilitate the
client’s transition and to ensure the transition process occurs the same
way every day.
The checklist for assisting a client’s transition should identify spe-
cific steps for staff to follow during the transition period. Such steps
may include, for example, to: 1) tell the client that in 15 minutes it will
be time to get on the van to go home, 2) make sure the client has all
personal possessions (e.g., eyeglasses, jacket, voice output communi-

cation device), 3) watch and make sure the client goes to the correct
place to meet the van and, 4) make sure the client gets on the correct
van. In this case, each of the steps must occur in the designated
sequence to effectively assist the client in transitioning from the cen-
ter to the home.
Performance checklists can be developed by a supervisor in sever-
al ways. One way is for the supervisor to perform the staff duty and
write down each action involved in completing the duty as it is per-
formed. Often this process has to be completed several times to make
sure the checklist is accurate and complete. Another way to develop
a checklist is for a supervisor to watch a competent staff person per-
form a job duty and write down each action as the staff person com-
pletes the task. However, it is usually most helpful if the supervisor
then completes the duty using the developed checklist to ensure all
relevant actions were written down in the correct sequence.
Work Activity Schedules

Another strategy that can help supervisors specify performance
responsibilities to make work duties very clear for staff is work activity
schedules. Work activity schedules provide specification in addition to
delineating a work duty as staff behavior. Activity schedules precisely
indicate in writing when, where, and often with whom, the duty is
expected to be performed by staff.
The following illustration indicates how an activity schedule can
be used to precisely specify a work duty for staff. In this situation, the
performance responsibility pertains to conducting a group instruction
session with six clients. The schedule specifies that the duty should be
fulfilled by staff Hilary (to be the lead instructor) and Carlos (to be the
co-instructor) at 9:00 in Classroom 1 at the work table. It further spec-
ifies that Hilary should be in front of the table facing the clients along
with the instructional duties she should perform. It likewise specifies
that Carlos should stand behind the clients and what constitute his
expected duties. The clients to participate in the session are also list-
ed. In this manner, the duties that each staff person should perform to
carry out the instructional session are specified. Such a schedule can
be much more useful for the staff relative to simply informing them
that they should conduct a group instruction session with a group of
clients.
ACTIVITY SCHEDULE FOR GROUP INSTRUCTION

LEARNING ACTIVITY: FOLDING A TABLE NAPKIN (10 TRIALS)
Responsible staff: Hilary, Carlos Time: 9:00 am

Place: Classroom 1 work table
Lead instructor: Hilary Co-instructor: Carlos
Clients: John, Vivian, Yolanda, Sampson, Hector, Michael
Lead instructor duties (facing front of clients at table):
1. Demonstrate and describe for clients at the table each step

required to fold the napkin.
2. Vocally instruct all clients to fold their napkin.
3. Provide additional vocal prompts to individual clients
4. Praise correct client responses and attempts.
Co-instructor duties (standing behind clients at table):
1. Following lead instructor’s initial instruction, provide physi-

cal prompts to individual clients as needed.
2. Praise correct client responses and attempts.
The activity schedule just illustrated also facilitates the supervisor’s

job of monitoring staff fulfillment of the assigned duty of conducting
a group instruction session. The supervisor could complete the sched-
ule on a daily or weekly basis and then observe during a sample of
the scheduled sessions. Using the developed activity schedule, it would
be easy for the supervisor to determine if staff are carrying out the
necessary duties for completing the group instruction session.
Work activity schedules have several advantages. As just indicated,

they help make performance expectations clear for staff and facilitate
the supervisor’s job of monitoring staff fulfillment of the assignment.
Additionally, when a supervisor develops an activity schedule, it helps
ensure that the supervisor is acutely aware of what needs to be done
by staff to complete a given duty.
In some cases, as a supervisor prepares an activity schedule it
becomes apparent to the supervisor that various obstacles exist that
can interfere with staff completing the specified duty. For example, the
supervisor may find there is not sufficient time allotted to perform the
duty or certain materials need to be acquired for staff use that other-
wise would not have been available. The obstacles might not have
been apparent if the supervisor simply informed staff about a respec-
tive duty relative to specifying what needs to be done with an activity
schedule.
Another advantage of work activity schedules pertains to agencies
in which staff who are unfamiliar with a particular setting are assigned
temporarily to work in that setting. This often occurs in residential
agencies when staff are temporarily assigned or “pulled” from one
home to another to cover for a staff person who is absent from the lat-
ter home. The situation also occurs in educational programs with sub-
stitute teachers. A work activity schedule can facilitate the unfamiliar
staff person’s understanding of what needs to be done during the work
routine in the setting in which the staff person does not regularly
work.
Work activity schedules are especially helpful for

staff in terms of expected job duties when staff are
temporarily assigned to work in an unfamiliar job
setting.
SPECIFYING PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES

IN WAYS ACCEPTABLE TO STAFF
The time and effort a supervisor exerts to make sure performance

expectations are clearly specified for staff is often well received by
many staff. It becomes apparent to staff that a supervisor is trying to

help them do their jobs well and they appreciate the supervisor’s
efforts in this regard. Additionally, having a good understanding
regarding what they should do on the job reduces confusion and pos-
sible apprehension or anxiety staff may experience when they are not
sure what needs to be done to complete a job duty.
There are also certain things a supervisor can do within the pro-
cess of specifying performance responsibilities that further enhance
staff acceptance of this supervisory action. The most important thing
a supervisor can do is to involve staff in the process. Involving staff in
the process of specifying their expected job duties represents a type of
participative supervision; staff participate in the supervision process. More
specifically, a supervisor should take the time to solicit staff input into
precisely how various performance responsibilities should be speci-
fied as work behavior expected of staff.
The essence of participative supervision is that staff have input into
decisions affecting their job. There is a good evidence base indicating
that staff prefer working for a supervisor who solicits and values their
input relative to a supervisor who makes all supervisory decisions
without staff input. Of course, by the nature of supervision, a super-
visor should still have the final say regarding what should happen on
the job. However, supervisory decisions can be made after supervisors
have listened to staff opinions about what the supervisor is consider-
ing.
Involving staff in specifying their expected performance duties has
some unique benefits for enhancing staff enjoyment with their work
relative to involving staff in other areas of supervisor decision making.
First, as already indicated, many staff are appreciative of a supervisor
who listens to their opinion about how to complete a particular job
duty. Second, staff often can provide valuable information about the
best way to complete a given work task, and especially staff who are
experienced with the respective duty. When a supervisor obtains such
information from staff, it is more likely that how the expectation is
delineated into specific work behavior will allow staff to complete the
work activities efficiently (and thereby make it easier for staff to com-
plete).
As with specifying performance responsibilities in general, involv-
ing staff in the specification process takes time and effort on the super-
visor’s part. Therefore, it can be unrealistic for a supervisor to solicit
staff input into every decision the supervisor has to make regarding
delineation of performance responsibilities. The same guidelines dis-
cussed earlier regarding specification of performance responsibilities
in general are also relevant for determining when to involve staff in
the specification process. Specifically, supervisors should strive to
involve staff in specifying performance responsibilities that relate most
directly to client outcome attainment and responsibilities that relate to
problem areas that interfere with client outcome attainment.
Another priority for staff involvement in the process of specifying
performance responsibilities pertains to those aspects of the work rou-
tine that are most important to staff. In every job situation there are cer-
tain things that are very important to staff. When a supervisor address-
es those aspects of the job as part of the performance specification
process, it is especially beneficial to actively solicit staff input. What is
particularly important to staff will vary from agency to agency, but
there are several areas that are almost always among the most impor-
tant for staff. Provided below are some of these areas.
TYPICAL ASPECTS OF JOBS THAT ARE VERY

IMPORTANT TO STAFF AND WARRANT STAFF
INPUT WHEN SUPERVISORS SPECIFY DUTIES ASSO-
CIATED WITH THOSE ASPECTS
Work schedules (e.g., when workdays and days off are

assigned)
Client-teaching and behavior-support assignments
Work-break and lunch schedules
Temporary re-assignment to other work locations (e.g.,

being “pulled” to cover for an absent staff person)
Mandatory overtime
Special assignments that represent periodic, extra duties

relative to the usual work routine
Whenever a supervisor must alter any of the job aspects just illus-
trated, staff acceptance of the supervisory action is likely to be signif-
icantly enhanced if the supervisor involves staff in the process.
Correspondingly, work enjoyment is less likely to be negatively
impacted by the supervisor’s actions if the supervisor involves staff in
the process. To illustrate, many agencies experience staffing issues
from time to time such that it is necessary to require someone to work
overtime. Staff will usually be more accepting about working overtime
if they have been involved in developing the process of how it will be
determined which staff will be required for overtime when needed.
In contrast to the participative process just summarized, if a super-
visor decides how overtime assignments will be determined without
staff input, some staff are more likely to be displeased when they are
unexpectedly assigned to work overtime. In the latter situation, staff
may believe, for example, that the supervisor is “picking on them” or
showing favoritism to certain staff. Conversely, other staff are likely to
be displeased that they were not afforded opportunities to earn over-
time pay. These types of negative reactions are much less likely if staff
had input into determining the process the supervisor uses to decide
who will work overtime.
1. Performance responsibilities should be clearly specified for staff to ensure

they know exactly what they are expected to do on the job and to facili-
tate a supervisor’s job of promoting quality work.
2. To ensure performance responsibilities are clear for staff, they should be

specified as work behavior that can be directly observed such that people
can readily agree when the behavior is occurring or not.
3. Two helpful strategies for specifying performance responsibilities as

observable work behavior are performance checklists and work activity
schedules.
4. Staff acceptance of having their performance responsibilities specified as

precise work behavior can be enhanced if staff have input into the speci-
fication process.
Chapter 4
TRAINING WORK SKILLS TO STAFF
O nce performance responsibilities have been specified as dis-

cussed in Chapter 3, the next step in evidence-based supervision
is to train staff in the skills to perform the designated duties. Training
is critical for ensuring staff know how to do what is expected of them
on the job. In this regard, essentially every human service agency has
some type of staff training component. In larger agencies, there is
often a staff training department, or at least one person identified as
being responsible for staff training. In smaller agencies, different per-
sonnel have staff training responsibilities in addition to their other
work duties. Regardless of how staff training services are formally
organized within an agency, however, staff training is still an essential
part of a supervisor’s job.
Staff training is a critical part of supervision for several key rea-
sons. A primary reason pertains to characteristics of the typical work
force in human service agencies. As indicated in Chapter 1, when
people are hired into direct support positions they usually have no
prior training or formal education specifically related to their newly
acquired jobs. Therefore, they must have opportunities to be trained
in relevant work skills once they are hired within a human service
agency.
It is well recognized across human service agencies that newly em-
ployed staff require training in the skills to perform their jobs. Agenc-
ies usually address the immediate training needs of new staff through
orientation-training programs. Although orientation programs are a
necessary part of an agency’s training services, the programs are insuf-
ficient for providing all the training needed by new staff. Orientation
training often focuses on presenting information that new staff need to
42
Training Work Skills to Staff 43
function within an agency on a general basis, but has little specific

bearing on how to provide direct support services needed by individ-
ual clients. Information presented in orientation classes typically per-
tains to such things as, for example, where and when to report to
work, how to complete time sheets to receive one’s pay, agency poli-
cies on use of social media regarding agency services and clients, and
learning the names and roles of key agency personnel.
Relatedly, the amount of time agencies can devote to training new
staff in orientation programs is limited. When people are hired into
direct support roles, they are almost always needed quickly in their
new jobs. Agencies typically do not have sufficient numbers of staff to
allow vacant positions to remain unfilled for very long. Consequently,
there is usually insufficient time within orientation programs to train
all the work skills that new staff need to perform their jobs. Super-
visors must therefore provide further training to new staff after they
complete orientation and report to their work sites.
Additionally, some staff do not transfer what they learn in orienta-
tion to their day-to-day job site. Many supervisors have experienced
situations in which a newly employed staff person appears to have for-
gotten seemingly everything taught in orientation as soon as the ori-
entation is completed. Supervisors then have to (re)train certain skills
once new staff report to their work sites following initial orientation.
Another reason a supervisor must function in part as a staff train-
er is that new skills are periodically required of human service staff
over time. Ways to provide quality support for people with disabilities
are continuously evolving and improving. Unless direct support staff
have opportunities to be trained in new developments, they cannot be
held accountable for providing up-to-date, quality services. Individual
clients also require different types of support from time to time, such
as new behavior support plans for challenging behavior or new teach-
ing programs for acquiring useful skills. Supervisors must ensure staff
are trained in the new or revised ways of providing such support.
For all the reasons just summarized, supervisors must be willing
and able to train their staff in relevant work skills if staff are to provide
quality supports and services. This chapter describes how supervisors
can provide effective staff training. In accordance with a continuing
theme throughout all chapters, how staff training can be provided in
a way that is acceptable to staff and enhances their work enjoyment is
also described.
Staff training is a fundamental part of a supervisor’s

job, regardless of other staff training services pro-
vided by an agency.
BASIC GOALS OF STAFF TRAINING
Effective staff training involves providing staff with the knowledge

and skills to perform their jobs in a quality manner. The focus here is
on the skills aspect of staff training. The rationale for the focus on
training specific work skills is several-fold. First, it is what staff do on
the job, or the skills they demonstrate while performing job duties,
that has the most significant impact on client welfare and attainment
of desired outcomes. Second, most agencies have procedures for pro-
viding knowledge or information that staff need, as represented in ori-
entation-training programs summarized earlier.
A third reason for focusing on training of actual work skills is that
human service agencies typically are better at providing staff with rel-
evant knowledge about their jobs than training them how to perform
their jobs. Enhancing staff knowledge involves what is technically con-
sidered as verbal training. Verbal training consists of providing lectures
about relevant issues and written information, often supplemented
with videos or on-line learning modules. For example, in an agency
serving clients with autism, information may be provided in orienta-
tion lectures and handouts or on-line modules about the diagnostic
characteristics of autism spectrum disorders. Such information and
presentation formats are important parts of training, but rarely train
staff how to actually perform their jobs.
Effectively training staff how to fulfill their performance responsi-
bilities involves what is referred to as performance-based training. As
noted in Chapter 2, performance-based training consists of showing
staff how to perform various job duties and having staff practice per-
forming the duties under supervision of the staff trainer. This type of
training is not provided very often in training programs such as staff
orientation in many human service agencies. Therefore, supervisors
have to be responsible for ensuring their staff receive performance-
based training to acquire the skills necessary to perform their jobs.
Before describing what supervisors should do to effectively train

staff how to perform their work duties, a caution is warranted about
the success of agencies in providing job-related knowledge for staff. In
Chapter 2, it was noted that to be consistently successful, staff training
programs should have a performance basis and a competency basis.
Competency-based staff training means that the training is not com-
plete until staff demonstrate competence in the area addressed by the
training.
In regard to presenting information to staff such as that provided
during orientation training, the competency part is sometimes lacking.
For example, newly hired staff may listen to a presentation, receive
some handouts, and perhaps watch a video or complete an on-line
instructional module. Staff trainees may also be required to sign a
form indicating they have completed the training. To be truly compe-
tency-based, however, another step must be added. Staff must demon-
strate they have acquired the knowledge that the training is intended
to provide.
Any training program that focuses on providing staff with certain
knowledge should include a way of assessing staff knowledge follow-
ing training. Such assessment can involve having trainees complete
written quizzes or answering questions posed to each trainee by the
trainer. If staff answer the questions accurately, they can be considered
to have demonstrated competence in acquiring the knowledge that the
training is intended to provide. If staff do not answer the questions
accurately, then they have not demonstrated competence and re-train-
ing should occur. Training should continue until each staff trainee de-
monstrates competence in having acquired the necessary knowledge.
BEHAVIORAL SKILLS TRAINING
There is a well-established, step-by-step protocol for effectively

training staff how to perform specified job skills. Although variations
can be made in how the protocol is used to suit certain situations as
will be described later, every supervisor should be skilled in applying
the protocol in its entirety. The steps constituting the protocol are pre-
sented in the following illustration.
The protocol presented below represents both a performance- and
competency-based approach to staff training, currently referred to as
behavioral skills training or BST. The steps constituting BST have been
used in research and application to train a wide variety of important
job skills to support staff, including how to teach people with disabil-
ities, provide choices, lift and transfer individuals who are nonambu-
latory, carry out behavior support plans, and adapt electronic devices
for use by people with physical challenges, to name just a few. The
training steps constituting BST represent a very valuable tool for
supervisors when needing to train job skills to staff.
PROTOCOL FOR TRAINING STAFF HOW TO PERFORM

JOB DUTIES: BEHAVIORAL SKILLS TRAINING
Step 1: Describe skills to be trained.
Step 2: Provide staff trainees with a written summary of

skills to be trained.
Step 3: Demonstrate the target skills for staff.
Step 4: Have staff practice performing the target skills

and provide feedback.
Step 5: Repeat Step 4 until staff demonstrate competence

in performing the skills.
Training Step 1: Describe Target Skills to be Trained

When beginning the staff training process, what is going to be
trained should be described in detail for the staff trainees. This is one
reason that performance responsibilities should be delineated into
specific work behaviors of staff as discussed in the preceding chapter.
Each behavior that a staff person needs to perform to complete the
job duty being trained should be described by the supervisor. For
complex skills that require a staff person to perform many behaviors,
the description process is greatly facilitated if a performance checklist
has been prepared as described in Chapter 3.
It is also helpful when introducing the training to provide staff with

a rationale regarding why the skills are being trained. Providing staff
with a rationale for what they are expected to learn how to perform
can promote staff acceptance of the training. In turn, increased accep-
tance of the training can enhance staff willingness to subsequently per-
form the target skills as part of their ongoing duties.
Training Step 2: Provide A Written Summary of the Target Skills

After the target skills to be trained to staff have been described
along with a rational for the importance of the skills, a written sum-
mary of the skills should be given to each staff trainee. In many cases,
this step can entail providing staff with the performance checklist that
the supervisor has prepared as part of the process of specifying per-
formance responsibilities. Providing a written summary of the target
skills has several benefits. One particular benefit is that some staff
learn more readily from reading how to do a job task relative to hear-
ing a trainer describe how to do the task.
Another benefit of providing a written summary of the skills to
perform a work duty is that the summary provides staff with a perma-
nent reminder or job aide regarding how to perform the task. When
staff later need to perform the task, they can review the summary if
they are not certain how to complete the task. It should also be noted
that some supervisors question this step because they have experi-
enced staff losing or discarding the written summary after the training
session. This situation will likely occur at times. However, there are
also many staff who will be motivated to perform the designated task
and will benefit from having the summary to use as a job aide.
It is important that the written summary of the target skills be pro-
vided to each staff person being trained. Sometimes only one summa-
ry is prepared and then filed in a central location for staff to review.
This often occurs with copies of behavior support plans for challeng-
ing behavior of clients. The latter approach is not as effective as pro-
viding each trainee with a summary. When trainees have their own
summary, it is easier for them to access the information when needed
relative to having to go to another location to obtain the information.
Because of the ready access to their own written copy, the likelihood
staff will review the information when needed is increased relative to
them having to go to another place to access the information.
The situation just referred to relates to a common obstacle to effec-

tive staff training. A number of skills that supervisors need to train to
direct support staff are derived from information prepared by other
personnel, such as clinicians and executives. A common example is
when a supervisor is charged with training staff how to carry out a
behavior support plan developed by a psychologist. Often the plan is
quite lengthy, consisting of a number of typed pages of information.
Documents such as behavior plans frequently need to include a lot of
information (e.g., about the client, assessments that were completed)
beyond what staff need to do to carry out the plan. Nonetheless, the
inclusion of such information can detract from the staff training pro-
cess as well as subsequent on-the-job performance.
Lengthy written information, such as that often included in behav-
ior plans, makes it difficult for staff to quickly look at the document
and find information that tells them specifically what to do on the job.
The increased time and effort required to read through all the infor-
mation to glean what is relevant for completing a task also results in
some staff not bothering to search for the information. The latter staff
will not spend the time and effort to access the needed information.
It is recommended that when a supervisor needs to train staff in a
job task that was developed by someone else, the supervisor do one
of two things. The most efficient action is for the supervisor to request
that the person who wrote the task prepare a succinct, written sum-
mary pertaining only to what staff need to do to complete the duty.
This should be the summary that is provided to staff. The complete
document that contains other information can still be filed in a central
location for staff to review if necessary. The other thing a supervisor
can do is review the written information that someone else prepared
and then develop a summary of action steps to give to staff.
A supervisor should provide each staff person with a

concise, written summary of the skills the supervi-
sor is training to staff.
Training Step 3: Demonstrate How to Perform the Target Skills

After the supervisor describes the target skills for staff and pro-
vides each trainee with a written summary, the next step in the BST
process is for the supervisor to demonstrate how to perform the skills.
Often the most efficient way to demonstrate how to perform a work
duty, and especially if it involves interacting with a client, is in a role-
play situation. The supervisor role plays the part of a staff person, and
another individual (e.g., another supervisor or staff person) role plays
the part of a client. The supervisor then carefully demonstrates the tar-
get skills as they are described on the written summary while the staff
trainees observe the demonstration.
Demonstrating how to perform a job task for staff is one of the best
ways to help staff learn how to perform the task themselves. It also is
a key component of performance-based training as referred to earli-
er—the supervisor performs the task for staff to see how to do the task.
Adequately demonstrating a work task for staff requires some skill on
the part of the supervisor. Most notably, the supervisor has to know
how to actually perform the task that is being trained to the staff. In
one sense, noting the importance of a supervisor knowing how to do
what the supervisor is training staff to do seems quite obvious.
However, such is not always the case.
The situation in which a supervisor is expected to train staff in a
job task that the supervisor is not sure how to perform usually occurs
when the supervisor is training something that someone else devel-
oped. This situation occurs most frequently when a clinician develops
a client program and expects the supervisor to train staff how to
implement the program, but the clinician does not adequately train
the supervisor in all aspects of the program. Either the clinician does
not take the time to train the supervisor, or basically does not know
how to train the supervisor (e.g., the clinician is not skilled in BST).
The same situation can occur when an agency executive directs a
supervisor to train staff in a new job duty, but does not provide the
supervisor with adequate training regarding how to perform the duty.
When a supervisor is expected to train staff but the supervisor is
not certain how to perform the target skills to be trained, corrective
action must be taken by the supervisor. If the supervisor does not take
corrective action and attempts to train staff to do something that the
supervisor is not competent in doing, multiple problems result. In par-
ticular, it is essentially impossible for a supervisor to adequately train

staff if the supervisor cannot perform the target skills proficiently.
Additionally, staff usually become aware that the supervisor is instruct-
ing them to do something that the supervisor does not know how to
perform. Such awareness tends to cause staff to question the compe-
tence of the supervisor and subsequently, to lose respect for the super-
visor.
What a supervisor does to avoid attempting to train staff in skills
that the supervisor is not competent in performing will depend on
each specific situation. However, the most common corrective action
is to make sure whoever is expecting the supervisor to conduct the
training is aware of the problem and can offer assistance. Such assis-
tance can involve initially training the supervisor prior to the supervi-
sor training the staff. Assistance can also be provided by the person
who prepared the information helping to conduct the staff training
while the supervisor is present. In the latter case, the supervisor is
essentially trained along with the staff.
Supervisors should avoid situations in which they

are expected to train staff in work skills that the
supervisors themselves are not sure how to perform
proficiently.
Earlier it was noted that demonstrating work skills as part of the

training process is usually accomplished most efficiently in a role-play
activity. Target skills can also be demonstrated in vivo in terms of the
supervisor performing the task with staff in the actual work site. How
to provide in vivo demonstrations as part of the training process will
be discussed later in the section on “Training Staff Individually.”
Training Step 4: Trainee Practice with Supervisor Feedback

Immediately after a supervisor has demonstrated how to perform
the target skills being trained, staff should be required to demonstrate
the skills themselves. This step of BST is also referred to as behavioral
rehearsal on the part of staff trainees. The staff demonstration or re-
hearsal represents the second key component of performance-based

training: staff perform the target skills as part of the training process. If
the supervisor’s demonstration occurred in a role-play situation, then
staff should also perform the task in a role play. If the supervisor
demonstrated the target skills in vivo, then that demonstration should
be followed by staff performing the skills in the actual work site as
well.
As staff practice performing the target skills, the supervisor should
observe and then provide feedback to staff based on the accuracy with
which they performed the target skills. Providing feedback is a critical
supervisory skill and will be discussed in much more detail in subse-
quent chapters. In regard to training staff, providing feedback means
the supervisor informs staff what they performed accurately and if
applicable, inaccurately. If staff did not perform the target skills cor-
rectly, the supervisor should also inform the staff what they need to do
differently to perform the skills correctly.
Behavioral skills training provides staff trainees

with opportunities to hear a description of the skills
being trained, read a description of the skills, see
the skills performed, and practice the skills.
Training Step 5: Repeat Step 4 Until Staff

Perform The Target Skills Proficiently
As indicated previously, the BST approach is not only perfor-
mance-based, it is also competency-based. Again, competency-based
means the training continues until each staff trainee demonstrates
competence in performing the target job skills. To ensure staff demon-
strate competence, Step 4 of BST (trainee practice with feedback)
should be repeated until the trainer observes each staff trainee per-
form the target skills correctly.
Competency-based training also means that staff demonstrate
competence in performing newly trained skills during their daily job
routine. Therefore, if all trainee practice occurs in role-plays, the su-
pervisor must then observe staff in their regular job setting. The intent
is to document that the staff generalize what they learned during train-
ing to the actual job situation in which they are expected to apply the
skills. Such on-the-job observation should also be followed by feed-
back as just described. Likewise, Step 4 of BST should be repeated in
the routine work site until staff demonstrate competence. It is only
when the supervisor observes staff perform the target skills proficient-
ly during their regular work situation that the training can be consid-
ered complete.
Staff training should never be considered complete

until the supervisor observes staff perform the skills
targeted in the training proficiently during their
routine work situation.
TWO MAIN FORMATS FOR TRAINING STAFF
There are two main formats for training staff in specified work
skills. One format, which is more formal in nature, pertains to train-
ing a group of staff. The second format, which is more informal,
involves training an individual staff member. Supervisors should be
well skilled in using each of these two training formats.
Training Staff in a Group

Conducting staff training in a group format is necessary when sev-
eral or all of a supervisor’s staff contingent require training in a spec-
ified set of work skills. This occurs, for example, when all staff need
to be trained in a new behavior support plan for a client. It is a more
efficient use of a supervisor’s time to conduct training in a group for-
mat relative to training each staff member in the same work skills on
an individual basis.
The first thing a supervisor should do when training a group of
staff in designated work skills actually occurs before the group train-
ing session: the supervisor should carefully prepare for the upcoming
training. Initially, the supervisor should outline how the training will
occur, using the steps of BST as a guide. The training should then pro-
ceed according to the protocol (see subsequent discussion regarding

additional preparation procedures associated with various steps of
BST).
A group training session should be initiated with staff by explain-
ing the rationale for why the training session is being conducted as
described previously. For example, it may be that a client has just
secured a supported work placement in a community job and it is
desired that the client be taught certain work skills prior to beginning
the job. The supervisor could explain that it would help the client’s
likelihood of success in the new job if staff conducted teaching ses-
sions to prepare the client for the new work assignments. It could be
further explained that each staff member needs to be trained how to
conduct the teaching sessions in order for all sessions to be conduct-
ed in a consistent and effective manner with the client.
Following presentation of the rationale for the training session, the
supervisor should describe the skills that the staff need to be able to
perform (Step 1 of BST). Subsequently, all staff trainees should be pro-
vided with a written summary of the skills (Step 2). To prepare for
these two steps, the supervisor must become proficient in the skills to
be trained. In the example provided above, for instance, the supervi-
sor would need to be familiar with the client’s teaching plan. The
supervisor would likewise need to have prepared the summary of the
teaching plan to distribute to each staff person.
After staff read the written summary of the target skills, the super-
visor should demonstrate how to perform the skills in a role-play situ-
ation (Step 3). To ensure adequate demonstration, some additional
preparation needs to occur before the actual training session. The
preparation includes deciding who will help the supervisor perform
the demonstrations (e.g., soliciting assistance of another supervisor or
one of the staff trainees), and specifying what each person should do
within the demonstrations. It is also helpful if the supervisor practices
the role-play demonstrations with whomever is helping the supervisor
prior to the training session. The practice is necessary to ensure the
demonstrations are sufficiently thorough and accurate to allow staff to
observe precisely how to perform the targeted work skills.
Supervisors should prepare for conducting a group

training session with staff: be well versed in the
skills to be trained, develop written summaries of
the skills to give to trainees, and practice role-play
demonstrations to ensure accuracy.
Following demonstration of the target skills, supervisors should

instruct staff to practice the skills in a role play with each other (Step
4). To ensure each staff member participates appropriately in the prac-
tice activities, supervisors should specify the roles in which staff
should engage (e.g., one trainee should role play the part of a staff per-
son performing the target skills and one trainee should role play the
part of the client). It should likewise be stressed that each staff person
must practice the target skills and that the other staff should observe
and give feedback to the staff person. The feedback should be based
on how well the staff person performed the target skills using the writ-
ten summary and the supervisor’s previous demonstration as a guide.
If there is a large number of staff trainees in a group, usually meaning
more than four or five staff, then the supervisor should divide the staff
into two or more subgroups for their practice activities.
The supervisor should also inform staff that in addition to giving
feedback to each other, the supervisor will be circulating among the
group to give individual feedback. The feedback should be provided
as described previously, specifying what a staff person demonstrated
correctly and if applicable, incorrectly. In the latter case, the feedback
should further specify what the staff person needs to do to correct the
demonstrated performance. Additionally, in some situations it is help-
ful if the supervisor supplements the feedback by repeating the
demonstration of how to correctly perform the skills. It is critical for
the supervisor to observe each staff person demonstrate the target
skills correctly during the training session, which may require some
staff to repeat the demonstration (Step 5 of BST).
After each staff person has performed the target skills proficiently,
the training session should be concluded by the supervisor informing
staff when they will be expected to perform the newly trained job
skills during their work routine. In many situations this final step can
be facilitated if the supervisor provides a work activity schedule re-
garding the new job duty (refer to Chapter 3 regarding work activity
schedules). The supervisor should also inform staff that their perfor-
mance of the target skills will be observed as they apply the skills on
the job. It should be explained that the observations are a continua-
tion of the training process. As discussed in the next chapter, inform-
ing staff that their performance will be observed and why it will be
observed helps reduce apprehension among staff that often occurs
when a supervisor formally observes their work performance on the
job.
In addition to following the BST protocol when conducting a
group training session with staff, there are some special considerations
to enhance effectiveness of the training. One consideration is for the
supervisor to solicit the assistance of someone to help conduct the
training. This is especially relevant if training focuses on work duties
designed by someone other than the supervisor.
To illustrate, again considering the example in which staff are
being trained to teach supported-work skills to a client, the teaching
program that the staff are expected to carry out was developed by a
clinician. Because the clinician is the most informed person regarding
the teaching program, it would be helpful if the clinician assisted the
supervisor in conducting the training session. It such situations, the
supervisor should also be assertive in soliciting the clinician’s partici-
pation in the preparatory activities described earlier prior to the train-
ing session with staff.
Another consideration with group training sessions pertains to
ensuring that the training focuses on performing the target skills. There
is a tendency among staff trainers (including supervisors) to spend too
much time talking during a training session and not enough time
demonstrating target skills and having staff practice the skills. Trainers
must remember that the key to effective skill training stems from the
performance aspects: staff seeing how the work duty is performed and
then practicing it themselves (followed by receiving feedback). There-
fore, the majority of the staff training session should be spent on the
trainer demonstrations and trainee practice activities with the role
plays.
When trainers spend more time talking to staff relative to demon-
strating and staff practicing, there is a detrimental effect on training
effectiveness beyond staff not having sufficient opportunities to actu-
ally see and practice the target skill. Specifically, when trainers spend
large amounts of time talking during a training session, staff attentive-

ness directed to the trainer diminishes significantly. As a result, train-
ees do not sufficiently comprehend what the trainer is talking about,
which erodes the trainer’s effectiveness.
As a general rule, a trainer should not spend more than 15 to 20
minutes talking without a demonstration or trainee practice activity.
Adult learning research as well as the experience of skilled trainers
suggests that trainees lose their attentiveness if required to listen to a
trainer talk for more than 15 to 20 continuous minutes. Consequently,
as supervisors prepare the training session, they should outline their
training process such that there is a demonstration or trainee practice
activity at least every 20 minutes.
To maintain staff attentiveness during a training

session, trainers generally should not talk continu-
ously for more than 15–20 minutes without a de-
monstration or trainee practice activity.
Training Staff Individually

Training individual staff in expected work duties is a responsibili-
ty that many supervisors encounter frequently. A supervisor often
needs to train individual staff when, for example, a new staff person
is hired or a staff person is temporarily assigned to a supervisor’s area
due to the absence of a regular staff person. In these situations, the
recommended way to train a staff person is through application of the
BST protocol as discussed throughout this chapter. However, there are
also a few variations when conducting BST with an individual staff
member relative to training staff in a group.
One variation with individual staff training is that it is generally
less formal than when conducting a group training session. The train-
ing usually can occur in the staff person’s regular work setting by tak-
ing the staff person aside for a relatively brief period of time. Alterna-
tively, if other work demands make it unlikely that a staff person could
attend to the staff trainer in the work setting, the training can occur in
the supervisor’s office or any other available room. Regardless of
where the training occurs, the supervisor should go through the five
steps of BST in a systematic manner.
Another variation pertains to the demonstration and trainee prac-
tice steps of BST. Often, the supervisor can ask the staff person to play
a certain role, such as that of a client if the target skill involves inter-
acting with a client, while the supervisor demonstrates the skill. Next,
the supervisor and staff person should exchange roles so that the staff
person can demonstrate the skill. In some cases though, and particu-
larly with complex work skills that involve a number of behavioral
steps to complete, it is more effective and efficient if a supervisor solic-
its the help of someone else to assist with the role-play demonstration
(e.g., another supervisor, a clinician, an experienced staff person).
Subsequent to the staff person’s correct demonstration in a role-play
situation, the demonstration can then be conducted with a client if rel-
evant.
Training within a staff person’s routine work setting is usually the
most efficient way to train staff on an individual basis. Once the staff
person demonstrates the target skill correctly, the training is complet-
ed. The supervisor does not have to go to the staff person’s work site
at a later time, as when training occurs in a different location, to
ensure the staff person can perform the skill in the regular job setting
(i.e., because the training is conducted in the actual job site). However,
if the skill being trained involves interacting with clients, then the
supervisor has to be sufficiently familiar with the clients to accurately
demonstrate the target skill with the clients. This is not always the case
when a supervisor works with a large number of staff who in turn
work with a large number of clients. In the latter case the initial de-
monstration should probably be conducted in a role-play manner.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS WHEN CONDUCTING

BEHAVIORAL SKILLS TRAINING WITH STAFF
The evidence-based BST approach has been used effectively to

train groups of staff and individual staff members in many human ser-
vice agencies. However, there are also some general considerations
when using this method to train staff with which supervisors should
be familiar. The considerations pertain to the amount of time and
effort to conduct BST and ensuring the training is conducted in a
manner that is well received by staff.
Reducing Time and Effort to Conduct Behavioral Skills Training

One of the most significant considerations when conducting per-
formance- and competency-based training such as BST is the time and
effort required of the supervisor. This approach to staff training usu-
ally requires more time and effort than what typically occurs in hu-
man service agencies. As indicated earlier, much of staff training in
the human services is verbal-based, consisting of trainer lectures sup-
plemented with written handouts, videos, or on-line learning modules.
Again, these training procedures are often helpful to some degree but
are usually not sufficiently effective for training staff how to perform
specific work skills. Because the latter training procedures do not
involve trainer demonstrations and trainee practice though, they usu-
ally require less time than BST.
The reduced time and effort when relying on a verbal-based train-
ing format is one reason this approach to training is common in
human service agencies. Reliance on training procedures that require
less supervisor time is understandable when considering the numer-
ous job duties supervisors are expected to fulfill on a daily basis.
However, on closer examination it is counterproductive to invest time
on staff training programs when the programs are not likely to be
effective. Consequently, consideration is warranted on how effective,
BST procedures can be conducted more efficiently.
Before describing ways to reduce supervisor time to conduct BST,
it should be noted that in some situations verbal-based training is used
even though it is apparent the training will not be very effective. One
relatively common situation is when a service-delivery problem is
identified by management or a regulatory body (e.g., through surveys
conducted within agencies receiving funding through the Federal
Medicaid Program for Intermediate Care Facilities—ICFs). Staff train-
ing, usually involving a group session in which the trainer presents
information about staff doing some aspect of their job differently, is
proposed as the corrective action to solve the problem. The purpose
in this situation, though not always recognized officially, is to demon-
strate to the regulatory body that the agency has done something to
resolve the problematic issue.
Conducting a training session for the purpose just noted may be
necessary in some cases, but should not be mistakenly considered as
an effective way to train staff to perform job duties. The concern here
is with training for the purpose of ensuring staff learn to perform spec-
ified work skills. If BST also serves another purpose such as that just
illustrated, that purpose should be considered secondary.
Ensure Staff Competence During Role-Play Activities. One
means for a supervisor to minimize the amount of time to conduct
BST pertains to the trainee practice activities, and particularly when
training a group of staff. As previously described, trainee practice of
the target skills (accompanied by trainer feedback) should first occur
during the group training session and then individually with staff in
their work setting. One aspect of this approach that often involves a
considerable amount of supervisor time is when various staff do not
perform the target skills competently on the job. When this occurs,
the supervisor has to conduct repeated on-the-job training interactions
with a staff person that can entail going to the person’s work site
repeatedly to complete the training.
One way to reduce a supervisor’s time due to a staff person not
demonstrating competence on the job is to ensure each staff member
attending the group training session demonstrates competence during
the role-play practice. When possible, it is helpful to have each staff
person perform the target skills competently at least twice during sep-
arate role plays within the group session. Typically, the better the com-
petence displayed by staff during role plays, the better they will per-
form the target skills later on the job.
Sometimes trainers become rushed and hurry through a group
training session such that they do not sufficiently observe all staff
members perform the target skills correctly. When this occurs, there is
increased likelihood that certain staff will have difficulty performing
the skills competently on the job (which then requires additional time
by the supervisor to complete the training). In short, the more time
spent ensuring staff are competent during the initial role plays, the less
time will usually be needed to ensure their competence on the job.
On-the-job competency of staff following group

training sessions is enhanced if each staff trainee is
required to demonstrate skill competence in role-
play activities during the group sessions.
Use of Media-Based Training. Another consideration for reduc-

ing supervisor time required to effectively train staff is to incorporate
media-based components within the training process. Access to media
and technology has become readily available in many human service
agencies, including use of videos, computer-based training packages,
and web-based or on-line training. For example, staff may be sched-
uled to watch a training video related to a specified work skill or com-
plete a training session on-line. These processes usually require mini-
mal supervisor time during the actual training.
Research has been increasingly demonstrating that media-based
procedures can be effective in certain situations for training work skills
to staff. For example, there are a number of videos and DVDs that
have been shown to increase the teaching proficiency of support staff
when working with individuals who have autism. However, the re-
search has also indicated some inconsistencies with the effectiveness
of media-based training (see “Staff Training” sections in the Selected
Readings for critical reviews of the research in this area). In particu-
lar, in a number of cases such training has not been effective with all
trainees. The latter trainees subsequently required a trainer to also
conduct components of BST with the trainees on an individual basis
to help them acquire the skills being trained.
One particular concern with media-based training is the perfor-
mance components that need to be included if the training is to be ef-
fective. Traditionally used visual media can easily present one perfor-
mance-based component of training, that involving demonstrations of
how to perform a target skill. It is more difficult though to include the
trainee practice-with-feedback component that is a critical part of BST.
An approach that has some supportive research for using media
within training while also providing the performance-practice compo-
nents is to use a video or DVD for selected parts of the training. To
illustrate, in a situation in which a behavior analyst needed to train
residential staff regarding a new behavior support plan for a client
with challenging behavior, the analyst developed a video to provide
some of the training. Staff could watch the video as their schedule per-
mitted within a designated time period.
The video explained the rationale for the plan, described the com-
ponent parts, and showed how to perform some duties associated with
implementing the plan. Subsequently, the behavior analyst met with
individual staff on the job for demonstration and practice-with-feed-
back purposes. In this manner, all components of BST were imple-
mented. However, the behavior analyst did not have to meet with the
group of staff to initiate the training process because this was accom-
plished by staff viewing the video.
Use of the video reduced the behavior analyst’s time to train staff rel-
ative to the usual process of conducting a group training session followed
by individual staff training on the job. One reason the video component
reduced trainer time was because when conducting group training with
staff, it is common that several sessions are required to make sure all staff
receive the training. Often supervisors and other trainers have to sched-
ule several group training sessions because not all staff can attend a given
session due to different work schedules or absences from work. By using
a video for the group training component, the trainer’s presence is not
required for repeated training sessions with different groups of staff.
However, when considering using visual media in such a manner, the
amount of time to develop the video must also be taken into account.
Another approach to using media that can provide the practice-
with-feedback component of BST is through videoconferencing appli-
cations. Videoconferencing allows for real-time observation and inter-
action between a trainer and trainee from different locations. Use of vid-
eoconferencing and related applications of what is considered telehealth
services for working with caregivers has recently become an area of
growing interest in the human services. Telehealth services are dis-
cussed in detail in Chapter 14 in regard to providing remote or dis-
tance supervision (including staff training). The point here is that use
of visual media to reduce time to train staff warrants consideration as
long as staff are still required and observed to demonstrate compe-
tence in performing the target work skills on the job. As emphasized pre-
viously, training should never be considered complete—regardless of
whether media-based procedures are used or not—until staff trainees
are observed to perform the target work skills competently on the job.
Media-based components such as videos and on-

line programs can be used to reduce the time for
trainers to train staff in a number of cases, but care
must be taken to ensure that trainees still have
opportunities to practice the skills being trained
and receive trainer feedback as part of the training.
Pyramidal Training. Another means of reducing the amount of

time required of a supervisor to train staff is through pyramidal train-
ing. Pyramidal training involves a supervisor training work skills to a
small number of staff who in turn train the skills to a larger number
of staff. The pyramidal feature of this training process is represented
by the following. One trainer (the supervisor) is at the top of the “pyra-
mid” and trains two or three staff to function as trainers who represent
the middle of the “pyramid.” The latter staff then train the remaining
staff who are at the bottom of the “pyramid.” Because this process
involves staff training other staff, it is also referred to as a peer training
model.
For pyramidal training to be effective, a supervisor usually must
train two sets of skills to the staff who will serve as peer trainers with
other staff. First, the supervisor must train the peer trainers in the tar-
get work skill. For example, a target skill to be trained to all staff may
be how to use a least-to-most assistive prompting strategy to teach self-
help skills to clients with severe disabilities. The supervisor would con-
duct BST in a group format to train the peer trainers how to use the
targeted prompting strategy. Second, the supervisor must train the
peer trainers how to use BST to train the rest of the staff. The latter
process involves training the peer trainers how to apply the same BST
steps that the supervisor used when training the trainers in the
prompting strategy.
Once peer trainers are prepared to train the target skill to the re-
maining staff, it is helpful if a supervisor develops a work activity sched-
ule regarding how and when the peer training will take place. This step
is necessary to make sure the training proceeds in an organized man-
ner. A work activity schedule is also necessary to ensure that the peer
trainers have sufficient time built into their more routine assignments to
allow them opportunities to conduct peer training sessions.
There are two primary advantages of using a pyramidal approach
to staff training. The most apparent advantage is that it reduces the
amount of time required of a supervisor to train all staff in a desig-
nated work skill. This is particularly the case when a supervisor has a
large number of staff, perhaps involving different work shifts across
the day, who need to be trained. It should also be noted, however, that
the total amount of time devoted to staff training is not reduced. Only
the supervisor’s time is reduced; time is still required for peer trainers
to conduct training.
A second advantage of pyramidal training pertains to the work

skills of staff who function as peers trainers. The process of training
other staff helps maintain the peer trainers’ proficient application of
the skills that they are training. With the case of peer trainers training
other staff how to use least-to-most assistive prompting with clients, for
example, the trainers’ proficiency in using the prompting strategy will
likely maintain at a high level due to their peer training activities. The
trainers’ skill maintenance is enhanced due to their review of the
prompting strategy and increased practice using the strategy that
occurs as they train the other staff.
There are also some disadvantages in using a pyramidal training
approach. One disadvantage is that it requires additional duties of
peer trainers beyond their regularly scheduled work tasks. A second
disadvantage is that some staff do not enjoy functioning as a peer
trainer. Their dislike of having to train other staff is due at times to the
increased work required of them to conduct the peer training. This is
especially the case if supervisors do not relieve the peer trainers of
other work responsibilities in order to train staff. Consequently, it is
recommended that supervisors ensure peer trainers are relieved of
certain duties whenever possible to train other staff instead of expect-
ing them to function as peer trainers in addition to performing all their
other job duties.
Another reason some staff do not like to function as trainers of
other staff is due to the specific peer training feature. Some staff are
uncomfortable instructing their peers, much less giving their peers
feedback, which is a necessary part of the training process. In essence,
the act of training staff places the peer trainers in a temporarily ele-
vated role relative to their usual side-by-side working relationship with
the other staff. Relatedly, some staff trainees do not like having their
peers assume a seemingly elevated role with them. The trainees’ dis-
like is often apparent to the peer trainers, which makes the trainers
even more uncomfortable with their peer-training duties.
Because of the advantages and disadvantages of pyramidal train-
ing, supervisors should decide on a situation-by-situation basis
whether this approach to staff training is desirable. A few guidelines
can help in this respect. First, supervisors should strive to involve staff
as peer trainers only if the selected staff express a willingness to func-
tion in a peer-training capacity; staff generally should not be required
to train their peers if they express serious concern or discontent about
being a peer trainer. Second, as indicated previously, supervisors gen-

erally should involve staff as peer trainers only when they can relieve
those staff from some of their other work duties.
A final note on pyramidal training pertains to how a supervisor
works with staff who are selected to train other staff. The peer train-
ers’ training responsibilities should be addressed by the supervisor as
with any other job duty of staff. The supervisors should not only train
the selected peer trainers how to train other staff, they should also
periodically monitor the trainers’ subsequent staff training and pro-
vide supportive and corrective feedback as needed. If supervisors do
not use the steps of evidence-based supervision with the training
duties of the peer trainers, then the likelihood of the trainers carrying
out the duties sufficiently to effectively train other staff is diminished.
Pyramidal training involves using BST to: (1) train

peer trainers in the work skills that they will then
train to other staff, and (2) train the peer trainers
how to train other staff.
Making Training Acceptable to Staff

When a supervisor trains staff using BST as discussed throughout
this chapter, the training is usually well received by staff. Staff accep-
tance of the training process is due to several factors inherent in BST.
One factor is that the training is quite effective; staff usually become
competent in performing the work skills targeted in the training.
When staff feel competent performing a given work duty, they gener-
ally enjoy performing that duty relative to duties with which they do
not feel competent. Relatedly, acquiring competence with performing
a new task as a result of effective training reduces anxiety and appre-
hension staff often experience when assigned a new task without
being effectively trained to perform the task.
Staff are also usually appreciative of a supervisor who takes the
time to ensure they know how to perform their job duties. When a
supervisor takes the time to provide BST, it indicates that the supervi-
sor is sincerely concerned about staff being able to perform their
duties proficiently. Staff typically enjoy working for a supervisor who

they believe is truly concerned about the quality of their work relative
to a supervisor who exerts minimal effort to help prepare them to per-
form their duties.
There are also other specific aspects of BST that tend to enhance
staff acceptance of this training approach. For example, the initial
rationale provided by the supervisor about why it is important that
staff be trained in the designated work skills promotes staff acceptance
of the training. As indicated previously, staff are usually more accept-
ing of assigned duties when they have an understanding of the reason
for their assignments.
Additionally, the BST step of the supervisor demonstrating the
work skills that are being trained tends to enhance staff acceptance.
When the supervisor performs the work skills expected of staff, it
shows staff that the supervisor knows how to do what the supervisor is
expecting staff to perform. As also indicated previously, staff often
respect a supervisor more when they know the supervisor can do what
is required of staff. In turn, staff tend to enjoy working more for a
supervisor they respect than a supervisor they do not respect.
Another aspect of BST that enhances staff acceptance pertains to
when using a group-training format. Earlier it was noted that to main-
tain staff attentiveness during a group session, the trainer should not
talk more than 15 to 20 minutes at a time without some type of
demonstration or trainee-practice activity. This strategy also tends to
make the training more enjoyable for staff trainees.
Staff often become bored when they have to listen to a trainer talk
for extended amounts of time. Such boredom causes many staff to
become discontented with having to participate in the training ses-
sion. In contrast, when the training involves frequent breaks from hav-
ing to listen to the trainer talk—and especially breaks that include the
trainees becoming active such as by practicing the targeted work skills
as with BST—boredom and general discontent are reduced or avoid-
ed.
Staff practice in performing the work skills being trained can fur-
ther increase staff enjoyment in many cases due to the nature of role
playing. Role-play activities often become somewhat humorous as
staff fulfill various roles while interacting with their peers during the
training. However, staff enjoyment with role-play activities should not
be taken for granted; supervisors must take specific steps to promote
enjoyment with the role plays. Otherwise, the role plays can actually
decrease staff enjoyment.
More specifically, some staff are likely to feel awkward or uncom-
fortable when initially requested to participate in role-play activities.
Supervisors can help staff avoid the latter experiences by informing
them prior to role plays that they may be a little uneasy when first par-
ticipating in the role plays. Supervisors should likewise inform staff
that such feelings are common and they should not be surprised or
bothered by feeling awkward or uncomfortable.
Supervisors should further explain that as the role plays continue,
staff are more likely to feel comfortable with the activities. This is one
reason supervisors should always follow staff practice activities with
feedback that includes letting them know what they performed well.
Receiving positive feedback from the supervisor helps staff enjoy the
role-play activities and be more comfortable during subsequent role
plays.
A QUALIFICATION WITH STAFF TRAINING
At the beginning of this chapter, the importance of supervisors

being willing and able to train work skills to staff was emphasized. If
supervisors follow the steps of BST, their training should be effective
and well received by staff. However, supervisors should be selective in
deciding when to provide training for their staff. There is a tendency
in many human service agencies to provide staff training whenever
there is a problematic situation with the performance of one or more
staff. This tendency was illustrated earlier when staff training is pro-
vided in response to a poor review of an agency’s services by an exter-
nal regulatory body, regardless of the actual reason for the poor
review.
When issues arise with problematic performance, staff training is
necessary if and only if the problem is due to staff not knowing how
to perform a work duty of concern. There are many other reasons
why problems occur with staff performance, ranging from lack of time
for staff to perform a duty adequately to insufficient motivation to
complete the task. Providing staff training in these types of situations
will not resolve the problems with work performance. As will be dis-
cussed in subsequent chapters, other evidence-based strategies should
be used by supervisors to resolve problematic work performance in

the latter situations.
1. Staff training is a critical part of every supervisor’s job.
2. Behavioral skills training (BST) represents a performance- and compe-

tency-based means of training work skills to staff that involves: (1)
describing the skills to be trained, (2) providing trainees with a written
summary of the skills, (3) demonstrating the skills, (4) having staff prac-
tice the skills and providing feedback, and (5) repeating step 4 until staff
demonstrate competence in performing the skills.
3. Staff training is most successful if supervisors prepare for the training by

becoming well versed in the work skills to be trained, developing a writ-
ten summary of the work skills to distribute to staff trainees, and prac-
ticing the demonstrations that will be performed.
4. When conducting staff training in a group format, supervisors should

limit their talking to no more than 15 or 20 continuous minutes with-
out a demonstration or trainee-practice activity.
5. Ways to consider reducing a supervisor’s time to conduct staff training

include being well prepared prior to the training, ensuring staff compe-
tence in performing target skills during initial role plays, incorporating
visual media and technology within the training, and pyramidal train-
ing.
6. Staff acceptance of training activities can be enhanced by a supervisor

explaining the rationale for the training, adhering to the steps of BST,
limiting the amount of time talking in lieu of demonstrations and prac-
tice activities, preparing staff for role-play activities, and always follow-
ing staff practice activities with some positive feedback.
7. Staff training should not be used as a means of resolving problematic per-

formance unless the problems are due to staff not knowing how to per-
form specific duties of concern.
Chapter 5
MONITORING STAFF PERFORMANCE
T he fourth step in evidence-based supervision consists of monitor-

ing staff job performance. Monitoring involves systematically and
objectively observing the quality of staff work and represents a critical
part of every supervisor’s job. Information obtained through monitor-
ing provides the basis for almost every other action a supervisor
should take to ensure proficient staff performance. Most importantly,
routine monitoring provides supervisors with information about the
quality of staff performance and whether they should act to support
or improve ongoing performance.
In preceding chapters, the importance of an evidence base was
emphasized in regard to supervisors relying on strategies for impact-
ing staff performance that have been demonstrated through research
to be effective. Routine monitoring by supervisors provides another
type of evidence base that is also important. The data obtained
through monitoring provides evidence regarding the degree to which
supervisory actions have had the intended effect on day-to-day staff
performance. Evidence obtained by supervisors in this manner is not
as scientific or thorough as the evidence base supporting the supervi-
sory protocol discussed throughout this text but is nonetheless critical
for supervisors to perform their jobs successfully.
Although monitoring is presented as the fourth step in the super-
visory protocol, it is not a singular step within a sequence of steps.
Instead, monitoring should be an ongoing responsibility of supervi-
sors. Monitoring helps inform a supervisor when, for example, staff
require training in certain job skills, whether the training has been
effective, and when other supportive or corrective supervisory action
is needed. In each of these ways monitoring provides an information-
gathering and evaluative function for supervisors. In this manner
68
Monitoring Staff Performance 69
monitoring also represents the basis for Step 7 of the supervisory pro-
tocol, that of evaluating staff performance.
As with monitoring, evaluating staff performance should be an
ongoing activity of supervisors. Evaluating staff performance involves
reviewing the results of monitoring to assess the quality of staff per-
formance and whether supervisor actions have had the desired impact
on staff fulfillment of their duties. Evaluating is listed as the final step
in the protocol only to indicate that it should follow every action a
supervisor takes to affect staff work performance.
Monitoring of staff work performance should be an

ongoing activity of every supervisor; it provides
information about the quality of staff performance
and how supervisory actions are affecting staff per-
formance.
The purpose of this chapter is to describe how supervisors should

monitor staff work performance as part of their routine supervisory
responsibilities. Two general ways supervisors should monitor staff
performance will be described. These involve formal monitoring and
informal monitoring.
FORMAL MONITORING
Formal monitoring refers to a supervisor entering a staff work area

for the explicit purpose of systematically observing a designated as-
pect of staff work performance. Formal monitoring also involves col-
lecting specific information on the quality of that performance. To
illustrate, a supervisor may have specified a responsibility of staff in
an adult activity program that pertains to promoting a client’s use of a
voice output communication aid (VOCA) for communication. The
client’s support team had determined the VOCA was the most effec-
tive means for the nonvocal client to communicate. The performance
specification indicated staff should act in certain ways with the client
that included making sure the VOCA was in arm’s reach of the client
at all times, ensuring the VOCA was operative (i.e., the batteries were
charged), prompting the client to use the VOCA when the client
attempted to communicate through gestures, and praising the client’s
use of the VOCA.
Subsequently, the supervisor had trained staff how to provide the
VOCA, check the batteries, and prompt and praise the client’s VOCA
use. The supervisor could then periodically enter the adult activity site
and observe staff behavior to monitor how well they performed the
specified duties necessary to promote the client’s use of the VOCA. If
respective staff were appropriately completing the targeted duties,
then the supervisor could actively support their behavior. In contrast,
if certain staff were not adequately performing the designated work
behaviors, the supervisor could take corrective action to improve their
performance. Specifically how the supervisor might support or correct
work behavior will be described in subsequent chapters. The point of
concern here is that the supervisor must formally monitor staff per-
formance to know how well they are performing and consequently,
what further action should be taken.
Before discussing the intricacies of formally monitoring staff per-
formance, a qualification is warranted regarding how results of formal
monitoring should and should not be used. One outcome of formally
monitoring staff performance is the collection of data regarding the
quality of the observed performance. Many human service agencies
have formal monitoring systems in place for use by supervisors. Some
larger agencies also have certain personnel other than supervisors
whose primary job is to monitor staff performance, such as individu-
als working within the agencies’ quality assurance or improvement
departments. The availability of data obtained through such monitor-
ing is a highly useful resource for supervisors—if used appropriately.
The qualification warranting attention is that data collected on the
quality of staff work activities must be used by supervisors to either
support or correct staff performance. Often what happens is that col-
lection of data on staff performance becomes basically institutional-
ized within an agency and over time, the obtained information is not
used for its intended purpose. The information is stored in a central
location, and perhaps summarized periodically for various personnel,
but then essentially ignored or discarded.
When this situation occurs, the monitoring serves no useful pur-
pose for the supervisor. Additionally, as will be discussed later, such a
process can have detrimental effects on staff acceptance of the moni-

toring and reduce their work enjoyment whenever the monitoring is
taking place. In short, collecting data on staff performance through
formal monitoring is only useful from a supervisory perspective to the
degree that the data are subsequently used by supervisors to support
or correct the monitored performance.
Information obtained on staff work performance

through formal monitoring should be used by
supervisors to actively support or correct staff per-
formance; otherwise, the monitoring usually should
not be conducted.
Formally monitoring staff work performance must be conducted in

certain ways if it is to result in information that will assist supervisors
in promoting quality performance. First, the monitoring must be
focused. Formal monitoring by supervisors should focus on a specified
area of staff work performance. This is another reason why supervi-
sors must specify performance responsibilities in terms of specific
work behavior of staff. Without such specification, it is essentially
impossible to adequately monitor staff performance on a formal basis.
Formal monitoring also needs to occur in an objective fashion by
supervisors. It must be very clear to supervisors when they formally
monitor staff performance whether the designated work behaviors are
occurring or not. If monitoring is not objective, usually due to lack of
clear specification of the work behavior to be monitored, then inac-
curate information on the quality of staff performance is likely to be
obtained.
Without an objective basis for formally monitoring staff perfor-
mance, supervisors must make subjective evaluations about the quali-
ty of staff work. Subjective evaluations tend to vary over time, such
that a true picture of the quality of staff work will not result from the
monitoring. This is particularly the case when several supervisors or
other agency personnel are monitoring staff performance in a subjec-
tive manner. Evaluations of the quality of staff performance will usu-
ally vary significantly across the different monitors, resulting in incon-
sistent and often conflicting information about the quality of staff per-
formance.
When formal monitoring is conducted objectively on focused
areas of staff work performance, it is more likely that the monitoring
will occur in a consistent manner. Formally monitoring staff perfor-
mance must be conducted using a consistent method to obtain accu-
rate information on the quality of staff performance over time. If
supervisors conduct monitoring inconsistently across monitoring ses-
sions, the information resulting from the monitoring will be of little
use to supervisors.
When monitoring is done inconsistently, supervisors tend to look
at different aspects of what staff are doing during various monitoring
sessions. Consequently, supervisors will have inconsistent information
about the quality of staff work because the supervisors are not looking
at the same work behavior over time. Supervisors also will not be able
to objectively determine if their efforts to support or correct an area
of staff performance are effective; the monitoring will not be consis-
tently focused on the area of concern.
Formal monitoring of staff work performance

should focus on a specified area of staff behavior
and be conducted in an objective and consistent
manner.
To ensure that formal monitoring of staff work behavior is con-

ducted in a focused, objective, and consistent manner, supervisors
should have prepared monitoring forms or digital tools to guide their
observations. Often, performance checklists and work activity sched-
ules prepared during the performance specification process can serve
this purpose. A supervisor can use a checklist or work activity sched-
ule and observe to see if a staff person is doing everything identified
on the checklist or activity schedule. It is also important to use the
checklist or activity schedule the same way during each monitoring
session. For example, the supervisor should observe staff performance
of each target behavior identified on a checklist or activity schedule
in the same sequence during each monitoring session.
Other types of monitoring tools in addition to checklists and activ-

ity schedules can also be used to formally monitor staff performance.
The most common type is a form (either written or digital) developed
to count how often a designated work behavior occurs within a speci-
fied time period. For example, a supervisor may have trained staff in
a group home how to provide positive attention to one particular
client. In this case, the client’s support team determined that the client
acted inappropriately to gain staff attention. The team also deter-
mined the client’s inappropriate behavior usually occurred during
unstructured times, such as in the evening before supper. It was decid-
ed to reduce the inappropriate behavior, staff should provide frequent
attention to the client during unstructured times. Therefore, it was
determined the client should receive an attentive interaction from staff
at least once every 10 minutes on average. In this manner the client
would be receiving frequent attention and not need to act out to
obtain staff attention.
The supervisor could use a form such as that in the following illus-
tration to monitor and count how often the client (B.T. on the form)
received interactions from the staff working in the home. The super-
visor could use the form during a 20-minute period before supper and
count how many interactions were provided by the staff. It would also
be assessed if at least one interaction occurred every 10 minutes on
average (i.e., there would be at least two interactions observed within
the 20-minute observation). What constituted an interaction would
have been previously specified before training the staff such as speak-
ing directly to the client and beginning each interaction by saying the
client’s name.
Monitoring Form: Staff Interactions with B.T.
Date: ______________________________________________
Time of observation (must continue at least for 20 minutes):
____________________________________________________
Interactions (mark each occurrence with a slash “/” on the

following line:
_____________________________________________________
Monitoring Summary:
Total number of interactions: ___________________________
Formally monitoring staff performance with checklists, activity

schedules, and forms or digital tools for counting staff work behavior
provides critical information for supervisors to promote quality work
performance. Every supervisor should be skilled in, and routinely use,
formal monitoring procedures as part of their supervisory duties.
When considering formal monitoring in this regard, an initial decision
supervisors must make is how often to monitor various areas of staff
performance.
Generally, monitoring should occur as often as necessary to obtain
an adequate sample of the performance of concern to accurately eval-
uate the quality of staffs’ work. Following this guideline means that the
supervisor will usually have to determine how often to monitor work
performance on a situation-by-situation basis. There are also several
more specific guidelines a supervisor can use to determine how often
a particular area of staff work performance should be formally moni-
tored.
One guideline is that staff performance pertaining to job skills that
have been recently trained to staff should be monitored frequently,
usually at least several times per week. Frequently monitoring staff
performance is important in this situation to ensure staff are appro-
priately performing the recently trained work skills during the daily
job routine. Often supervisors will have to provide some corrective
feedback when staff initially apply newly acquired work skills to help
them perform the targeted duty proficiently. After staff have demon-
strated proficient performance during several monitoring sessions, the
frequency of monitoring can then be reduced to, for example, week-
ly and perhaps eventually to every other week or monthly (provided
staff continue to perform the target skills proficiently).
A second guideline regarding when formal monitoring should

occur frequently is when a supervisor has just taken corrective action
to improve an area of staff performance. The rationale for frequent
monitoring in this case is similar to that with the first guideline. In
contrast to ensuring that staff are appropriately performing recently
trained work skills though, the purpose here is to ensure the correc-
tive action taken by the supervisor resulted in improved staff perfor-
mance. Supervisors will often need to conduct several monitoring ses-
sions with feedback to adequately improve an area of staff perfor-
mance and subsequently, to provide supportive feedback for their
improvement.
A third guideline is that formal monitoring should occur frequent-
ly when a supervisor has concerns that staff are not performing a cer-
tain job duty proficiently. Monitoring is needed frequently in this case
to help the supervisor determine the reasons for the problematic per-
formance (detailed information on assessing reasons for problematic
staff performance will be provided in subsequent chapters).
Monitoring is also needed frequently when there are suspected prob-
lems with staff performance because a supervisor may need to take
corrective action to improve the performance. As indicated with the
second guideline, increased monitoring is needed in the latter situa-
tion to determine if the supervisory action resulted in improved per-
formance.
A fourth guideline pertains more to what a supervisor should mon-
itor than how often to monitor, though the latter issue is still relevant.
As with specifying performance responsibilities as observable work
behavior (which, again, is a prerequisite for formal monitoring), there
are limits to how many areas of staff performance can be formally
monitored on a regular basis. The same guideline regarding what per-
formance areas are priorities for precise specification applies to what
areas should be formally monitored: staff completion of duties that
relate most directly to client attainment of desired outcomes and work
behavior that clearly interferes with adequate completion of those
duties. The former areas should always be monitored on a regular
basis and usually at least monthly. The latter areas should be moni-
tored formally on an as-needed basis, using the first three guidelines
to help decide exactly how often.
FORMAL MONITORING OF STAFF PERFORMANCE

SHOULD OCCUR MOST FREQUENTLY WHEN:
1. Staff are expected to perform new work skills that were

recently trained.
2. Corrective action has just been taken by a supervisor to

improve an area of staff work activity.
3. A supervisor has concerns about the quality of an area

of staff performance.
4. Staff perform duties most directly related to assisting

clients in attaining desired outcomes or engage in activ-
ities that interfere with completion of those duties.
INFORMAL MONITORING
In contrast to formal monitoring that requires a prepared obser-

vation tool (e.g., checklist, activity schedule, written or digital tool for
counting a work behavior) and occurs during set time periods, infor-
mal monitoring requires no prepared tool and can occur at any time
of the staff workday. Informal monitoring involves a supervisor mak-
ing quick observations of ongoing staff performance. The supervisor
then immediately determines if staff are performing their job duties
appropriately.
Informal monitoring usually occurs while a supervisor is present
in the staff workplace to perform other supervisory duties. The super-
visor simply looks at what staff are doing and makes a mental note
regarding the adequacy of their performance. No written recordings
are made during informal monitoring, although a supervisor may
make notes about observed work activities at a later time. Informal
monitoring in this manner should occur essentially every day a super-
visor is at work.
The general purpose of informal monitoring is the same as that
with formal monitoring: to assess the quality of staff performance to
determine whether to support or correct the performance, and to de-
termine if previous supervisor actions have had the desired impact on

staff performance. If informal monitoring indicates an area of staff
performance is not of sufficient quality, then one of two supervisory
actions is usually needed depending on the severity and prevalence of
the problem across staff persons. If the performance problem is rela-
tively minor and involves only one or two staff, the usual supervisory
action is to intervene immediately to improve the performance. If the
problem is more serious or involves a larger number of staff, supervi-
sory action should involve developing a formal monitoring system to
help assess the reasons for the problematic performance (both of these
supervisor actions will be discussed later).
If informal monitoring indicates staff are performing ongoing
duties in a quality fashion, a supervisor should take immediate action
to support such performance—usually by providing impromptu feed-
back that indicates to staff how well they are performing the observed
duties. The latter action represents the most important reason a super-
visor should routinely observe staff performance in an informal man-
ner: it provides the supervisor opportunities to provide positive feed-
back to staff on a frequent and regular basis. As discussed in-depth
later, frequent provision of positive feedback is a critical supervisory
action for both promoting quality staff performance and helping staff
enjoy their work.
There are also other important benefits of frequent, informal mon-
itoring of staff behavior. One noted benefit is that it makes the super-
visor visible to staff. More specifically, because informal monitoring
requires the supervisor to be in the staff workplace, staff frequently see
their supervisor. When a supervisor is frequently visible to staff on the
job, staff tend to view the supervisor as being sincerely concerned
about their work. This view helps make it apparent to staff that their
work is important and appreciated. Additionally, by being in the staff
workplace frequently, it makes it easy for staff to pose questions to the
supervisor if they are unsure about an assignment or how to perform
a work task.
Supervisors should strive to be highly visible to staff by being pre-
sent in their workplace frequently. If a supervisor is not present and vis-
ible, staff have to seek out the supervisor in another location such as the
supervisor’s office when needing assistance. When staff have to leave
their workplace to find the supervisor, the likelihood that they will seek
the supervisor is reduced and their concerns will not be resolved.
In this regard, some staff are reluctant go to the supervisor’s office

because they are concerned they will be bothering the supervisor.
Other staff simply will not exert the time and effort to seek out the
supervisor. Still other staff may be concerned that if their peers see
them go to the supervisor’s office, they may be viewed as trying to
gain special favor with the supervisor (or what is often referred to as
“buttering up,” “sucking up” or “brown nosing”). There is also the
concern that if staff have to leave their workplace to seek the supervi-
sor’s assistance, clients may be left unattended and completion of
ongoing duties will be impeded.
Concerns regarding visibility of a supervisor are most relevant
when a supervisor works with staff in a variety of different locations
such that the supervisor is not continuously present in a respective
staff member’s workplace. If a supervisor’s workplace is the same as
that of the staff being supervised, such as in a classroom or a group
home, visibility is usually not a concern. However, even in the latter
situation, a supervisor should still be informally monitoring staff per-
formance essentially every day the supervisor is at work.
Frequent informal monitoring increases a supervi-

sor’s opportunities to support proficient staff per-
formance and increases the supervisor’s visibility
and accessibility for staff.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS WITH MONITORING
There are two special considerations when monitoring staff per-

formance beyond the issues discussed to this point. The first consid-
eration pertains to staff reactivity to the monitoring. The second
involves issues associated with overt versus covert monitoring of staff
performance.
Staff Reactivity to Monitoring

Reactivity refers to staff changing their ongoing work behavior
upon becoming aware that their behavior is being monitored—the
staff react to the monitoring. Reactivity to supervisory monitoring is a

frequent concern in human service agencies. When staff change what
they are doing and act differently when aware of being monitored, the
supervisor will not be observing typical staff performance.
Consequently, the supervisor may not be obtaining accurate informa-
tion regarding the quality of routine work performance.
Staff reactivity is especially a concern during formal monitoring by
a supervisor. Many supervisors have experienced the situation in
which some staff members appear to change their work behavior
when the supervisor begins to formally monitor their performance. A
common example pertains to living units in residential centers when
a group of clients is present in a room during leisure time along with
several staff persons. When a supervisor initially enters the room, the
supervisor notices that the staff persons are all sitting down, perhaps
talking to each other. When the staff members see the supervisor, they
immediately get up and begin interacting with clients. In this type of
situation, the staff members are reacting to the supervisor’s presence
and alter what they are doing.
Staff reactivity to having their performance observed by a super-
visor is a rather natural phenomenon. Nonetheless, it can interfere
with a supervisor’s attempts to obtain an accurate evaluation of the
quality of typical work behavior. Therefore, special concern is war-
ranted by supervisors to conduct their monitoring in ways that reduce
or eliminate reactivity. There are several key ways that supervisors can
reduce reactivity.
The best way to reduce reactivity associated with monitoring is to
monitor staff performance frequently. A primary reason that staff react
to a supervisor’s formal monitoring is that the act of monitoring rep-
resents a novel event in the workplace. The novelty essentially creates
an unusual situation that attracts staff attention and evokes various
responses by staff, many of which result in them changing what they
are currently doing. By monitoring frequently, the novelty tends to
erode over time and staff stop responding to the monitoring. In
essence, staff get used to the supervisor’s monitoring because it
becomes a common occurrence.
Another way to reduce reactivity in some cases is for a supervisor
to begin monitoring quickly when entering the staff workplace. In
essence, the supervisor begins monitoring before staff have time to
change what they are doing. This is especially the case when staff are
expected to be performing a work duty that requires preparation on

their part.
For instance, if a supervisor enters the staff workplace at a time
when staff are assigned to conduct teaching sessions with clients, staff
would be expected to be interacting with clients with certain materi-
als present. If, upon entering the staff workplace, the supervisor
observes staff doing something else such as completing paperwork, it
would take the staff some time to begin teaching clients. In such a
case, the supervisor usually could be certain that what is initially
observed represents what staff were doing prior to the supervisor’s
presence, thereby giving an accurate (though not necessarily desir-
able) account of typical staff performance at that time.
A third way for a supervisor to overcome reactivity is to conduct
unexpected, return visits to the staff workplace relatively quickly after
conducting a formal monitoring session. To illustrate, after completing
a monitoring session, the supervisor could leave the workplace but
then return unannounced within 10 or 15 minutes to conduct anoth-
er monitoring session (provided the work activity that is to be moni-
tored is expected to be occurring over that time span). If the supervi-
sor observes staff doing the same work activity that they were doing
during the initial monitoring session, then the supervisor can usually
be confident that what is observed is an accurate representation of
what staff are usually doing within that time period.
A final way to reduce reactivity in some cases is to formally mon-
itor staff work performance on an unpredictable schedule. In this
manner, staff are unlikely to change what they are doing prior to the
supervisor’s arrival to monitor because the supervisor’s presence in the
staff workplace is unexpected. However, this does not mean that a
supervisor should not inform staff about forthcoming monitoring ses-
sions. As will be indicated later when addressing staff acceptance of a
supervisor’s monitoring, staff should always be informed beforehand
that formal monitoring will occur. In this case though, the exact time
of forthcoming monitoring is not provided, just that monitoring will
be conducted. For example, staff may be informed that the supervisor
will be coming around on a number of occasions during the week to
watch certain work activities, but not informed specifically on which
days or times of day the monitoring will occur.
WAYS TO REDUCE REACTIVITY TO

FORMAL MONITORING BY A SUPERVISOR
1. Monitor frequently.
2. Begin monitoring immediately upon entering the staff

workplace.
3. Conduct unexpected, “return” monitoring sessions.
4. Monitor on a generally unpredictable schedule.
Overt Versus Covert Monitoring

One way some supervisors attempt to overcome staff reactivity to
the supervisors’ monitoring is to monitor covertly. Covert monitoring
involves observing staff performance without staff being aware that
their performance is being observed. The reasoning behind covert
monitoring is that if staff are not aware that the supervisor is moni-
toring their work activities, then they will not change their ongoing
work behavior during the monitoring. Covert monitoring can success-
fully overcome reactivity in many cases, but it also causes serious
problems among staff.
The main problem associated with covert monitoring is that it
rarely remains covert; staff almost always become aware that a super-
visor is monitoring their work behavior. In particular, because moni-
toring is followed by a supervisor responding to observed staff behav-
ior such as when the supervisor acts to support or correct the perfor-
mance, staff will then become aware that the supervisor has been for-
mally monitoring their performance. In other cases, staff quickly
become aware when a supervisor begins to monitor their work per-
formance due to other various actions (e.g., the supervisor making
recordings on a monitoring form in front of staff), despite the super-
visor’s attempts to keep the monitoring covert.
When staff become aware that a supervisor is attempting to covert-
ly or secretly monitor their work behavior, their respect for the super-
visor begins to seriously erode. Covert monitoring tends to give staff
the impression that the supervisor does not trust what they are doing
and in essence, does not value the honesty or professionalism with

which they approach their work. Consequently, staff acceptance of the
supervisor and their enjoyment associated with working for that super-
visor is decreased substantially.
For the reasons just noted, covert monitoring should not be a part of
the usual supervision process. Supervisors should not hide the fact that
part of their job is to regularly monitor the quality of staff work per-
formance. There is one exception though. If a supervisor has reason-
able evidence that something highly unacceptable is occurring in the
workplace, such as client abuse or neglect, staff sleeping on the job,
stealing agency or client property, or consuming illegal substances or
alcohol at work, then covert monitoring may be needed. However, in
such cases the purpose of monitoring is not to work with staff from a
supervisory perspective to support or correct their performance. In-
stead, the purpose in these situations is to catch staff in the suspected
act and remove them from the agency work force. This is generally the
only type of situation in which covert monitoring should be conducted.
PROMOTING STAFF ACCEPTANCE OF

PERFORMANCE MONITORING BY A SUPERVISOR
Monitoring of staff work performance is one of the steps of evi-

dence-based supervision that warrants particular attention by a super-
visor in regard to staff acceptance. Staff are often displeased when a
supervisor monitors their work activities, and particularly when mon-
itoring is done on a formal basis. Staff dislike of monitoring is preva-
lent across many human service agencies due to a number of reasons
(see also Chapter 14 regarding additional concerns with staff accep-
tance when monitoring is conducted remotely such as through cam-
eras in the staff workplace).
The most common reason staff dislike having their performance
formally monitored is a somewhat natural one. Most people simply
feel uncomfortable or anxious when they are aware that someone is
systematically watching what they are doing. Another reason pertains
to previous experiences staff may have had when their performance
was formally monitored within a given agency. In many agencies,
monitoring is not conducted for the purposes described to this point.
Instead, formal monitoring of staff performance occurs primarily
when senior management has concerns with the quality of staff per-
formance. Monitoring is conducted to substantiate the concerns and

then to impose negative sanctions with staff (e.g., supervisor criticism,
disciplinary action). Consequently, when monitoring occurs in these
situations, it serves as a signal to staff that negative actions are forth-
coming.
In short, supervisors need to be aware that staff are likely to expe-
rience discontent or apprehension with having their work activities
formally observed. Such feelings by staff can have a negative effect on
their daily work enjoyment. Consequently, supervisors should make
special efforts to formally monitor staff performance in ways accept-
able to staff.
Follow Specific Guidelines When

Formally Monitoring Staff Performance
Research and experience have indicated several ways that staff dis-
pleasure or lack of acceptance with having their performance formal-
ly monitored can be prevented or at least reduced. Those ways have
resulted in a number of useful guidelines. The most common guide-
lines are presented below.
GUIDELINES FOR MAKING FORMAL MONITORING

ACCEPTABLE TO STAFF
1. Inform staff prior to monitoring what will be monitored

and why it will be monitored.
2. Upon entering the staff workplace to monitor work per-

formance, greet all staff present.
3. Discontinue monitoring if a potentially harmful or

embarrassing situation is apparent.
4. Provide feedback to staff soon after monitoring.
5. Acknowledge staff upon completion of the monitoring

prior to departing the staff workplace.
The first guideline for enhancing staff acceptance of monitoring is

for the supervisor to inform staff about the monitoring before initiat-
ing formal monitoring procedures. Staff should be informed about the
aspect of their work performance that will be observed along with the
rationale for why it will be observed. The most advantageous time to
provide such information is either when the expected duty is specified
for staff as work behavior, or when they are being trained in the ex-
pected duty. It can simply be explained that part of the supervisor’s
job is to have first-hand information regarding how performance
expectations are being fulfilled. It can also be explained that moni-
toring is necessary to acquire information to help support staff with
their work. As indicated previously, the exact time when monitoring
will occur does not have to be specified, only that it will occur within
a general time frame.
If staff are informed that a specific aspect of their performance will
be formally observed along with the rationale for the monitoring, then
misconceptions staff may have when the supervisor arrives to monitor
can be prevented. This is especially important in cases described pre-
viously in which staff have experienced monitoring to signal that man-
agement has concerns with staff work activities and negative sanctions
are likely to be forthcoming. Staff should be aware that is not the rea-
son why the supervisor will monitor their performance. Additionally,
often staff simply appreciate a supervisor who lets them know about
future events on the job—in this case that monitoring will be taking
place.
The second guideline for enhancing staff acceptance of superviso-
ry monitoring is of a social courtesy nature. Often when supervisors
and other agency personnel enter the staff work area to monitor, they
attempt to be as inconspicuous as possible and do not interact with
staff in any way. The intent is to avoid drawing attention to themselves
as a means of reducing potential staff reactivity to their observations.
Though well intended, this strategy is usually counterproductive. The
mere act of a monitor entering the staff work area will usually make
staff aware of the monitor’s presence such that potential reactive
effects could still occur. More importantly, it is basically rude and even
disrespectful to staff to enter their workplace without any form of
social greeting.
It is generally considered common social courtesy that when a per-
son enters a room with other people present, that person will greet the
people already there. The same courtesy applies to when supervisors

enter the staff workplace for monitoring purposes: the supervisor
should socially acknowledge staff. This simple act of greeting staff who
are present can make the monitoring experience more pleasant for
staff, and beneficially impact their acceptance of the monitoring.
The third guideline pertains to when monitoring should not occur,
even though the supervisor has entered the staff workplace with the
intent of formally monitoring their performance. If it is apparent that
an unusual situation is occurring that involves staff or clients who are
present, then generally the supervisor should abandon the planned
monitoring. This is especially the case if a situation is occurring in
which somebody, either staff or clients, could be potentially harmed
such as an aggressive or disruptive act by a client. It is also the case if
the situation is one in which someone is likely to be embarrassed,
such as a toileting accident involving a certain client.
In the situations just illustrated, a supervisor should do one of two
things. First, if possible, the supervisor should attempt to help resolve
the potentially harmful or embarrassing situation, such as by helping
to calm a client who has become upset or aggressive or seeking addi-
tional personnel to help with the situation. Second, if the supervisor is
not able to help resolve the situation or the supervisor’s presence is
likely to make the situation worse (e.g., the presence of a new person
in the immediate area is likely to upset the client even more), the
supervisor should acknowledge the situation and leave the area. The
supervisor could also indicate that observations of work performance
can simply occur later when things are settled down.
It can be quite frustrating and unpleasant for staff in the types of
situations just noted if a supervisor does not help resolve the problem
and begins to formally monitor staff activities. Additionally, the mon-
itoring is not likely to result in the supervisor obtaining intended infor-
mation in regard to evaluating routine staff performance. The super-
visor is not likely to be able to monitor the intended performance of
staff because it is an unusual situation and staff are required to forego
their usual tasks to resolve the problematic situation.
One concern that arises at times in the type of situations just noted
is that a supervisor may be interested or concerned about how staff
respond to problematic situations and therefore, desire to observe
their performance. This concern is certainly valid in some cases.
However, if a supervisor believes it is important to observe how staff
perform in problematic situations, the supervisor should still attempt

to help resolve the ongoing situation and only monitor on an informal
basis while providing assistance. For reasons just summarized, the
supervisor usually should not engage in formally monitoring staff per-
formance without attempting to help resolve the problem.
The fourth guideline for enhancing staff acceptance of formal
monitoring is for the supervisor to inform staff about the evaluation of
their performance based on the monitoring as quickly as possible.
When a staff member’s work activities are observed, the staff person
often experiences a degree of anxiety regarding the supervisor’s eval-
uation of the performance. Such anxiety can be relieved if the super-
visor provides information, and especially some positive feedback,
immediately after the monitoring. If the staff person is very busy with
a given duty and the supervisor does not want to interfere with com-
pletion of the duty, the supervisor should briefly inform the staff mem-
ber that they can meet later when things are not so busy to discuss the
monitoring results.
The final guideline is similar to the second guideline and pertains
to social courtesy. The supervisor should acknowledge staff prior to
departing their work area upon completion of the monitoring.
Sometimes monitors simply leave the staff work area as soon as they
are through with the monitoring without saying anything to staff. This
occurs because, for example, the monitors are in a rush to complete
variously expected work tasks or they do not want to interrupt ongo-
ing staff work. However, it does not take much time or interruption to
simply acknowledge staff in a pleasant manner upon departing the
workplace such as thanking them for putting up with the monitoring.
This seemingly simple act, just as with initially greeting staff upon
entering their workplace, can help make the monitoring experience
more acceptable to staff.
Supervisors should always practice common social

courtesy when formally monitoring staff perfor-
mance: greet staff when entering their workplace
and acknowledge staff when leaving.
Use a Participative Approach When

Developing a Formal Monitoring System
Earlier it was mentioned that to enhance staff acceptance of formal
monitoring, supervisors should inform staff that their performance
will be monitored prior to initiating a monitoring session. Such accep-
tance can be enhanced further if supervisors take a participative
approach as described in the previous chapter when developing a for-
mal monitoring system. Specifically, a useful process when staff are
being trained in work skills that subsequently will be monitored is for
the supervisor to familiarize staff with the monitoring tool and how it
will be used. In this manner, staff will have a good understanding
about what the supervisor is doing when monitoring eventually oc-
curs, such that anxiety can be prevented that often arises over not
knowing what or why the supervisor is monitoring.
One highly useful way to familiarize staff with a supervisor’s mon-
itoring system involves the following. First, as the staff training process
is winding down, the supervisor should show staff the monitoring tool
that will be used. Second, the supervisor should explain how the tool
will be used to assess staff proficiency in performing the designated
work skills. Third, the supervisor should have staff use the tool to
observe the supervisor’s performance of the target skills either in a
role-play or in-vivo situation (depending on how the training is con-
ducted) and then discuss the staff observations.
The process just described has several beneficial effects on staff
acceptance of the supervisor’s forthcoming monitoring of their work
performance. Most importantly, it thoroughly familiarizes staff with
what the monitoring involves. As previously indicated, such familiari-
ty can prevent staff misconceptions and apprehension when their per-
formance is subsequently observed. Additionally, when staff monitor
the supervisor’s performance of the work skills that the staff are being
trained in and expected to perform, it helps reduce the “we versus
they” view that some staff develop in human service agencies.
Sometimes direct support staff form the perception that they are
considered a devalued component of an agency’s work force, due in
part to being at the bottom of the management hierarchy in the
agency. They view themselves as the “we” and everybody in a super-
visory or executive position as “they.” This view often develops when
a predominant management approach in an agency appears to staff as
one in which they are usually blamed for problematic issues that arise.
A common illustration is when staff rarely receive special attention

from agency executives, and perhaps their supervisor, unless there is
a problem in the workplace. The perception is presented to staff that
the problem is the fault of the staff; they are considered by manage-
ment to be doing something inappropriately or not performing tasks
that should be performed.
The situation just described represents a serious concern within a
human service agency from several perspectives. This will be dis-
cussed more in-depth later along with what supervisors should do to
avoid such an atmosphere from developing in an agency. The point of
concern here is that how formal monitoring is conducted can play a
small but important part in either fostering or preventing a “we versus
they” view among staff.
When staff have opportunities to observe and evaluate supervisors
performing what the staff are expected to do, it tends to show that it
is not just the performance of staff that is of concern; supervisors are
expected to be proficient in the same work skills as staff. As a result,
staff are less likely to believe that it is only their performance being
singled out. It becomes apparent that concerns for quality work per-
tain to supervisors as well as staff themselves such that the “we versus
they” perception is reduced. Additionally, the act of the supervisor
performing the duty expected of staff (while the staff observe with the
monitoring tool) helps diminish the “we versus they” perception
because everybody—the staff and the supervisor—are doing the same
thing at least in part. As noted earlier, staff tend to be more accepting
of supervisor actions when they observe the supervisor proficiently
perform what the supervisor expects them to perform.
Ensure Personnel Who Observe for Supervisors

Monitor in a Way Acceptable to Staff
Previously, it was noted that in larger agencies sometimes desig-
nated personnel are assigned to monitor staff work performance in
addition to staff supervisors. This should not be interpreted to mean
that supervisors themselves should not formally monitor staff perfor-
mance. Again, monitoring should be a routine part of every supervi-
sor’s job. However, when a supervisor has responsibilities over large
numbers of staff, often the assistance of others must be solicited to
ensure the performance of all staff is formally monitored sufficiently
frequently to obtain necessary information about the quality of staff
performance.
When other agency personnel assist a supervisor in formally mon-
itoring staff performance, those personnel should follow the same
guidelines discussed to this point regarding the supervisor’s own mon-
itoring of staff performance. This is particularly the case in regard to
how a formal monitoring session should be conducted. Again, those
guidelines involve informing staff about upcoming monitoring prior to
the monitoring, greeting staff upon entering and departing the staff
workplace, discontinuing monitoring if a situation arises in which
someone could be harmed or embarrassed, and providing at least
some positive feedback soon after the monitoring is completed.
Agency personnel who formally monitor staff performance should
monitor in a way that is acceptable to staff for the same reasons that
supervisors need to be concerned about staff acceptance of monitor-
ing. Additionally, when someone other than the supervisor monitors
staff performance, that person’s actions are often viewed by staff as an
extension of the supervisor. Staff are aware that the monitoring is
occurring with the supervisor’s knowledge and the supervisor will be
aware of results of the monitoring. If the monitoring is conducted in
a way that is not acceptable to staff, then staff will likely view the mon-
itor in a less than approving nature. Such a view will also be extend-
ed to the supervisor who usually is considered to be at least partially
responsible for the actions of the monitor.
1. Monitoring staff performance should be an ongoing supervisor responsi-

bility; it provides information on the quality of staff work and how
supervisory actions affect staff performance.
2. Monitoring should be conducted formally and informally. Formal moni-

toring requires use of a prepared monitoring tool and occurs on a peri-
odic, scheduled basis by a supervisor. Informal monitoring occurs while
a supervisor is present in the staff workplace for other purposes and
requires no formally prepared tool or recording of information.
3. Monitoring of staff performance should be conducted exclusively for eval-

uating staff work activities and assessing how supervisory actions have
impacted staff performance.
4. Formal monitoring must be focused on a specified area of staff work

behavior and be conducted in an objective and consistent manner.
5. Formal monitoring should occur most frequently when: (1) staff are
expected to perform recently trained work skills, (2) corrective action has
recently been taken with a specified area of work performance, (3) a
supervisor has concerns over insufficient work quality and, (4) staff per-
form duties most directly related to client attainment of desired outcomes
or engage in activities interfering with completion of those duties.
6. Staff reactivity to formal monitoring can be reduced by monitoring fre-

quently, beginning monitoring immediately upon entering the staff work-
place, conducting unexpected “return” monitoring sessions, and monitor-
ing on a generally unpredictable schedule.
7. Covert monitoring should not be routinely used by supervisors; staff

should be informed about forthcoming monitoring as well as the ratio-
nale for the monitoring, and familiarized with the monitoring process.
8. Staff acceptance of a formal monitoring session can be enhanced by: (1)

informing staff about the monitoring prior to initiating the session, (2)
greeting staff upon entering their workplace, (3) discontinuing monitor-
ing if a potentially harmful or embarrassing situation is apparent, (4)
providing feedback to staff soon after monitoring and, (5) acknowledging
staff upon completion of monitoring prior to departing their workplace.
Chapter 6
SUPPORTING PROFICIENT
WORK PERFORMANCE:
POSITIVE FEEDBACK
T he steps constituting evidence-based supervision described to this

point will often result in staff performing their work in a quality
manner. Once performance expectations have been specified as staff
work behavior, expected work skills have been trained to staff using
behavioral skills training, and staff work activities are routinely moni-
tored by the supervisor, many staff will demonstrate proficient work
performance. However, although these supervisory steps are critical,
they represent only part of what constitutes effective supervision.
Supervisors must also respond in certain ways to ongoing staff per-
formance to ensure job duties are consistently completed in a profi-
cient manner. As indicated in previous chapters, supervisors must
actively respond to quality work behavior in ways to support and
maintain that behavior. Supervisors likewise must actively respond to
work behavior that is not of acceptable quality in ways that improve
such behavior. This and the subsequent chapter focus on how super-
visors can act to support and maintain proficient work behavior of
staff. Chapter 8 focuses on how supervisors can improve nonproficient
work performance.
In the introductory comments to this text the importance of supervi-
sors actively supporting quality performance was noted for helping moti-
vate staff to perform their duties proficiently on a routine basis. It was
also noted that if quality staff performance is not well supported, staff
motivation often diminishes over time and staff appear “burned out”
with their jobs. There are also other reasons why supervisor support is
important for motivating staff to work diligently and proficiently.
91
One fundamental reason why active supervisor support is neces-

sary pertains to why many people seek employment in a direct sup-
port position. There is a common view that people who enter the
direct support profession do so because of an inherent desire to help
individuals who have disabilities. This is certainly a reason why some
people seek employment in a human service setting. However, it is not
the most common reason. Most people who take a job in the human
services do so because it is the best available job they can find at the
time. As indicated in Chapter 4, they usually have no prior experience
working with people who have disabilities. As such, they do not nec-
essarily have a pre-established motivation specifically for working in a
direct support capacity.
Hopefully, people who obtain jobs in the direct support area devel-
op a special concern for individuals with disabilities upon gaining ex-
perience in a human service agency. Undoubtedly, this happens with
many support staff. Again, though, this usually is not why they took
the job in the first place. Consequently, it cannot be assumed that an
inherent concern for the welfare of individuals with disabilities will
motivate all staff to perform their job duties diligently and proficiently.
Another reason supervisors need to actively promote staff motiva-
tion and quality performance pertains to the nature of direct support
jobs. Providing direct support for individuals with developmental and
related disabilities can be demanding. The work may be physically
challenging due, for example, to having to repeatedly lift and transfer
clients who are nonambulatory. In other cases, the work is demanding
because of having to physically intercede with aggressive or disruptive
behavior that some clients display. Additionally, direct support work
may not be very pleasant at times, such as when having to help bathe
clients who have frequent toileting accidents. For many staff, aspects
of the job can also become somewhat monotonous in regard to hav-
ing to do many of the same things every day. Each of these job fea-
tures can reduce staff enjoyment with their work and impede day-to-
day work motivation.
Still another feature of the job of providing direct support that can
reduce work motivation pertains to how staff are treated by manage-
ment in some agencies. In the preceding chapter the effects of work-
ing in an agency with a predominantly negative or punitive manage-
ment style were noted, often resulting in a “we versus they” atmos-
phere. As will be discussed later, a serious effect of working in a situ-
Supporting Proficient Work Performance 93
ation in which management imposes frequent negative action with

staff is a reduction in staff motivation to work diligently. Staff tend to
do only what is necessary to avoid receiving criticism and other neg-
ative sanctions.
The effect on staff motivation of working in an agency with a neg-
ative management style is further compounded by another common
feature of direct support jobs. Human service agencies typically have
a number of clinical personnel who interact with direct support staff
on a frequent basis, such as nurses, psychologists, speech and lan-
guage pathologists, and behavior specialists. Clinicians generally
develop client programs and other services that direct support staff are
expected to implement. Clinicians likewise provide directives to staff
about carrying out duties associated with the programs and services.
This places direct support staff in a rather difficult situation: they are
often receiving directives about what they should do on the job not
only from their supervisors but also from several clinicians.
Being directed to perform various duties by a number of agency
personnel can be displeasing. Many people do not particularly like
being repeatedly told what to do, and even less so when being told
what to do by multiple individuals. Receiving repeated directives
from different agency personnel, some of which are conflicting at
times, contributes to the “we versus they” phenomenon described ear-
lier. It can also lead to situations in which staff simply become frus-
trated or overwhelmed and essentially give up trying to please every-
one—they reduce their motivation to work proficiently.
Supervisors should not assume all staff are inher-

ently motivated to work with people who have dis-
abilities; supervisors should actively strive to pro-
mote staff motivation to work diligently and profi-
ciently.
The importance of supervisors actively supporting proficient staff

performance is due to all of the features associated with direct support
jobs just presented. There are also more proactive reasons for super-
visors to support quality work performance. When supervisors active-
ly support quality work among staff, not only is quality performance

likely to continue but staff are more likely to feel good about their
work. As emphasized later, the process of supporting staff perfor-
mance involves a supervisor letting staff know when they are doing a
good job. When the good work of staff is acknowledged by their
supervisor, it helps staff feel good about their work efforts. In turn,
when staff feel good about their work, they are more likely to enjoy
their jobs.
Another proactive reason for supporting quality staff performance
is that it helps promote staff retention. Staff are much more likely to
want to continue a job if they are actively supported in fulfilling their
job duties and feel good about their work. In one sense, the work
behavior of staff who do consistently perform their jobs diligently and
proficiently should be especially supported by supervisors. Staff who
perform in a quality manner are usually the individuals who have the
most opportunities to seek employment elsewhere. Employers desire
staff with good work histories relative to staff who have histories of
problematic work performance.
The importance of actively supporting staff who regularly perform
their duties in a quality fashion is well illustrated in situations in which
such support is lacking. This often happens in those agencies charac-
terized by a predominantly negative management style. When a neg-
ative management style is used with staff, proficient work of staff gen-
erally goes unrecognized whereas frequent attention (of a negative
nature) is directed to staff whose performance is problematic. There-
fore, there is minimal if any support for the actions of staff who per-
form proficiently. Unless the performance of the latter staff is actively
supported and they feel good about their work, they are more likely
to seek other jobs. The result is that over time the remaining work
force within an agency is represented in large part by staff whose per-
formance is often less than desirable because the agency is not able to
retain staff who perform proficiently.
Due to the noted importance of supervisors actively supporting good
work performance of staff, a considerable amount of research has fo-
cused on developing ways to provide effective support. Such research
has resulted in a number of evidence-based strategies supervisors can
use to effectively support quality work among human service staff.
Essentially all of the strategies involve providing positive feedback to
staff in some manner regarding the proficiency of their work.
THE POWER OF POSITIVE FEEDBACK
In its purest form, feedback involves providing information about

the quality of a specific aspect of staff work behavior. Information is
presented to staff regarding what was performed correctly and if ap-
plicable, incorrectly. Feedback is most helpful for supporting proficient
performance if it is accompanied by explicit expressions of approval
or commendation for work performed appropriately. Information
about the quality of work that includes approval or praise is referred
to as positive or supportive feedback.
Providing positive feedback is the most readily available, effective
means for a supervisor to support proficient staff performance. There
has been more research demonstrating the supportive effects of posi-
tive feedback on the work performance of human service staff than
any other supervisory strategy. Routinely providing positive feedback
is also the most readily available means for a supervisor to enhance
staff enjoyment with their day-to-day work activities.
Providing positive feedback is straightforward in concept.
Supervisors observe staff perform a given job duty and determine if
their performance meets the previously specified criteria for complet-
ing the work task. Subsequently, the supervisor informs staff what they
performed appropriately accompanied by expressions of approval for
the good work performance. However, providing feedback in a way
that truly supports staff in continuing to perform a task proficiently
and feeling good about their work also requires certain skills. Skills in
providing positive feedback are essential for supervisors to acquire
and practice if their supervision is to be successful.
AN EVIDENCE-BASED PROTOCOL
FOR PROVIDING FEEDBACK
There are many ways to provide positive feedback. Due to recog-

nition that providing feedback also requires a specific set of skills by
supervisors, a significant amount of research has been conducted on
how supervisors should provide feedback. Such research has resulted
in a basic protocol for providing feedback to staff about the quality of
their work. The steps constituting this evidence-based means of pro-
viding feedback are summarized below.
EVIDENCE-BASED PROTOCOL FOR

PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO STAFF
Step 1. Begin feedback with a positive or empathetic

statement.
Step 2. Specify what staff performed correctly.
Step 3. Specify what staff performed incorrectly, if

applicable.
Step 4. Specify what staff need to do to correct the work

behavior identified in Step 3.
Step 5. Solicit questions from staff about the information

provided.
Step 6. Inform staff about subsequent supervisory actions

regarding the target work behavior.
Step 7. End feedback with a positive or empathetic state-

ment.
Before discussing the steps involved in providing feedback, it should

be noted that the protocol represents a comprehensive feedback pro-
cess. It is comprehensive in that it involves a means of not only sup-
porting proficient staff performance, but also correcting or improving
nonproficient performance. The protocol is also comprehensive in
terms of promoting staff acceptance of the manner in which feedback
is provided. Each of these features will be highlighted as the steps con-
stituting the protocol are described. Subsequently, this and the follow-
ing chapter focus on those steps of the protocol that are specifically
designed to support proficient performance and work enjoyment.
Chapter 8 then focuses on the steps that supervisors can use to im-
prove nonproficient staff performance.
The evidence-based protocol for providing feedback is intended
primarily for formal feedback sessions involving a supervisor and an
individual staff member. It was designed as a guide for when a super-

visor meets with a staff person for the explicit purpose of providing
feedback, such as following formal monitoring of a staff person’s work
performance. The protocol is also useful when providing feedback on
a more impromptu or informal basis, and particularly after a supervi-
sor has informally observed staff performance. In the latter case, how-
ever, a supervisor does not always have to include each step of the
protocol. When the various steps are and are not needed is discussed
in subsequent chapter sections.
Step 1: Begin Feedback with A Positive or Empathetic Statement

Supervisors should initiate formal feedback sessions with a positive
tone for the staff person. This can usually be accomplished by saying
something complimentary about the person’s observed performance
in a general sense (e.g., “Things seem to be going well.” or “You are
getting the hang of this.”) or something more empathetic in nature
(e.g., “I know this is a tough part of the job.”). Precisely what supervi-
sors say will have to be determined based on what they are comfort-
able with and each specific situation. The primary point is to say
something that is likely to begin the feedback session on a pleasant
note for the staff person.
Beginning a formal feedback session in a pleasant manner is
important for several reasons. First, many staff are likely to be some-
what anxious about having their work performance formally evaluat-
ed by their supervisor. Beginning the feedback session in a pleasant
manner can help reduce the anxiety. Second, as indicated in the pre-
ceding chapter, some staff have had negative experiences with having
their performance formally observed and evaluated. Consequently,
they are likely to expect the supervisor’s feedback session to be nega-
tive as well. Beginning in a pleasant fashion can help change this type
of expectation. Finally, beginning the feedback on a positive or upbeat
note simply helps make the feedback session more acceptable overall
for the staff person.
Step 2: Specify What Staff Performed Correctly

Immediately after initiating the feedback session in a positive or
empathetic manner, the supervisor should specify each aspect of the
observed work duty that was performed correctly. This information
lets the staff person know exactly what was performed appropriately
and how the staff person should continue to perform specified aspects
of a task. To effectively serve these purposes, the feedback must be
very specific in terms of describing appropriate work behavior of the
staff person.
Often supervisors tend to be more general when providing feed-
back to staff about their appropriate work performance. For example,
when giving feedback to a staff person regarding carrying out a client’s
teaching program, a supervisor may say something like “You did a
nice job with the teaching program.” or “Awesome teaching!”. These
types of rather broad statements can be helpful in certain situations as
will be discussed later. For the purposes of this step of the feedback
protocol, however, such statements are too general.
Information related to the staff person’s teaching should be much
more specific about the staff person’s actual teaching behavior. More
specific information would be represented by a statement such as
“When the client did not respond to your first prompt you always pro-
vided more assistance on the next prompt—that is exactly how least-
to-most assistive prompting is supposed to be done.” The specificity of
the latter statement is much more helpful for ensuring the staff person
knows precisely what was performed correctly, and what should be
continued.
Step 3: Specify What Staff Performed Incorrectly, If Applicable

After informing the staff person what was performed correctly, the
supervisor should describe in detail what was performed incorrectly
or what was not performed that should have been completed. If the
staff person performed all aspects of the job duty proficiently, then this
step of the feedback protocol can be omitted. Alternatively, the super-
visor could inform the staff person that there were no aspects of the
job task that were performed incorrectly.
As with informing the staff person what was performed correctly,
when indicating those aspects of a work task that were not performed
correctly the supervisor should be very specific. The exact behaviors
that were incorrect should be described. Using the client-teaching
example again, such a statement could be something like “On two
occasions you repeated the same prompt on a given trial without pro-
viding the client with more assistance.” The specificity is warranted to
ensure the staff person knows exactly what was not performed cor-
rectly.
Step 4: Specify What Needs to be Done to

Correct the Behavior Identified in Step 3
Following identification of what was not performed correctly, the
supervisor should specify what the staff person needs to do different-
ly to correct the performance (if the staff person did not perform any-
thing incorrectly, then this step is not applicable). In this regard, there
is little value in informing staff that their performance is not correct or
appropriate without specifying how to improve that performance. As
with the preceding two steps of the protocol, the information provid-
ed to the staff person should be very specific. To illustrate, for the
client-teaching behaviors exemplified above in Step 3, the staff person
could be told something like “Remember that if the client does not
respond correctly to a prompt, the next prompt should provide more
assistance for the client.”
Sometimes supervisors inform a staff person what was not per-
formed correctly and then provide only general information that
improvement is warranted (e.g., “You need to be more consistent with
your teaching.”). Such information may indicate to the staff person
that a change is needed but not exactly what or how to change the
teaching activities. One reason general information is provided by
some supervisors is they are not sure what the staff person should do
to improve the performance, only that there are problems with the
way the staff person is currently performing a task.
To avoid the situation just illustrated, supervisors must make sure
they are well skilled in performing the job duty themselves for which
they are providing feedback to the staff person. When a supervisor is
not so skilled and cannot specifically instruct the staff person how to
improve the performance, the feedback session will be of minimal
benefit. More pointedly, the feedback will probably not help the staff
person perform the given duty more proficiently. Additionally, staff
quickly become frustrated and potentially discontented when their
supervisor points out problems with their performance but cannot tell
them precisely what to do to improve the performance.
Supervisors should not give feedback to staff about

performing a job task if the supervisors are not
skilled themselves in performing the task.
Step 5: Solicit Questions About the Information Provided

The fifth step of the feedback protocol involves soliciting questions
from the staff person about what the supervisor has described. The
intent is to provide the staff person with an explicit opportunity to
seek additional information or clarification about what was said by the
supervisor. Sometimes a staff person is unsure about something that
was described but feels uneasy questioning the supervisor. When the
supervisor specifically solicits questions, it becomes easier for the staff
person to seek clarification. Additionally, prompting questions gives
the staff person the opportunity to explain what was done in case
there were mitigating circumstances that may have affected the ob-
served performance. In short, this step helps make sure the staff per-
son and supervisor are both very clear about the content of the feed-
back that has been presented to this point.
Providing the staff person with opportunities to seek clarification
or explain why something was performed in a certain manner also
makes the feedback session more participative. When staff are active-
ly encouraged to participate in a feedback session, the participation
tends to make the session more acceptable to the staff. In contrast, if
a supervisor provides feedback without encouraging staff input in the
process, a feedback session is usually less well received by staff.
Step 6: Inform Staff About Subsequent Supervisory Actions

After answering any questions posed by the staff person, the next
step is for the supervisor to inform the staff person about when anoth-
er feedback session will be conducted. The supervisor should make a
decision about how soon the performance of concern needs to be
monitored again, followed by giving feedback, based on how well the
staff person performed the duty of concern. The guidelines previous-
ly presented in Chapter 5 regarding how often formal monitoring
should occur can be used as a basis for the decision. In particular, if
the staff person is having difficulty performing the duty proficiently,

then monitoring and feedback should occur again soon, generally
within a few days. If the staff person’s performance is of acceptable
quality, then monitoring and feedback will not need to occur as quick-
ly. Whatever time period is determined by the supervisor, this infor-
mation should be given to the staff person.
Informing staff when feedback will be provided again serves sev-
eral useful purposes. On a general basis, it is just good practice from
a staff-acceptability standpoint to let staff know about forthcoming
supervisory actions. Additionally, for many staff, knowing the super-
visor will be formally monitoring a specific aspect of their perfor-
mance in the near future will motivate them to attempt to perfect their
performance. When a supervisor follows the guidelines for conducting
monitoring and providing feedback in ways that are acceptable to
staff, many staff will also begin to look forward to future monitoring
and feedback sessions. Staff will want to demonstrate their proficient
work skills because they know the supervisor will recognize and ap-
preciate their good work.
In other cases, staff will attempt to improve their performance be-
cause they know their work will be formally observed less often once
they demonstrate work proficiency. This occurs when, despite a super-
visor’s best attempts, some staff still feel somewhat anxious or uncom-
fortable when their supervisor formally monitors their performance.
From a staff acceptance perspective, avoiding future monitoring by
the supervisor is not the most desired reason for staff being motivat-
ed to improve their performance. However, it is a relatively common
phenomenon in many agencies such that it warrants mention.
There is also another important reason for supervisors to inform
staff about forthcoming monitoring and feedback sessions. In a lot of
agencies, staff become accustomed to a particular area of their per-
formance being a periodic concern of management. However, they
also know that if they wait long enough, the focus of management will
vary over time and the given performance area will no longer be a sig-
nificant concern of management. In essence, staff adopt an attitude
that if they “stay below the radar” or simply “lie low,” management’s
immediate concerns will pass and their performance of a specific duty
will not receive attention for very long.
The latter view develops among staff because they become aware
that management does not consistently follow through on various
issues of concern. Lack of management follow through represents an

ineffective approach to supervision and should not occur.
Nonetheless, many staff are likely to have experienced this situation.
A supervisor can negate such a view at least in part by simply inform-
ing staff that the performance of concern will be monitored again
(and, of course, actually conducting subsequent monitoring and feed-
back sessions). Following up in this manner helps indicate that the per-
formance is important and will be attended to by the supervisor on a
regular basis. The end result of informing staff about continued mon-
itoring and feedback is increased motivation among some staff to per-
form their duties proficiently.
Step 7: End Feedback Session with a Positive or Empathetic Statement

The last step of the evidence-based feedback protocol is to end the
feedback session in a pleasant manner. This can be accomplished as
with initiating the session by providing a generally positive or empa-
thetic statement. The positive statement can reiterate the performance
aspects performed correctly accompanied by clear expressions of
approval (e.g., “Your teaching is looking real good; your prompting is
giving the client increased assistance as needed. This will really help
the client learn.”). Alternatively, the statement can be more empathet-
ic in nature (e.g., “I know this is a tough assignment and I really appre-
ciate your efforts in getting it done.”).
The primary purpose of this step is to enhance staff acceptance of
the feedback. The simple act of ending a feedback session in a posi-
tive manner can have a significant effect on the staff person’s accep-
tance of the supervisor’s feedback. It can also make the staff person’s
anticipation of future feedback sessions more pleasant.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS WHEN USING

THE EVIDENCE-BASED FEEDBACK PROTOCOL
The evidence-based feedback protocol represents a very valuable

tool for supervisors. It is a readily available means of effectively sup-
porting proficient staff performance and improving nonproficient per-
formance. When each of the steps are followed during feedback ses-
sions, this method of providing feedback usually is also well received
by staff. However, there are some special considerations warranting a
supervisor’s attention to use the feedback protocol most effectively

and acceptably.
Feedback as a Unique Skill

Providing feedback in a way that affects staff work performance in
the desired manner and is well received by staff is a unique supervi-
sory skill. There is a common misconception that if a supervisor
knows how to perform a work task that staff are expected to perform,
then the supervisor will be able to provide effective feedback regard-
ing how staff perform the task. A supervisor being skilled in perform-
ing the job task that staff are expected to perform is a prerequisite to
providing effective feedback. However, such skills are not sufficient. A
supervisor must also be skilled specifically in providing feedback,
such as using the steps of the evidence-based protocol.
Research has clearly shown that just because a supervisor is skilled
in performing a respective job task, the supervisor will not necessari-
ly be skilled in giving feedback to staff about their completion of the
task. More specifically, the supervisor may not be skilled in providing
feedback in a manner that supports proficient staff performance or
improves nonproficient performance regarding the task. Failure to rec-
ognize this fact is one of the reasons that some staff who are very
skilled in working in a direct support position are not very effective
supervisors when promoted to a supervisory position.
Supervision of direct support staff requires a number of unique
skills beyond being able to provide direct support to individuals with
disabilities, including providing effective feedback. Unless staff pro-
moted to supervisory positions receive training specifically related to
use of effective supervisory strategies, they are not likely to succeed
very well in their new roles. Of particular concern here, supervisors
must exert the time and effort to become thoroughly competent in
providing feedback as a means to support quality staff performance
and correct inadequate performance.
Giving feedback with the protocol is a performance skill. Like any
other area of performance, supervisors can improve their skill in pro-
viding feedback with practice. Therefore, the more a supervisor uses
the feedback protocol, generally the better the supervisor will be at
giving feedback to staff. When initially using the protocol, it is helpful
if a supervisor reviews each of the steps of the protocol before meet-
ing with a staff person for a formal feedback session. Over time, the
supervisor will no longer need such a review because following the
steps will essentially become routine for the supervisor.
For supervisor feedback to be effective, supervisors

must be skilled in performing the staff work task for
which feedback will be provided and skilled in the
process of providing feedback.
Providing Feedback in Difficult Situations with Staff

There are several situations in which providing formal feedback to
staff can be particularly difficult for supervisors. One situation is when
a supervisor is giving feedback to a staff member who is considerably
older and has much more work experience than the supervisor. In this
situation, many supervisors feel uncomfortable evaluating the staff per-
son’s work performance and providing formal feedback. Supervisors
nonetheless must still be able to provide feedback effectively in this sit-
uation to perform their jobs successfully.
The feedback protocol has several inherent aspects that can help
inexperienced and young supervisors overcome their uneasy feelings
when giving feedback to older and more experienced staff. First, as
just noted, simply using the feedback protocol over time will help
supervisors become more comfortable providing feedback. Again,
giving effective feedback is a performance skill and supervisors will
become more proficient and fluent using the protocol with practice.
Another aspect of the protocol that can be helpful for new super-
visors pertains to the second feedback step. When supervisors are
very specific in describing what work behaviors a staff person per-
formed proficiently, there are several benefits beyond those already
noted. In particular, the act of describing specifically what a staff per-
son performed proficiently makes the staff person aware that the
supervisor is knowledgeable about the work performance of concern.
It also makes the staff person aware that the supervisor is very knowl-
edgeable about how well the staff person performed the given duty.
Such awareness helps the staff person gain respect for the supervisor,
regardless of the supervisor’s age or inexperience. The staff person’s

respect for the supervisor is usually reflected in the person’s demeanor
during the feedback session. In turn, the staff person’s respectful
response can help make the supervisor feel more confident in inter-
acting with the staff person and providing feedback.
Another situation that can be difficult for a supervisor is when a
staff person becomes defensive or argumentative during a feedback
session. This typically occurs when the supervisor indicates how the
staff person’s observed performance was not correct and what needs
to be done differently to improve the performance. One means to
help a supervisor manage this situation is to focus on following each
step of the protocol, despite what the staff person may object to or
question. The supervisor simply listens to the staff person’s concerns
and then proceeds with the steps of the protocol. The supervisor does
not need to engage in arguing with or contradicting the staff person,
but just politely acknowledges what the staff person has to say and
then provides information relevant to each step of the protocol.
Feedback Must Be Sincere

For a supervisor’s feedback to be effective, it must be sincere. The
supervisor must be sincerely concerned about the quality of a staff
person’s work behavior and want to help the staff person perform pro-
ficiently. If the supervisor is not sincerely concerned in this respect,
the lack of sincerity will usually become apparent to the staff person
and multiple problems result. Most notably, the staff person will lose
respect for the supervisor and not attend to the feedback provided.
This type of situation occurs, for example, when a supervisor is
required to provide formal feedback on a regular basis by agency
executives but the supervisor either does not want to provide feedback
or sees no utility in providing feedback.
Being sincerely concerned about the quality of staff work perfor-
mance is not something with which this or any other text can be of
much help. If supervisors are not sincere in their concern, it is highly
unlikely they will be successful in their supervisory roles. Sincerity
cannot be taught, though it can develop over time in some cases. The
primary point here is that if a supervisor is not sincere in wanting to
promote quality work among staff, or help staff enjoy their work, no
supervisory strategy will be very successful. The only suggested action
in such situations is for the supervisor to seek employment in anoth-

er job that does not involve supervising direct support staff.
There is another important issue regarding sincerity and a super-
visor’s likelihood of providing effective feedback. Not only does a
supervisor have to be sincere, the supervisor’s feedback has to appear
sincere to the staff recipient of the feedback. In some cases, such as
with young or inexperienced supervisors as referred to earlier, super-
visors are very sincere about working with staff but have difficulty pro-
viding feedback in a way that comes across as sincere to the staff per-
son. This is usually due to the supervisor being uncomfortable in pro-
viding feedback as also illustrated earlier.
If a supervisor is sincere, providing feedback in a way that appears
sincere to staff is something that can be learned by the supervisor.
Again, providing feedback is a performance skill and supervisors can
improve how they provide feedback with practice. Using steps of the
protocol repeatedly as discussed previously will usually help supervi-
sors begin to provide feedback in a way that comes across sincerely.
It can also be helpful for a supervisor to learn to provide feedback
that comes across sincerely if the supervisor carefully attends to how
a staff person responds to the feedback. A supervisor should observe
whether a staff person appears accepting of how specific information
is presented, or not very accepting. The supervisor can then alter how
information is presented, such as how the feedback session is initiated
or terminated, for example, based on the staff person’s response. If the
response seems to be accepting of what the supervisor said, then that
approach can be continued in future feedback sessions. If the
response appears to indicate lack of acceptance or even apathy or dis-
content by the staff person, then the supervisor should present infor-
mation in a somewhat different manner in subsequent feedback ses-
sions.
An illustration of the type of situation just referred to is with staff
who appear uncomfortable when the supervisor explicitly commends
an aspect of their performance. Many staff are not used to a supervi-
sor complimenting their work and are not sure how to react. Upon
noticing that a staff person appears uncomfortable with receiving pos-
itive feedback, a supervisor could alter how such information is pro-
vided.
For example, the supervisor could limit the amount of compli-
mentary information provided to the most important aspects of the
performance (e.g., so that the staff person is not seemingly over-

whelmed when presented with multiple compliments about observed
performance). As the staff person becomes more accustomed to
receiving positive feedback, then the supervisor can be more elabora-
tive in complimenting additional features of the individual’s perfor-
mance. Staff discomfort with certain aspects of feedback is another
reason a supervisor’s feedback has to be sincere and come across sin-
cerely to the staff person. If a staff person questions the sincerity of a
supervisor’s positive feedback, then the staff person will not become
more comfortable with the feedback over time.
Supervisors must be sincerely concerned about

quality staff performance when giving feedback
and provide feedback in a manner that comes
across as sincere to staff.
Maintaining Privacy with Feedback

When providing formal feedback, supervisors should take special
care to respect the privacy of individual staff members. A general rule
is that feedback using the evidence-based protocol should be provid-
ed to a staff person in a private manner that cannot be heard by other
staff. Many staff seriously dislike a supervisor providing feedback to
them in front of other staff, or what is referred to as public feedback.
This is especially the case when feedback includes information about
what a staff person did not perform appropriately. Therefore, supervi-
sors should make sure to meet with a staff person for a feedback ses-
sion in an area that is not within earshot of other staff, or in a sepa-
rate room altogether.
Some supervisors recognize the importance of providing feedback
in a private manner when the feedback involves informing what a staff
person performed incorrectly, but believe it is acceptable to provide
positive feedback in a public manner. The rationale is that a staff per-
son is not likely to mind, and might even enjoy, being complimented
for good performance by a supervisor in front of other staff. There are
certain situations in which presenting positive feedback publicly has
important benefits as will be discussed later. However, even with pos-
itive feedback, a supervisor should carefully consider whether it would
be acceptable to a staff person to receive such feedback in front of

other staff. Some staff do not like to be singled out in front of their
peers—which happens when feedback is presented to them in a pub-
lic manner—even if they are being complimented for their good per-
formance.
Formal feedback should generally be provided pri-

vately to staff members, and especially feedback
that includes information about what a staff person
performed incorrectly.
A Reported Concern with the Feedback Protocol

It should also be noted that there is some controversy with pro-
viding feedback by following the seven steps of the formal feedback
protocol. The controversy centers on beginning and ending the feed-
back on a positive note (Steps 1 and 7 of the protocol). The contro-
versy also pertains to including specification of correct or commend-
able aspects of performance (Step 2) when the primary purpose is to
improve problematic performance (see Chapter 8). The controversy is
based on concerns over what is referred to as the “sandwich effect.”
The reported “sandwich effect” pertains to the sequence and type
of information presented to the staff person. The protocol starts and
ends with providing positive information to the individual. The mid-
dle of the protocol involves providing what is considered negative in-
formation in terms of noting problems with the individual’s perfor-
mance. In this manner, the negative information is considered to be
“sandwiched” between the positive information. The concern is that
with repeated use of this approach for providing feedback, the initial
presentation of positive information will signal to the staff person that
something negative is forthcoming. As a result, the initial information
can lose its positive value for the staff person because it causes the
individual to focus on what negative information is going to be sub-
sequently presented.
Another reported concern with the “sandwich” issue is that some
staff will attend to and remember only the positive information pre-
sented. Conversely, other staff will attend to and remember only the
negative information. A concern has also been expressed that if a
supervisor is going to present any type of negative information about
a staff person’s performance, most staff prefer the supervisor to get
straight to the problem issue. The latter concern is based on the view
that when the negative information is embedded between positive
comments, staff will perceive that the supervisor is essentially “sugar-
coating” the problem issue and discredit the supervisor for not being
more forthright.
Despite these concerns with the perceived “sandwich” format of
the feedback protocol, it is still generally recommended that supervi-
sors rely on the protocol when presenting formal feedback. There are
several key reasons for the recommendation. First, because investiga-
tions repeatedly have demonstrated the effectiveness of the protocol
for both reinforcing proficient performance of human service staff and
improving nonproficient performance, the protocol has a strong evi-
dence base to support its use. Second, research has also indicated that
use of the protocol in its entirety is typically well received by staff.
Additionally, when the feedback protocol is used in conjunction
with the other steps of outcome management, problems with staff per-
formance tend to be minimized. Most applications of the protocol will
therefore pertain only to supporting proficient staff performance such
that corrective feedback will not need to be included within most feed-
back presentations (i.e., Steps 3 and 4 of the protocol are not applica-
ble). Negative information therefore is not interspersed between posi-
tive information which negates concerns with the reported “sand-
wiching” of information. Relatedly, because presentation of positive
information is not routinely followed by negative information to a staff
person, presentation of the former information it is not likely to signal
to the individual that negative information is forthcoming.
Nonetheless, the potential “sandwich effect” is noted here because
of reported concerns in this regard. Additional research is needed to
better validate the concerns. Such research may also determine spe-
cific types of situations in which the concerns do and do not apply.
DIFFERENT WAYS OF PROVIDING FEEDBACK
Providing feedback to support proficient staff performance has been

discussed to this point in regard to formal feedback presentations by
a supervisor. A supervisor meets individually with a staff person for

the explicit purpose of providing feedback concerning previously
observed work performance. There are also other ways for a supervi-
sor to provide positive feedback to staff. These include, for example,
informal feedback presentations and written forms of feedback.
As with formal feedback sessions that a supervisor conducts with
a staff person, other ways of providing positive feedback are based on
the evidence-based feedback protocol. However, some steps of the
protocol are not always necessary with certain ways of providing feed-
back. There are also special considerations associated with each dis-
tinct way of providing feedback.
Before describing different ways to provide feedback and the asso-
ciated considerations, it should be emphasized that Step 2 of the pro-
tocol generally should be included as part of any presentation of pos-
itive feedback. All positive feedback usually should include a descrip-
tion of the specific work behavior that a staff person performed in a
proficient or quality manner. This is the step that is most useful for
helping staff continue performing their work appropriately and feeling
good about their performance.
Informal Feedback
As discussed in Chapter 5, an ongoing responsibility of supervi-
sors is to monitor staff performance on an informal basis. As also
stressed, a primary reason for supervisors to informally monitor staff
performance is to be able to provide frequent positive feedback for
work performed appropriately. When positive feedback is presented
after informally monitoring staff work, it is usually of an informal
nature.
Informal positive feedback involves a supervisor simply telling a
staff person about one or more aspects involved in completing a task
that were performed proficiently. In essence, informal feedback
involves carrying out Step 2 of the evidence-based feedback protocol
as just noted for at least one specific area of staff performance. Again,
frequently informing staff about work behavior they have performed
proficiently is the most readily available and effective means for a
supervisor to support proficient work and enhance staff enjoyment
with their work.
Supervisors should be continuously looking for good work perfor-
mance of staff for which they can provide positive feedback on an
impromptu or informal basis. Supervisors should strive to inform staff

about the good aspects of their work behavior essentially every day.
Frequent provision of informal feedback in this manner is a key char-
acteristic of successful supervision. Many direct support staff also
report that they respect and enjoy working for supervisors who fre-
quently recognize and acknowledge their good work.
Many experienced supervisors are well aware of the importance
of providing frequent feedback regarding proficient staff performance.
However, because supervisors are often very busy, many supervisors
also encounter difficulties in providing positive feedback to staff as fre-
quently as they would like. Consequently, it is helpful if supervisors
take specific steps to ensure they provide positive feedback to staff on
a routine basis.
There are a variety of steps supervisors can take to ensure they
routinely provide positive feedback to staff. One way is to always fol-
low informal monitoring of staff performance with at least some posi-
tive feedback as discussed in the previous chapter. Another way is for
supervisors to identify something like “provide feedback” on their
daily or weekly to-do lists, along with other supervisory tasks that
need to be completed. In this manner, providing feedback tends to be
viewed more readily as a regular job responsibility of supervisors in
contrast to a task that is considered separate from their more tradi-
tionally expected duties.
Considering provision of positive feedback as a routine superviso-
ry duty is important because supervisors are not always held account-
able by their superiors for providing feedback relative to completing
other duties. Supervisors are often held accountable by management
for duties such as completing various paper-work tasks on time, main-
taining schedules regarding when different staff are assigned to work,
and attending designated meetings. There is a natural tendency for
supervisors to prioritize those duties for which they are held account-
able by management (e.g., if the supervisors are likely to receive neg-
ative consequences from management when the duties are not com-
pleted in a timely fashion).
Other important duties for which supervisors are not commonly
held responsible—such as giving staff positive feedback—tend to
receive less attention by supervisors. As a result, the latter duties are
not completed as often as they should be relative to completing the
former types of duties. Consequently, supervisors must take special
steps to ensure they find the time to provide frequent positive feed-
back to staff.
Making sure positive feedback is presented frequently to staff can
be particularly difficult for supervisors who work with large numbers
of staff or with staff in different workplaces. In these cases, supervisors
should attempt to include informal feedback within interactions they
have with staff for other purposes. For example, when interacting with
a staff person to provide a duty assignment or related information, the
supervisor can take an extra minute or two and express commenda-
tion for an aspect of the staff member’s recently observed performance.
It can also be helpful in some cases for supervisors to maintain a
table or chart on which they record when positive feedback has been
provided to respective staff. Supervisors can review their recordings
on a weekly basis to ensure each staff person has been provided with
at least some feedback. If supervisors notice that they did not provide
positive feedback to certain staff during the week, they can then make
special attempts to interact with those staff as soon as reasonable for
the purpose of providing feedback.
Supervisors should be continuously looking for

quality staff performance that they can informally
commend or praise.
Written Feedback
Throughout the previous discussion on feedback, the focus has
been on supervisors speaking to staff about their work performance.
Feedback can also be provided using a variety of written formats.
Some ways to provide written feedback are quite formal, such as with
a form specifically prepared to provide information on the quality of
a designated area of staff performance. To illustrate, a form may be
prepared that lists each expected behavior of a staff member’s as-
signed teaching task with a client. The supervisor then writes in infor-
mation or scores check-boxes regarding how well, for example, the
staff member provided prompts in the designated manner, and rein-
forced client responses. The form that summarizes how well the staff
person performed each teaching behavior is then given to the staff

person. Other ways to provide written feedback are more informal,
such as with a brief note or short e-mail correspondence about one
particular work behavior that was performed commendably by a staff
person.
Written feedback can also vary in its comprehensiveness. Some
feedback forms may be quite comprehensive in terms of providing
information pertaining to each step of the evidence-based protocol
(with the exception of soliciting questions from the staff person).
Other formats may simply describe one aspect of performance that
was performed particularly proficiently as just indicated. Regardless
of the degree of formality or comprehensiveness though, each format
for providing written feedback should always include a specific de-
scription of some aspect of performance that was performed well (again,
Step 2 of the feedback protocol).
Advantages of Written Feedback. There are several advantages
of providing feedback to staff in written form. The most notable
advantage is that it provides a permanent product of the evaluation of
a staff person’s performance. In turn, having a written copy of a super-
visor’s positive feedback can enhance the importance of the feedback
for a staff person. Many staff maintain their copies of feedback and
periodically review the positive information about their work that the
supervisor took the time to prepare. The increased importance asso-
ciated with written feedback can enhance a staff person’s acceptance
of the feedback and help the staff person feel good about the recog-
nized work performance.
The permanent product inherent in written feedback can also be
useful for supervisors in several ways. In particular, copies of the feed-
back provide information that a supervisor can review periodically to
maintain an up-to-date, objective view of a staff person’s overall work
performance. Relatedly, when a supervisor is having difficulty helping
a staff person improve aspects of work performance, copies of the writ-
ten feedback represent documentation of the supervisor’s attempts to
help the staff person. As will be discussed in Chapter 8 on corrective
management, such documentation can be important if more serious
action is later needed to bring about improvement in work perfor-
mance.
Another advantage of written feedback pertains to supervisor time
and effort involved in providing feedback, and especially for supervi-
sors who work with many staff in different locations. Supervisors can
prepare written feedback for several staff persons and then send the
information through interagency mail or e-mail to each individual.
This process is much quicker relative to supervisors going to each staff
person’s workplace to speak with staff individually to present the feed-
back.
Disadvantages of Written Feedback. There is one primary dis-
advantage of written feedback: it does not involve face-to-face inter-
actions between a supervisor and a staff person as does feedback pro-
vided vocally. As noted earlier, face-to-face interactions are important
for evaluating how a staff person responds to a supervisor’s feedback.
Providing feedback in written form also does not allow a supervisor
an immediate opportunity to solicit information from the staff person
about the feedback that was provided, or for the staff person to seek
clarification if necessary.
Because of the noted disadvantage of written feedback, it is rec-
ommended that supervisors not rely solely or even predominantly on
this means of providing feedback to staff. Written feedback should be
a periodic supplement to feedback presented vocally to staff in face-
to-face interactions. Vocal feedback, and particularly informally pre-
sented vocal feedback, should be the primary means for supervisors
to provide information to staff about their work quality and to support
proficient performance overall.
One way to capitalize on the advantages of both vocal and written
feedback is to provide feedback both ways for a given aspect of staff
performance. This means of providing feedback pertains primarily to
more formal feedback presentations. The supervisor meets with a staff
person, provides vocal feedback in accordance with the feedback pro-
tocol, and then gives the staff person a written summary of what was
just described. The inclusion of the written summary in this manner
often makes the feedback more appreciated by the staff person rela-
tive to just listening to the supervisor’s presentation of the feedback.
The only drawback to combining vocal and written feedback is the
extra time and effort required of supervisors relative to presenting the
feedback in just one of the two ways. Therefore, supervisors will need
to be somewhat judicious in their use of combined vocal and written
feedback. A helpful guideline for when to provide feedback in both
spoken and written formats is to reserve this approach for the most
important aspects of staff performance and those aspects that have
been observed to be especially commendable.

As with presenting positive vocal feedback, supervisors typically
need to take special steps to ensure that providing written feedback
becomes a regular part of the supervisors’ work routine. One means
of facilitating provision of positive written feedback is to develop pre-
pared forms for providing feedback. In this manner, supervisors main-
tain a supply of the forms and on a planned schedule fill out the infor-
mation on one of the forms for a given staff member’s noteworthy per-
formance. The feedback is then sent to the staff member. More
detailed information on this approach to providing written feedback
is provided in Chapter 7 on use of special recognition procedures to
support staff performance. The point of concern here is that the avail-
ability of such forms facilitates the supervisor’s provision of positive
feedback because all a supervisor has to do is complete a form and
send it to a deserving staff member. The availability of prepared forms
can also serve as a prompt or reminder for supervisors to provide pos-
itive written feedback on a regular basis.
Supervisors should routinely acknowledge quality

work of staff in face-to-face interactions, supple-
mented with periodic written commendation.
Special Considerations with Providing Written Feedback. For

written feedback to serve its intended purpose of supporting proficient
performance and enhancing work enjoyment of staff, several consid-
erations warrant attention. A primary consideration is the same as that
described earlier with spoken feedback in terms of sincerity: written
feedback must be sincere on the part of the supervisor and be pre-
sented in a manner that comes across sincerely to the staff person. The
main concern with written feedback in this regard—assuming that the
supervisor is sincere in appreciating quality staff performance—is how
the information is written.
Care must be taken by supervisors to ensure written feedback is
provided accurately. Accuracy is important in two respects. First, the
information must accurately describe some aspect of a staff person’s
work that was performed proficiently such that it warrants commen-
dation. Therefore, the information must be based on a staff person’s

work that the supervisor has observed firsthand to be performed pro-
ficiently. Second, the written information must be accurate in regard
to identifying the staff recipient. The supportive effect of written feed-
back will be diminished significantly or entirely eroded if, for exam-
ple, the supervisor misspells the staff person’s name.
Noting the importance of correctly identifying the staff recipient of
written feedback may appear to be stating the obvious. However,
problems have arisen in a number of cases when a supervisor or
agency executive has actually misspelled a staff person’s name when
providing written feedback. This situation has occurred when super-
visors or executives have become rushed and simply want to get the
feedback notice sent out quickly.
The situation also occurs when a supervisor is not sincerely con-
cerned about staff performance but is required to provide periodic
feedback by agency policy or management. The supervisor does not
take the time to ensure that a staff person’s name is correctly spelled,
or delegates preparation of the written feedback to an assistant who in
turn does not check the accuracy of what is written. The end result is
the staff recipient is given the impression that the supervisor was not
seriously interested in the staff person’s performance. Receipt of the
misinformation actually hinders rather than supports the staff person’s
work motivation, as well as respect for the supervisor.
Another consideration with using written feedback is the frequen-
cy with which the feedback is provided. In a number of agencies, writ-
ten feedback is provided very infrequently to staff. A common exam-
ple is when the only written feedback a staff person receives is through
an annual evaluation of the staff person’s performance that a supervi-
sor prepares. If written feedback is to effectively support proficient
performance and work enjoyment, it must be provided frequently.
Written feedback also must be provided soon after a staff person per-
forms the work duty for which feedback is provided. Annual evalua-
tions are far too infrequent to meet these two criteria.
When written feedback is limited to annual evaluations, the fol-
lowing type of scenario often occurs. The supervisor begins preparing
a staff member’s evaluation in accordance with agency policy requir-
ing an annual review. The supervisor tries to recall the staff person’s
work activities during the preceding year to decide what to address in
the evaluation. Because the supervisor has not frequently evaluated
the performance during the year and provided written feedback, the
resulting evaluation is usually incomplete and not representative of
the individual’s overall performance; the supervisor simply cannot
remember all aspects of how the staff person has performed.
In contrast to the scenario just described, if a supervisor has pro-
vided written feedback frequently during the year, then the supervisor
will be in a much better position to provide an accurate annual eval-
uation. The supervisor can review copies of the written feedback and
use that information to provide a detailed summary of the perfor-
mance covering the entire year. In this manner, frequent written feed-
back serves two important functions. First, it can support the staff per-
son’s performance and work enjoyment when it is provided. Second,
the availability of the written information facilitates the supervisor’s
job of providing an accurate annual evaluation.
Individual Versus Group Feedback

To this point, the discussion on spoken and written feedback has
centered on a supervisor presenting feedback to an individual staff
person regarding that individual’s work performance. Another way to
provide feedback is to present information to a group of staff. For
example, during a staff meeting a supervisor may commend an aspect
of the group’s previous work performance (e.g., “Everybody complet-
ed their client progress notes on time this month. Nice work . . . and
thanks!”). Alternatively, a supervisor might enter the work place of a
group of staff such as a classroom and commend an aspect of what the
group of staff have accomplished (e.g., “You folks have really main-
tained your classroom in a well-organized and attractive manner.”).
Providing feedback to a group of staff has several benefits. In par-
ticular, it is an efficient way for a supervisor to support staff perfor-
mance. The supervisor only has to provide the feedback once to the
entire group relative to providing feedback multiple times for each
staff person. Additionally, commending the performance of a group of
staff can facilitate an atmosphere of cooperation among staff and pro-
mote their support of each other’s work performance. As with pre-
senting positive feedback to individual staff, group feedback can also
help staff feel good about their work performance and enhance their
work enjoyment.
Group feedback also has its disadvantages from a supervisory per-
spective. Most noticeably, providing feedback to a group of staff runs
the risk of presenting information about work performance that may

be partially inaccurate. The most common example is a supervisor
commending the work performance of a group of staff even though all
staff in the group did not proficiently perform the duty of concern.
When a supervisor provides positive feedback to a group of staff
but the performance of one or more staff members does not warrant
commendation, there are multiple problems. In particular, for the staff
persons who did not perform the respective duty proficiently, their
nonproficient performance is in essence being supported by the super-
visor. Consequently, such staff may continue performing the given
duty in a less than acceptable manner.
Commending the work of all staff when some staff did not perform
proficiently also has deleterious effects on the staff who did complete
the duty appropriately. The latter staff are usually aware that some of
their peers did not perform the work as diligently or proficiently as it
should have been performed. The staff whose performance was com-
mendable can resent their peers receiving commendation when the
work of their peers was not so deserving. Such staff also tend to lose
respect for the supervisor because it becomes apparent that the super-
visor is not sufficiently aware of which staff are performing profi-
ciently versus nonproficiently. Each of these features can reduce the
overall supportive effects of feedback presented in a group format.
Because of the issues just summarized, supervisors must be careful
when providing feedback to a group of staff. Group feedback should
not be provided unless supervisors are sure that the performance of
each staff member in the group is sufficiently proficient to warrant posi-
tive feedback. It is only when supervisors are assured that each mem-
ber of the group performed the duty of concern appropriately that
group feedback can be effective in supporting quality staff perfor-
mance.
Supervisors should present positive feedback to a

group of staff only when the supervisor is sure the
performance of each staff member in the group
warrants commendation.
Publicly Posted Feedback

One means of providing feedback that is used in some agencies is
through public posting. Public posting involves providing written feed-
back regarding staff performance in a location where all staff in a
given workplace can view the feedback. For example, a form may be
posted outside a supervisor’s office or on a bulletin board in a hallway
on which information about staff performance is presented. Publicly
posted feedback has been used regarding the performance of individ-
ual staff as well as groups of staff.
The intent behind publicly posted feedback is several-fold. The
primary intent is to commend some aspect of staff performance so
that other staff in the workplace become aware of the commendation.
It is expected that when other staff see the positive comments, they
will provide additional positive feedback to the staff whose perfor-
mance was publicly recognized. In this manner, the staff for whom the
supervisor is providing feedback actually receive multiple commen-
dations (i.e., from the supervisor as well as from other staff who view
the feedback and then provide positive comments).
Another intent of publicly posting feedback is to enhance the sup-
portive impact of the supervisor’s positive feedback for staff. The fact
that the positive feedback is made public can enhance its importance
for the receiving staff. Staff often feel especially good about their per-
formance when the commendable aspects of their work are made
apparent to other agency personnel.
Providing feedback in a publicly posted manner may seem con-
tradictory when considering the concerns noted earlier about respect-
ing the privacy of staff when providing feedback. Posting feedback in
a public place obviously does not maintain privacy of the staff receiv-
ing the feedback. Public posting nonetheless is noted here as a means
of providing feedback because it has been used effectively in some sit-
uations.
Due to the enhanced importance of publicly posted feedback for
staff as just noted, it can be a useful means for supervisors to support
proficient staff performance. However, because of the issue regarding
privacy of staff receiving the feedback, publicly posted feedback must
be used wisely and carefully by supervisors. In particular, public post-
ing should only involve presentation of positive feedback. As discussed
earlier, there are problems associated with providing corrective feed-
back to staff in a way that makes other staff aware of the feedback.
Therefore, information about staff performance that was problematic
or otherwise not proficient generally should not be publicly posted.
Even when publicly posting commendation for staff performance
with positive feedback, special care should be taken. Reasons for con-
cerns with positive feedback presented vocally in a nonprivate man-
ner as discussed earlier are also relevant with public posting. A relat-
ed concern pertains to one of the advantages of publicly posted feed-
back—that of other staff seeing the positive comments about the per-
formance of certain staff and then offering their own commendation
to the latter staff.
The concern with positive feedback that is publicly posted is a
supervisor has no control over what other staff say to the staff whose
performance is addressed with public posting. Although the intent is
for other staff to provide additional commendation, such staff may
provide negative comments to the staff whose performance was
addressed with public posting. The negative nature of the comments
is due to features also discussed previously with presentation of feed-
back in a nonprivate manner (e.g., the staff may be jealous of the staff
whose performance was publicly commended or believe that the lat-
ter staff have been trying to gain special favor with the supervisor in
inappropriate ways).
If publicly posted feedback is provided by a super-

visor, it should be used only after careful considera-
tion and should only present positive feedback
about staff performance.
In consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of publicly

posted feedback, it is generally recommended that this means of pro-
viding feedback be used by supervisors only occasionally if used at all.
Again, when publicly posted feedback is used it should only provide
positive feedback on quality performance. Additionally, publicly post-
ed feedback should only be used when a supervisor is confident that
staff have a good working relationship with each other. If a supervisor
has observed staff behavior that suggests a working relationship may
be problematic because, for example, certain staff criticize other staff,

staff tend to bicker with each other, or various staff complain to the
supervisor about other staff, then public posting would not be recom-
mended.
Immediate Versus Delayed Feedback

The power of positive feedback for supporting proficient staff per-
formance is usually maximized when the feedback is presented imme-
diately after the performance is observed. As discussed in the previous
chapter on performance monitoring, providing feedback immediately
to staff after observing their work also is usually appreciated by staff
and enhances their acceptance of the monitoring. However, supervi-
sors are not always able to provide feedback to staff immediately after
staff performance is observed. Sometimes supervisors do not want to
interrupt ongoing work of staff to provide feedback as also discussed
in the previous chapter. At other times supervisors cannot take the
time to give detailed feedback to staff immediately after observing
staff performance due to competing responsibilities of the supervisors.
When supervisors cannot provide positive feedback immediately
after observing staff work activities, feedback can still be provided
later in a delayed manner. Generally, delayed feedback is usually not as
helpful for supporting staff performance and work enjoyment as
immediate feedback. However, delayed feedback is certainly better
than not providing any feedback.
There is also an advantage to periodically providing delayed feed-
back of a positive nature. When a supervisor returns to the staff work-
place for the sole purpose of providing positive feedback to staff
regarding work behavior that was previously observed, many staff are
appreciative of the supervisor’s efforts. Also, the fact that the supervi-
sor made a special visit or arranged a specific meeting with staff to
provide positive feedback about something that occurred previously,
the importance of the targeted work duty can become heightened for
staff. Staff tend to reason that the duty must be important if it warrants
a special visit or meeting with the supervisor to discuss how they per-
formed the duty. These features can increase the overall supportive
effect of the supervisor’s feedback for the specific area of concern.
Supervisors should strive to provide feedback

immediately after observing staff performance; on
occasion when it is not feasible to provide immedi-
ate feedback, supervisors can still provide feedback
at a later time.
Outcome-Based Feedback
To this point discussion has focused on providing feedback based
on observed staff performance. Feedback can also be presented based
on the outcome of staff work activities. Instead of using the evidence-
based protocol to deliver feedback about how staff have performed a
given work task, the feedback is provided regarding the outcome or
effect of performing the task.
Outcome-based feedback is generally used with two types of staff
work responsibilities. One type pertains to staff duties that result in an
observable change in some aspect of client welfare. The other type
involves staff performance that results in a change in the physical envi-
ronment of the workplace or completion of an observable product.
A common example of providing feedback based on improvement
in client welfare that results from proficient staff performance relates
to client skill development. Staff may be assigned, for example, to
teach certain types of daily living skills to clients with severe intellec-
tual disabilities, such as how to set the table for supper. After desig-
nated staff have been carrying out the teaching program for setting the
table for a week or so, a supervisor may observe that the client is now
setting the table independently at suppertime. The supervisor could
then provide feedback to staff about how well the client is setting the
table. In this situation all feedback steps usually would not be neces-
sary, just a variation of Step 2 in which the appropriate table-setting
activities of the client are described for the responsible staff accom-
panied by commendation for their success in teaching the client.
There are numerous other examples of staff work activities that di-
rectly affect client welfare for which outcome-based, positive feedback
could be provided to staff. Some of the most common include reduc-
tions in a client’s challenging behavior following staff implementation
of the client’s behavior support plan, apparent increases in a client’s
happiness or enjoyment accompanying staff provision of certain leisure

activities, and productive work performance of a client following in-
creases in staff prompting and reinforcing of the client’s work behavior.
There are also a number of staff duties that are expected to result
in a change in the physical work environment for which supervisors
can provide outcome-based feedback. To illustrate, supervisors could
offer positive feedback to staff based on the cleanliness or attractive-
ness of a part of the workplace (e.g., the front porch of a group home,
a classroom, the agency van) for which staff are responsible for the
physical upkeep. Relatedly, many work duties of staff result in a phys-
ical product, such as monthly progress notes or completion of data
sheets regarding the occurrence of challenging behavior. Supervisors
could use outcome-based feedback to support the quality and timeli-
ness of the preparation of these work products by staff. Alternatively,
if there are some problems with the designated work products, out-
come-based feedback could be used to correct how the products are
completed (i.e., carrying out Steps 2 and 3 of the feedback protocol as
well as the other steps as appropriate).
Outcome-based feedback is somewhat indirect relative to feedback
provided based on what staff have been observed to be doing. More
specifically, the feedback is indirectly based on what staff have been
doing by relating to the accomplishment of their work activities.
However, because the accomplishment is a clear result of what staff
have done in the workplace, it is still a useful means of supporting
quality work as well as work enjoyment of staff.
There are a number of advantages of providing feedback to staff
based on the outcome of their work. One advantage is a practical one
for supervisors. Often it is easier for a supervisor to observe the out-
come of staff work to evaluate its quality and then provide positive
feedback relative to observing staff actually performing a task. In the
former situation, the supervisor does not have to be present at the
exact time staff are performing the task of concern. The supervisor
simply checks the outcome of staff work at a time that is convenient
for the supervisor.
A second advantage of outcome-based feedback is that it is some-
times easier for supervisors to provide positive feedback about work
accomplishments in a manner that comes across sincerely to staff.
This is especially the case when supervisors may be uncomfortable
providing positive feedback as described previously. When the feed-
back is based on the outcome of staff work, such as commending fea-

tures of the staff workplace that appear especially attractive, it is typi-
cally rather straightforward—the outcome is usually readily apparent
to both the supervisor and the responsible staff. As such, staff who
may be somewhat uncomfortable receiving commendation for their
work behavior per se are usually not as uncomfortable when a super-
visor commends what they accomplished. In turn, providing feedback
becomes more comfortable for the supervisor because of a more pos-
itive staff reaction to the feedback that is presented.
A third advantage of outcome-based feedback is that at times, the
feedback has heightened supportive effects on staff performance and
work enjoyment. By specifically commending certain features of
something that resulted from staff work efforts, the supervisor makes
those features stand out for staff. The commendation highlights that
staff work performance is having an important outcome. Such feed-
back can impress upon staff that their work is really fulfilling an
important purpose, and that the benefits of what they have accom-
plished are clearly appreciated.
ADVANTAGES OF OUTCOME-BASED FEEDBACK
Provides more supervisor flexibility for providing feed-

back to staff.
Makes it more comfortable for supervisors to provide

feedback to some staff.
Increases the supportive effect of feedback on staff work

proficiency and enjoyment in some cases.
The only drawback to outcome-based feedback is that there are

limitations to how many staff responsibilities can be addressed with
this type of feedback. There are some staff duties that do not result in
readily apparent or quick outcomes. For example, a desired job ex-
pectation may be for staff to interact with adult clients in ways that are
appropriate and dignified for adults. There is not always a clear out-
come of staff interacting in dignified ways with adult clients that super-
visors could observe at a later time in order to provide outcome-based
feedback. Nonetheless, there are many performance responsibilities
of staff that do result in clear outcomes and for those, outcome-based
feedback can be an advantageous way for supervisors to support qual-
ity staff performance and work enjoyment.
Provide Feedback in Multiple Ways

Each of the various ways of providing feedback has its respective
advantages and disadvantages. The advantages and disadvantages
should be considered by supervisors in determining how and how
often to provide each type of feedback. Generally, though, supervisors
should provide informal, vocal feedback to staff every day. More for-
mal vocal feedback should be provided on an as-needed basis follow-
ing the guidelines previously presented. Supervisors can also supple-
ment their vocal feedback with the other ways of providing positive
feedback on a less frequent basis.
Supervisors who are very successful in supporting proficient work
performance of staff as well as staff enjoyment with their work usual-
ly provide positive feedback in multiple ways. Again, most of the feed-
back is presented to staff informally in a face-to-face manner. How-
ever, supplementing the usual vocal feedback with other ways of pre-
senting feedback as just noted has some special benefits.
One noted benefit is that as feedback is provided to staff in differ-
ent ways, the supportive effect of the feedback tends to be enhanced.
Because the feedback is presented in a different way than usual, it
tends to evoke increased attention among staff—due in large part to its
relative novelty. Additionally, providing feedback in multiple ways can
facilitate the supervisor’s job of presenting feedback in a manner that
comes across sincerely to staff relative to always providing feedback
in the same way. Each way of providing feedback requires different
actions on the part of the supervisor and reduces the likelihood that
the supervisor’s feedback will appear rote or repetitive.
1. A critical component of successful supervision is supervisors routinely

taking active steps to support proficient work performance of staff.
2. Providing positive feedback to staff is the most readily available, effective

means for a supervisor to support proficient staff performance and
enhance staff enjoyment with their work.
3. A basic, evidence-based protocol for providing formal feedback involves:

(1) beginning the feedback session with a positive or empathetic state-
ment, (2) specifying what staff performed correctly, (3) specifying what
staff performed incorrectly, if applicable, (4) specifying what staff need to
do to correct the performance noted in Step 3, (5) soliciting questions
from staff about the information provided, (6) informing staff about sub-
sequent supervisory actions regarding the target staff performance, and
(7) ending the feedback session with a positive or empathetic statement.
4. For supervisor feedback to be effective, supervisors must be skilled in the

staff work duty for which feedback is provided and skilled in the process
of providing feedback.
5. Feedback can be provided by supervisors in multiple ways, including

vocally in both a formal and informal manner, in written form, in a
group and individual format, publicly posted, in an immediate and
delayed manner, and based on the outcome of staff performance.
Supervisors should be familiar with the advantages and disadvantages
of each type of feedback and use each type accordingly.
6. Generally, supervisors should provide informal positive feedback in face-

to-face interactions with individual staff as their primary means of sup-
porting staff performance, supplemented with other types of feedback on
a periodic basis.
Chapter 7
SUPPORTING PROFICIENT
WORK PERFORMANCE:
SPECIAL RECOGNITION PROCEDURES
A s stressed in the previous chapter, providing positive feedback is

the most effective means for supervisors to routinely support both
quality performance and work enjoyment among staff. Supervisors
should provide positive feedback to at least some staff in informal,
face-to-face interactions every day. More formal feedback such as with
the evidence-based protocol should also be provided in face-to-face
interactions on a regular basis, though not as frequently as informal
feedback. These two ways of providing feedback should be periodi-
cally supplemented with positive feedback provided in written form.
Other types of feedback, such as in a group format (versus individu-
ally presented), in a delayed manner, and through public posting can
be provided on occasion as well.
Another means for supervisors to supplement routinely provided,
informal feedback is through special recognition procedures. Special
recognition procedures include both formal and informal ways to sup-
port quality performance and work enjoyment. Formal ways general-
ly involve special recognition awards that represent public recognition for
quality work performance. Informal ways involve special recognition
actions taken by a supervisor in a private manner with individual staff.
Many agencies have various types of special recognition awards.
These are represented, for example, by presenting selected staff with an
“Employee of the Year Award,” an “Outstanding Client-Instructor
Award,” or “Perfect Attendance Award.” Presentation of the various
awards often occurs with a special ceremony to honor the award recip-
ient. In contrast, special recognition actions are much less ceremonious,
127
involving a supervisor doing something special to privately recognize

commendable performance of a staff member. To illustrate, a supervi-
sor may unexpectedly request a staff person to report to the supervisor’s
office. When the staff person arrives at the office, the supervisor then
explains that the sole reason for the meeting is to express appreciation
and commendation for an aspect of the person’s work performance.
Before describing these and other ways supervisors can provide
special recognition for staff accomplishments, two critical considera-
tions warrant mention to ensure the procedures are used effectively.
The first consideration is that the procedures must be used as a peri-
odic supplement to more routine supportive actions. In particular, spe-
cial recognition procedures should be used in a manner that periodi-
cally supplements frequent presentation of informal feedback in face-
to-face interactions with staff.
Most special recognition procedures by their nature occur infre-
quently (e.g., an “Employee of the Year Award” is only going to occur
once per year). The infrequency of the procedures means that they are
likely to have minimal effect on routine, day-to-day staff performance.
As indicated in the last chapter, supportive actions taken by a super-
visor need to occur immediately or soon after the performance that
the supervisor is intending to support. Additionally, such actions must
occur frequently if the actions are to motivate staff to continue per-
forming in a proficient manner.
Another feature of most special recognition procedures that mini-
mizes their effectiveness for supporting daily staff performance is the
limited number of staff whose performance is specially recognized.
The procedures usually are provided for only one or a small number
of staff at a time (e.g., generally only a very small number of staff will
be recognized as employees of the year for a given year). Therefore,
the work performance and enjoyment of staff who do not receive the
special recognition will likely be unaffected.
Special recognition procedures should not be the

primary means for supervisors to support staff work
performance or enjoyment; special recognition
should periodically supplement routine provision
of informal, positive feedback.
The second consideration regarding special recognition proce-

dures pertains to the effects that the procedures do have on staff per-
formance and work enjoyment. Although the procedures usually have
limited impact on everyday work behavior, they can have a significant
impact on staff behavior immediately after the procedures are imple-
mented. When staff work accomplishments are specially recognized,
either formally with an award or more informally by a supervisor, staff
motivation can be enhanced significantly. Most noticeably, staff typi-
cally are very appreciative when they receive special recognition for
their performance. Although this effect is usually short-lived, it never-
theless helps staff feel good about their work at least for a while.
Because feeling good about one’s work can enhance work motivation,
special recognition procedures represent one thing a supervisor can
occasionally do to support staff performance and work enjoyment.
The considerations just noted will be discussed in more detail as
various ways to provide special recognition are presented. The point
of concern here is that special recognition procedures can be effective
ways for supervisors to occasionally support work performance and
enjoyment when used on a supplemental basis as just described. In
some agencies, special recognition procedures and particularly special
awards are viewed as the primary means of supporting staff perfor-
mance. Agency executives tout the procedures as indication that they
strongly support the performance of front-line staff. The latter view,
though well intended, is misconceived and generally will do little to
ensure quality staff performance on a day-to-day basis.
SPECIAL RECOGNITION AWARDS
Special recognition awards can be provided on an agency-wide

basis or just for a supervisor’s own staff contingent. Initially, a decision
must be made by agency executives or supervisors regarding the type
of performance to be recognized with an award. A useful guideline for
making such decisions is to focus the awards on performance areas
that relate most directly to client attainment of desired outcomes. For
example, in educationally related agencies such as schools and adult
education programs, desired student or client outcomes typically
involve acquisition of functional skills. Consequently, an area of staff
performance that would be appropriate to recognize with a special
award is success in teaching designated skills to students or clients

(e.g., “Instructor of the Month Award”).
Another initial decision necessary for implementing special recog-
nition awards is how often the awards will be presented. Usually, the
awards should be provided on a preplanned schedule, such as month-
ly, quarterly, or annually. Occasionally, the awards also can be provid-
ed on an impromptu or unscheduled basis when a staff person has
done a particularly commendable job with the performance addressed
by a special award (e.g., a staff person has successfully taught an im-
portant skill to a client who historically has had difficulty learning new
skills).
To ensure that awards for quality performance have a truly special
meaning for staff, they usually should involve presentation of a cer-
tificate or plaque that formally recognizes the target performance. Pre-
sentation of certificates or plaques also can be accompanied by mon-
etary awards or special gifts. However, the latter components require
increased financial investment that can be difficult to maintain over
long periods of time. If it is expected that monetary awards and gifts
cannot be provided with the special awards on a consistent and long-
term basis, then generally they should not be used. When a compo-
nent of special awards has to be discontinued due to financial or relat-
ed considerations, the impact of the awards for staff recipients can be
diminished relative to when the extra components previously accom-
panied the awards for other staff.
For special recognition awards to be a useful supplement to rou-
tine provision of feedback for supporting staff performance and work
enjoyment, two key steps must be taken. The first step is to ensure that
presentation of an award is clearly based on specified performance of
the staff recipient. Supervisors must have accurate information that
the recipient clearly has performed designated duties in a quality man-
ner. If special recognition awards are not clearly based on quality per-
formance, they will not have a supportive effect on desired work be-
havior and may actually promote nonproficient performance.
The second step a supervisor must take is to ensure the perfor-
mance basis of the awards is made apparent to all staff in an agency.
Otherwise, staff may develop inaccurate views regarding why a given
staff person received an award. To illustrate, if staff are not aware of
the work accomplishments of their peer who received an award, they
may believe that the peer has a special relationship with a supervisor
that has nothing to do with quality performance (e.g., the award recip-
ient has a social or familial relationship with the supervisor). When
the latter situation occurs, presentation of the award can have delete-
rious effects on staff whose performance seems more deserving rela-
tive to the work accomplishments of the award recipient. The former
staff tend to view the supervisor’s actions as representing concern for
the supervisor’s relationship with the award recipient and not for qual-
ity work behavior of staff. The end result is the award can actually
diminish staff motivation to perform their duties proficiently.
Special recognition awards should be made based

on performance accomplishments of staff and the per-
formance basis of the awards should be made appar-
ent to all of an agency’s staff.
Peer Awards
One type of special recognition award that warrants additional
consideration by supervisors to ensure a supportive effect on staff per-
formance is peer awards. Peer awards involve a group of staff deter-
mining, usually through a voting process, which of their peers should
receive a special performance award. When a staff person receives a
special award based on the opinion of the person’s peers, the sup-
portive effect of the award can be particularly powerful for the staff
person. Many people are especially appreciative of being recognized
by their peers for work accomplishments.
The specific consideration warranting attention by supervisors
with peer awards is that supervisors cannot control what influences
the peer basis of the award. Although the intent is for staff to recog-
nize a peer for work accomplishments, staff may base their recom-
mendation on other factors such as social popularity. Therefore, super-
visors must take care in setting up the award process to require staff
to nominate a peer for a special award with a clear indication of why
the peer’s work accomplishments are deserving of the award.
Formal Staff Appreciation Events

Many agencies recognize staff performance through formal staff
appreciation events. Common examples include holding a “Staff Ap-
preciation Day,” providing a “Staff Appreciation Luncheon,” or hav-
ing a “Staff Appreciation Party.” Sometimes the appreciation events
include presentation of special recognition awards as described in the
previous section. In other cases, the event itself is considered to rep-
resent an award for staff accomplishments.
Generally, staff appreciation events have the same benefits as spe-
cial recognition awards. However, one benefit tends to stand out with
formal appreciation events: a considerable amount of staff enjoyment
is often generated within the workplace. Although the enjoyment is
usually limited in time to the actual occurrence of the event, and per-
haps for a few days in anticipation of the event, the enjoyment is
nonetheless significant.
Staff appreciation events also share the same limitation as special
recognition awards: the events rarely impact staff work proficiency
and enjoyment on a day-to-day basis due to their infrequency. Because
the events are conducted with groups of staff, either on an agency-
wide scale or for a supervisor’s contingent of staff, the events also
share the same risks as presenting positive feedback in a group man-
ner. Specifically, appreciation may be provided to some staff within
the group whose performance has not been worthy of recognition.
In some cases, the risk of expressing appreciation for staff whose
performance is not deserving of commendation is considered irrele-
vant by supervisors who sponsor the appreciation events. The rea-
soning is that staff should be shown appreciation because they are part
of an agency and their participation in providing the agency’s services
should be recognized (regardless of potential concerns with the spe-
cific work performance of some staff). Such reasoning is risky, as it can
provide the impression that staff work activities are appreciated re-
gardless of whether or not work performance is of an acceptable qual-
ity.
Despite the risks associated with formal appreciation events for
staff, such events can be a useful means of occasionally enhancing staff
enjoyment with their work situation. The events can also increase staff
appreciation for the supervisors who sponsor or help sponsor the
events. Formal appreciation events can be especially useful in this
respect when it is clear that all staff have contributed something worth-
while to a particular service component within an agency.
Formal appreciation events for staff should be considered in light
of their benefits and potential detriments for supporting staff perfor-
mance and enjoyment. An additional consideration pertains to the
amount of time and effort (and potential financial cost) for supervisors
to sponsor the events. Typically, a significant amount of supervisor
time and effort, as well as that of other agency personnel, is necessary
to sponsor an event for which staff are truly appreciative. This is
another reason formal appreciation events should be a supplement to
more routine means of supporting staff performance and work enjoy-
ment, and should be provided only occasionally.
Formal staff appreciation events generally increase

staff work enjoyment for a circumscribed period of
time but do little to impact everyday work profi-
ciency.
Performance Lotteries
A rather unique way to provide special recognition awards is
through performance lotteries. A performance lottery involves the fol-
lowing basic process. A criterion of acceptable performance initially is
established in regard to completing a certain work task. Next, staff
performance of the task is formally monitored on a regular basis. On
a set schedule, such as monthly, the monitoring results are reviewed
and a determination is made regarding the staff whose performance
met the established criterion. The names of the latter staff subsequent-
ly are placed into the lottery and one or more names are randomly
drawn to represent the lottery winners. Finally, the lottery winners are
provided with a preferred item, activity, or privilege. To illustrate, var-
ious agencies have provided winners of performance lotteries with gift
certificates for local stores or restaurants, opportunities to be relieved
of a chosen work task for a period of time (usually to be performed by
the supervisor for the staff person), and desired work schedules or pre-
ferred parking places for a specified time period.
An example of how a performance lottery can be used pertains to

staff completion of client teaching duties. The rationale for the lottery
may be that client teaching is considered highly important given the
mission of the agency, but a number of staff are not completing as
many client teaching sessions as desired on a monthly basis. A crite-
rion would be established to determine the goal for number of teach-
ing sessions to complete each month. Next, staff teaching performance
would be monitored on a regular basis to determine how many of the
desired teaching sessions are completed for a given month. The names
of all staff who completed the criterion number of sessions would go
into the lottery at the end of the month and a small sample of the
names would be randomly drawn. The lottery winners would then re-
ceive designated awards for their performance.
There is a relatively substantial body of evidence supporting the
effects of performance lotteries on increasing designated areas of staff
work proficiency. Performance lotteries have received attention in this
respect for two reasons. One reason is that the process establishes de-
sirable consequences for specific areas of proficient performance (i.e.,
the items, activities, or privileges provided to lottery winners). In turn,
the chance to receive desired consequences can help motivate staff to
perform the specified duties in a proficient manner.
The second reason for attention given to performance lotteries is
that they can be an efficient and cost-effective means of supporting
quality performance. The desired consequences do not have to be
provided to all staff whose performance meets the quality criterion,
only to the lottery winners. This can be especially advantageous when
the consequences involve a significant financial cost to provide. Ad-
ditionally, there may be a limited number of designated consequences,
such as preferred parking places, such that the consequences could
not be provided to all or many staff.
As with all special recognition awards, there are also some notable
disadvantages with performance lotteries. One disadvantage is that
only a small proportion of staff actually receive the desired consequences
even if many staff meet the performance criterion. Over time, perfor-
mance quality of staff who do not win the lottery may diminish as the
staff lose motivation for trying to win the lottery based on their work
efforts.
Another disadvantage is that performance lotteries have some-
times been viewed as somewhat artificial or condescending by staff.
Some staff tend to view lotteries as more of a gimmick by supervisors

relative to true concern for supporting quality work. Operating per-
formance lotteries on a regular basis also can require considerable
time and effort on the part of supervisors.
Again, as with all recognition awards, use of performance lotteries
to support staff performance and work enjoyment should be consid-
ered in light of their advantages and disadvantages. In considering a
performance lottery in this regard, one other advantage warrants at-
tention. When used as a supplement to more frequent, informal ways
of supporting staff performance, lotteries can have a somewhat special
effect on workplace enjoyment. Because of the novel nature of lotter-
ies within a work setting, they can generate some enthusiasm and ex-
citement among staff. If upon trying a performance lottery a supervi-
sor observes such a reaction among staff, then there would be support
for continuing the lottery procedure. If such a positive reaction is not
observed, or if a more negative reaction is apparent in terms of staff
opinions of the lottery as just illustrated, then the lottery probably
should be discontinued.
Various types of special recognition awards should

be considered in light of the respective advantages
and disadvantages associated with their use.
SPECIAL RECOGNITION ACTIONS
As indicated earlier, special recognition actions refer to ways

supervisors can interact privately with a staff person to provide par-
ticularly noteworthy commendation for quality performance. These
ways of specially recognizing staff work accomplishments are much
more informal than use of special recognition awards. Nevertheless,
the special actions represent means of providing positive feedback that
generally have heightened significance for staff relative to more rou-
tine ways of providing feedback.
Special recognition actions generally have the same advantages
and disadvantages as special awards for supporting proficient perfor-
mance and helping staff feel good about their work. However, infor-
mal actions taken by supervisors to specially recognize staff perfor-

mance usually have more of an impact on supporting routine work be-
havior than special awards. The greater impact of special recognition
actions occurs because they can be provided more often than special
awards and they can be provided more quickly in response to com-
mendable performance.
The following sections describe a number of supervisory actions
for providing special recognition for proficient staff performance. The
ways to be described are by no means exhaustive. Successful supervi-
sors usually are effective in creating their own means of specially rec-
ognizing commendable performance.
Supervisors should decide how to specially recognize staff perfor-
mance based on what they are comfortable with and how staff re-
spond to various recognition procedures. The following special recog-
nition actions are meant only as a guide for supervisors. They are pre-
sented here because a number of experienced supervisors have found
the respective ways to be particularly effective for supporting staff pro-
ficiency and helping staff feel good about their work.
Special Recognition Meetings

Earlier it was noted that one way a supervisor can provide positive
feedback in a special manner is to unexpectedly request a staff person
to report to the supervisor’s office. When the staff person arrives at the
office, the supervisor then informs the staff person that the sole reason
for the meeting is to commend a particular aspect of the person’s per-
formance. This means of providing positive feedback is referred to as
a special recognition meeting. Arranging a meeting with a staff person for
the exclusive purpose of recognizing the individual’s work accom-
plishment tends to heighten the importance of the recognition. It usu-
ally becomes apparent to the staff person that the supervisor sincere-
ly appreciates the performance accomplishment because the supervi-
sor took the time to arrange the meeting just to commend the indi-
vidual’s performance.
Special recognition meetings can also be especially appreciated by
staff because the purpose of such meetings stands in stark contrast to
why supervisors call impromptu meetings with staff in many agencies.
Often when staff are notified that their supervisor wants to meet with
them, the initial reaction of staff is one of apprehension—staff expect
that the supervisor has concerns about some aspect of their work. This
typically occurs in those agencies characterized by a negative man-
agement style.
As indicated previously, when agencies are operated in a predom-
inantly negative manner, management attention usually focuses on
problematic staff performance and good performance receives mini-
mal recognition. Therefore, when informed that a supervisor needs to
meet with staff, the staff suspect that something is wrong and criticism
is forthcoming. When staff subsequently become aware that the pur-
pose of the meeting is not to discuss problematic issues but to ac-
knowledge good performance, however, two beneficial effects result.
First, staff are relieved that their work is not being criticized. Second,
staff tend to feel good about their performance that is commended,
and appreciate their supervisor’s expression of commendation.
An alternative and more efficient way to conduct a special recog-
nition meeting is for the meeting to take place in conjunction with a
regularly scheduled meeting that occurs for another purpose. For
example, a supervisor may hold a meeting to inform staff of an up-
coming agency event and at the end of the meeting, request a staff per-
son to meet a few extra minutes with the supervisor. The supervisor
then indicates that the purpose of meeting privately with the staff per-
son is to express appreciation or commendation for some aspect of
the person’s performance. Positive feedback is then presented that
specifies precisely what the staff person has done that warrants special
commendation.
Taking Home the Goods

One effect of special recognition meetings as just described is that
they can change traditionally negative events for staff into positive
events. Specifically, what staff initially expect to be an unpleasant
meeting with a supervisor (i.e., to discuss something problematic with
their work) actually becomes a pleasant meeting (a supervisor’s ex-
pression of commendation for a job well done). Turning traditionally
negative events in the staff workplace into positive events represents a
particularly effective means of supporting work performance and
enjoyment.
As suggested previously, one means of enhancing the amount of
enjoyment staff experience with their jobs is for supervisors to active-
ly strive to increase the good aspects of staffs’ work situation and de-
crease the bad aspects. In essence, the more positive events a super-
visor can make happen for staff in lieu of negative events, the more
enjoyable the work environment becomes for staff. Additionally, when
positive events provided by a supervisor occur in response to good
work performance, the supervisor’s actions can support staff in con-
tinuing to perform their work duties in a proficient manner.
A means of turning negative aspects of the staff work routine into
positive events in addition to special recognition meetings involves what
is referred to as taking home the goods. There is a rather common view
in the human services that staff should not take work home with them.
This actually means that staff should not let negative or unpleasant
events at work impede their quality of life when not at work—staff
should not take home the bad aspects of a job. A typical example is
when staff have an unpleasant experience at work and then tend to
focus on the bad work experience while at home. Staff may worry
about what happened at work, or experience frustration or anger
about something that happened. The more staff think about the neg-
ative job experience, the worse it makes them feel.
Thinking about the bad aspects of work while at home, or “taking
home the bad” as referred to here, is usually not a pleasant situation
for staff. Supervisors can turn the situation around by helping staff
take home the good aspects of a job. Specifically, an opportune time
for a supervisor to meet with a staff person to provide positive feed-
back about work performance is immediately before the staff person
leaves work for the day. When the last thing that happens for a staff
person before leaving work is that the supervisor sought out the staff
person for the sole purpose of commending the person’s work perfor-
mance, the person’s workday ends on an upbeat or pleasant note.
In the situation just described, if a staff person does think about
work when at home, it is likely the staff person will focus at least in
part on the last event that happened at work—the positive things the
supervisor made a special effort to say about the individual’s work.
This process can help the staff person feel good about the job. Again,
it represents a means of turning a potentially negative experience of
being discontented about work while at home into a pleasant experi-
ence associated with thinking about the supervisor’s positive feedback.
An opportune time for supervisors to provide posi-

tive feedback and help staff feel good about their
work is immediately before staff leave the job site at
the end of the workday.
Receiving the Goods at Home

Another way to turn something that is often negative for staff into
something positive is referred to as receiving the goods at home. A num-
ber of jobs in the human services require supervisors to occasionally
contact staff at home regarding a work issue. A common example is
in residential settings in which a supervisor has to call a staff member
at home to request the person come to work on an unscheduled basis.
Typically, this situation occurs when another staff member has not
reported to work as scheduled and the supervisor needs a replacement
staff person to maintain adequate coverage for client services. Receiv-
ing such a call at home is often a negative or unpleasant experience
for a staff person. The individual’s home or personal routine is unex-
pectedly altered when the staff person is informed about needing to
report to work on an unplanned basis.
Many supervisors know first-hand the negative reaction that can
result from receiving work e-mails, texts, or calls at home. A number
of supervisors, and particularly those in residential settings, are often
contacted at home due to a problematic situation at work for which
the supervisor’s assistance is needed to resolve. Responding to such
contacts, and especially if the supervisor has to report to the work site
to resolve the problem, disrupts the supervisor’s home life and is fre-
quently an unpleasant event. Again, a similar reaction occurs among
staff when a supervisor contacts them at home.
Supervisors can turn the negative reaction staff often experience
when contacted at home about work into a more positive reaction.
Specifically, supervisors can contact a staff person at home for the sole
purpose of expressing commendation for something the staff person
performed at work. Relatedly, the supervisor may contact the staff per-
son when there is good news for the staff person such as, for example,
a staff member’s special request for a desired vacation has been
approved.
When staff receive a contact from work that provides good news
or is otherwise positive in nature, the contact usually represents an un-
expectedly pleasant event for staff that is associated with their job. Re-
ceiving good news in this manner is often appreciated by staff. Staff
are also frequently appreciative of the supervisor’s actions in this re-
gard, which can help staff feel good about working for the supervisor
and about the job in general.
Contacting staff at home to commend performance or present
good news of some type should be done carefully and on an infre-
quent basis. Although the contact usually represents an unexpectedly
pleasant event for staff, it can still disrupt the home or personal rou-
tine of staff, albeit only briefly. This process should generally be done
only when there is particularly good news to present. It can also be
beneficial in situations when a supervisor desired to provide special
commendation for noteworthy performance that the supervisor
observed, but did not have time to meet with the staff person before
the individual left work. The supervisor can apologize for contacting
the person at home but indicate that the person’s actions at work were
sincerely appreciated and the supervisor did not want to let the
actions go unrecognized.
Saying Good Things Behind the Back

Still another way for supervisors to turn traditionally negative ex-
periences at work into positive experiences for staff is saying good things
about a staff person’s performance behind the back. The world of work is in
some ways like many other social situations in which a group of peo-
ple interact with each other. One relatively common occurrence in
social situations is that some people tend to say negative things about
a person when the individual is not present; they engage in negative
gossip by saying bad things behind the person’s back. Supervisors can
turn this type of situation around by saying good things about a staff
person’s work accomplishments when the staff person is not present—
the supervisor says good things behind the person’s back.
When a supervisor commends a staff person’s performance when
the person is not present, two beneficial outcomes often result. First,
the supervisor is describing a specific type of work behavior that the
supervisor values. When the staff who are present hear the supervi-
sor’s description of valued performance, it can serve to prompt those
staff to perform the designated duty in the described manner. Second,

usually the staff person whose performance was commended eventu-
ally becomes aware of the supervisor’s positive comments.
It is well known in many human service organizations that the
informal communication processes among staff are more effective for
disseminating information than formal communication channels
between management and staff. When a staff person hears from other
staff the good things a supervisor said to those staff about the person’s
work, the person usually feels good about the work accomplishments.
Relatedly, hearing about the supervisor’s positive comments can have
a supportive effect on the staff person’s likelihood of continuing to per-
form the commended duties in a proficient manner.
A related means of specially recognizing a staff person’s work
accomplishments is by saying good things about the person’s perfor-
mance to executive personnel when the person is not present. De-
scribing a staff person’s quality work to executives can help establish
a good reputation for the staff person among executive personnel.
Additionally, in a number of cases, executives themselves will then
relay to the staff person the commendation that the supervisor
expressed. The end result is the staff person receives positive feedback
from people who are considered especially influential and important
in the agency. Receiving feedback in this manner can have supportive
effects on promoting the staff person’s continued performance and
helping the staff person feel good about the performance.
In considering saying good things about a staff person’s perfor-
mance when the staff person is not present, it should be noted that the
process essentially involves providing feedback in a public manner.
Therefore, all of the cautions noted in the previous chapter about pro-
viding feedback publicly warrant attention by supervisors before com-
mending a staff person’s performance to other staff or agency execu-
tives. Nonetheless, when presented in a thoughtful manner by super-
visors, this means of providing positive feedback can have special im-
portance for many staff.
Supervisors can promote work enjoyment among

staff by actively striving to decrease bad events in
the staff workplace and increase good events.
Stand-up Supervision
A means of supporting proficient performance that is related to say-
ing good things about a staff person’s work to executives when the staff
person is not present is stand-up supervision. In many agencies executive
personnel receive negative information about a staff member’s work that
is inaccurate. The information may be inaccurate due to any number of
reasons. To illustrate, the information may be exchanged through sev-
eral individuals before reaching an executive and in the process become
distorted. Additionally, someone may not be knowledgeable about what
a staff person is doing and inaccurately judge the activity to be prob-
lematic. In other cases, someone may simply have malicious intent due
to personal differences with the staff person and want to present the per-
son in an unfavorable light to upper management.
When a supervisor becomes aware that an executive has received
inaccurate information and formed a negative impression of a staff
person’s performance, the supervisor must act to correct the impres-
sion. Supervisors can act to correct an executive’s inaccurate percep-
tion of a staff member’s work proficiency by “standing up” for the staff
person. Supervisors should clearly express to the executive that the
impression is inaccurate or not representative of the staff person’s typ-
ical work behavior. The intent is to prevent the executive from giving
inaccurate, negative feedback to the staff person or otherwise impos-
ing negative sanctions that are unwarranted.
By standing up for a staff person’s work performance, the supervi-
sor can prevent a negative event from occurring with the staff person.
Specifically, the supervisor prevents the person from unwarranted neg-
ative actions that the executive may initiate. This process does not
directly support the staff person’s proficient performance in terms of
promoting continuation of the performance, but it does prevent action
that could diminish proficient work. When staff receive negative feed-
back or related sanctions for work that is proficient, the ultimate effect
is to diminish their overall motivation to work proficiently. It does not
matter if the staff person is unaware of the supervisor standing up for
the staff person’s performance and preventing the negative sanctions.
What matters is that the staff person’s good work performance is not
erroneously criticized by management.
Stand-up supervision as just described is an important responsibil-
ity of supervisors. However, it can be a difficult responsibility for
supervisors to fulfill in some situations. Some executives are not
pleased to be informed by a supervisor that their views are not accu-

rate (in this case their views regarding a particular staff person’s work
proficiency or lack thereof). Nonetheless, because of the detrimental
effect of staff receiving inaccurate, negative sanctions when their work
does not deserve such, supervisors must stand up for good work per-
formance of staff.
When standing up for staff performance, it is critical that supervisors
have direct knowledge of how well individual staff are performing their
duties. This represents another reason for frequent monitoring of staff
performance as discussed in previous chapters—monitoring is the best
way to maintain up-to-date knowledge regarding the quality of staff
work. Supervisors should only stand up for performance of their staff
when the supervisors are certain the performance warrants support.
If supervisors stand up for performance just to support their staff
in general regardless of the proficiency of staff performance, over time
executive personnel will devalue the supervisors’ opinions. Executives
will become aware that no matter how poorly certain staff perform,
for example, a supervisor will likely support the staff in interactions
with the executives. In contrast, when supervisors only stand up for
good work performance, executives will become aware of the appro-
priateness of the supervisors’ representation of staff work quality and
tend to listen more carefully to the supervisors’ opinions.
WAYS SUPERVISORS CAN TURN

NEGATIVE WORKPLACE EVENTS
FOR STAFF INTO POSITIVE EVENTS
1. Limit specially called meetings for discussing problems

with staff performance; periodically hold unexpected
meetings solely to provide positive feedback to staff
about work performance.
2. Strive to help staff avoid taking home bad aspects of

work; help staff take home the good aspects by provid-
ing positive feedback about work performance immedi-
ately prior to staff leaving work at the end of the work
shift.
3. Refrain as much as possible from contacting staff at

home to discuss problematic work issues; occasionally
contact staff at home to provide good news about work.
4. Avoid discussing problematic issues about a staff per-

son’s performance “behind the person’s back”; periodi-
cally commend the person’s performance to other
agency personnel when the person is not present.
5. Do not let agency executives form inaccurate, negative

impressions about a staff person’s work behavior; “stand
up” for the individual’s appropriate performance by
attempting to correct the inaccurate impressions of
executives.
Relief of Duty
One of the nicest ways supervisors can take action to specially rec-
ognize noteworthy staff performance is through relief of duty. This pro-
cess involves a supervisor providing a staff person with temporary
relief from performing an especially demanding task that the staff per-
son has persisted in performing proficiently. The supervisor acknowl-
edges the staff person’s efforts and indicates that because of the spe-
cial efforts, the supervisor has found a way for the task to be com-
pleted by someone else to give the staff person a temporary break.
An illustration of how relief of duty can occur pertains to when a
staff person is working with a client who is having a noticeably diffi-
cult time. The client may be engaging in a high rate of disruptive
behavior, for example, that requires considerable effort by the staff
person to remediate. The supervisor, upon becoming aware of the
staff person’s extra work effort, indicates that such effort is seriously
appreciated and the staff person deserves a break from the routine.
The supervisor then provides relief by assigning another staff person
to work with the client, or the supervisor works with the client for a
period of time while the staff person works on a less demanding task.
Providing relief of duty in a manner as just indicated obviously
requires some planning and time on the part of the supervisor and is
not always possible. Consequently, this means of providing special

recognition for staff work accomplishments usually cannot occur very
frequently. When a supervisor can provide temporary relief following
particularly effortful work, however, it is typically well appreciated by
staff. It also tends to indicate that the supervisor is aware of staff work
efforts and is sincerely concerned about their work. Such effects can
help promote continued diligence and help staff feel good about their
work efforts.
USING MONEY FOR SPECIAL RECOGNITION
There is a common view in human service agencies that the most

effective way to promote quality performance and enjoyment among
staff is to reward good performance with pay raises and other mone-
tary compensation. Money is of course important and it certainly can
affect staff motivation. However, the effects of monetary compensation
are usually circumscribed. The amount of pay staff receive typically
affects whether they initially accept a job in a human service agency,
and whether they leave the job for other employment. In contrast,
salary levels and other financial compensation often have little effect
on day-to-day staff performance or work enjoyment.
The lack of effect of monetary compensation on staff work activi-
ties is due to one primary reason: pay levels rarely change sufficient-
ly frequently to impact routine performance. Relatedly, supervisors of
direct support staff usually do not have the capability of providing fre-
quent pay raises to staff. As stressed previously, to effectively impact
day-to-day work behavior, supportive actions of supervisors must oc-
cur frequently and in close proximity to the staff performance that
warrants support. In most agencies, supervisors usually cannot pro-
vide special monetary compensation in this manner.
Monetary compensation usually affects whether

staff accept jobs in human service agencies and
whether they leave current jobs for other employ-
ment; amount of compensation rarely impacts daily
work performance or enjoyment.
Frequently, the only time supervisors have any control over pay
raises for staff is on an annual basis as part of formal performance
reviews. In these cases, supervisors may be able to provide pay raises
to deserving staff or at least recommend to agency executives who
should receive the raises. Even the availability of annual pay raises is
not very consistent in many agencies, though, due to factors beyond
supervisor control such as the agency’s current financial status. In
short, supervisors generally should not count on the availability of
monetary compensation to provide special recognition for proficient
staff performance on a regular basis.
In those relatively infrequent cases when supervisors have access
to providing extra compensation for staff, then all the guidelines for
providing special recognition awards as described earlier should be
followed. Most importantly, supervisors should have good records of
the quality of each staff person’s work performance based on frequent
monitoring of the performance. The extra compensation should then
be provided based on quality performance that has been objectively
observed and documented.
1. Special recognition procedures including formal awards and informal

actions taken by supervisors can be an effective, periodic supplement to
more routine provision of positive feedback for supporting staff perfor-
mance and workplace enjoyment.
2. Special recognition awards should always be based on well-documented

performance accomplishments of staff and the performance basis of the
awards should be made apparent to all agency staff.
3. Some special recognition awards such as peer awards and staff appreci-
ation events can support staff work proficiency and enjoyment for a cir-
cumscribed period of time but generally do little to impact routine, day-
to-day work activities of staff.
4. Different types of special recognition awards should be considered in

light of their respective advantages and disadvantages for supporting
staff work proficiency and enjoyment.
5. Supervisors should take special actions to occasionally support quality

work performance and staff enjoyment on an informal basis, such as
with impromptu recognition meetings, helping staff “take home the good
aspects of the job,” providing good news for staff while away from work,
“saying good things about staff performance behind their backs,” stand-
ing up for good staff performance with executive personnel, and provid-
ing temporary relief from performing especially demanding tasks.
6. Supervisors should strive to promote work enjoyment among staff by

decreasing bad events in the staff work routine and increasing good
events.
7. Due to typically infrequent opportunities to follow commendable staff

performance with monetary compensation, supervisors should not count
on use of money as a means of motivating day-to-day work proficiency of
staff or their work enjoyment.
Chapter 8
CORRECTING NONPROFICIENT
WORK PERFORMANCE
E very supervisor in the human services faces issues with problem-

atic staff performance at times. Problems with work performance
may be extremely serious and require immediate action to resolve,
such as repeated failures of staff to report to work or abuse of clients.
Other problems are less extreme such as inconsistent teaching of
clients or incomplete recordkeeping, though still warranting correc-
tive action to ensure clients receive quality supports and services.
Consequently, supervisors must be thoroughly skilled in how to quick-
ly correct nonproficient and otherwise unacceptable staff performance.
Correcting nonproficient performance represents the sixth step in
evidence-based supervision. This chapter describes how supervisors
can correct nonproficient performance, or corrective supervision proce-
dures. Before describing what constitutes corrective supervision, how-
ever, some pre-requisites warrant attention that need to be in place
prior to implementing corrective actions.
PREREQUISITES FOR CORRECTIVE SUPERVISION
To effectively correct nonproficient staff performance in an effi-

cient manner, the steps of evidence-based supervision described in
preceding chapters should be routinely practiced. As noted previous-
ly, there are a number of reasons staff do not perform various duties
satisfactorily. Successfully correcting problems with staff performance
must be based on the reasons for the problems. Each step of the
supervisory protocol discussed to this point has a distinct relationship
to one or more of the most common reasons for problematic staff per-
148
Correcting Nonproficient Work Performance 149
formance. Therefore, when the steps are followed by supervisors, the

reasons for problematic performance frequently are prevented or
quickly resolved.
In contrast, when the steps of evidence-based supervision are not
consistently implemented by supervisors, problematic staff perfor-
mance is much more prevalent. To illustrate, if staff performance
expectations are not clearly specified, staff may not perform certain
duties because they are unaware of what they should do in respective
situations. Staff also may not complete various duties proficiently
because they are not sure precisely how to perform the (poorly spec-
ified) duties. Additionally, if supervisors do not routinely monitor staff
performance, they will have difficulty determining the reasons for
problematic performance. Supervisors will subsequently have difficul-
ty responding to problematic performance in a manner to effectively
resolve the problems.
The training step of evidence-based supervision is likewise impor-
tant when considering nonproficient performance. If staff are not
effectively trained how to do what is expected, fulfilling daily job
responsibilities is almost always problematic. Finally, if quality staff
performance is not actively supported by supervisors, then that per-
formance will likely deteriorate and nonproficient work will result.
Problematic performance is most likely to be pre-

vented or quickly corrected if job responsibilities
have been clearly specified, staff have been well
trained to perform their duties, work activities have
been routinely monitored, and proficient work ac-
tivity has been actively supported.
A SERIOUS MISCONCEPTION ABOUT HOW TO

CORRECT NONPROFICIENT PERFORMANCE
When considering the pre-requisites for corrective supervision,

actively supporting quality work warrants special attention. Routinely
supporting proficient staff performance enhances the effectiveness of
supervisory actions needed to correct nonproficient performance that
may occur. When supervisors regularly support proficient performance,

corrective action that is taken by supervisors appears in clear contrast
to their usual supportive actions. The corrective action tends to stand
out for staff and evokes serious staff attention directed to improving
the designated performance.
The importance of routinely supporting quality work on supervi-
sor success in correcting nonproficient performance when necessary
cannot be overemphasized. Such importance is highlighted when con-
sidering a serious misconception about supervision in general. Spe-
cifically, good supervision is often equated with persistent punishment
of inappropriate or nonproficient staff work. There is a somewhat
common view that strong supervisors are known for their frequent
and harsh response to inadequate staff performance; the supervisors
have a reputation for frequently imposing seriously negative sanctions
for problematic performance.
There are of course times when supervisors should impose nega-
tive sanctions for staff performance. However, such actions should be the
exception and not the rule. When the steps of evidence-based supervision
are routinely practiced, negative sanctions represent exceptions to a
supervisor’s regular actions with staff. The sanctions also usually do
not have to be severe to be effective. In contrast, when a supervisor
routinely takes negative actions with staff, the actions almost always
have to become progressively more severe to have an effect on staff
performance.
The detrimental effects of supervising with a predominantly nega-
tive focus have been discussed previously. To review briefly, there are
three most serious effects. First, staff tend to decrease their work moti-
vation and do only what is necessary to avoid the wrath of the super-
visor. Staff do little beyond what is minimally necessary because in
essence, they realize the more they do the more likely it is the super-
visor will find something wrong with what they are doing. Second,
because there is little recognition for quality performance, staff moti-
vation to perform in a quality manner is diminished. Third, frequent
negative sanctions by a supervisor seriously decrease staff enjoyment
with their work and further reduce motivation to work diligently and
proficiently.
There is also a more global effect of a predominantly negative
supervisory style. When staff receive frequent criticism and other neg-
ative sanctions from their supervisor, workplace withdrawal increases.
Workplace withdrawal refers to staff avoiding their jobs. The most spe-
cific and serious examples are frequent absenteeism among staff and
high rates of staff turnover.
The research underlying evidence-based supervision was initiated
in large part due to recognition of problems with supervisory styles
that focus on punishing unacceptable performance. The research has
resulted in effective strategies for supervisors to correct nonproficient
performance without the serious problems associated with predomi-
nantly negative supervisory approaches. Again, the first consideration
in this regard is to ensure the other steps of evidence-based supervi-
sion are routinely practiced.
Routinely practicing the steps of evidence-based

supervision reduces a supervisor’s need to take
severely punitive actions to resolve problems with
staff performance.
COMMON REASONS FOR NONPROFICIENT STAFF

PERFORMANCE AND SUPERVISOR CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
Reasons for nonproficient and otherwise problematic staff perfor-

mance vary widely across agencies and staff. Supervisors have to be
astute in assessing the various reasons to determine appropriate cor-
rective action. In many cases, supervisors will become aware of fac-
tors influencing problematic performance during their routine moni-
toring of day-to-day staff performance. A formal assessment tool, the
Performance Diagnostic Checklist—Human Services (PDC-HS), has also be-
come available recently for identifying environmental variables asso-
ciated with poor staff performance (see references to several investiga-
tions involving the PDC-HS in the “Improving and Maintaining On-
going Areas of Staff Performance” section of the Selected Readings).
The PDC-HS involves key agency personnel responding to structured
questions concerning situations associated with identified perfor-
mance problems as well as some specific observation procedures.
Although there are many potential reasons for nonproficient staff
performance, there are four reasons that are most prevalent across
human service agencies. These include lack of skills to perform re-

spective duties, insufficient resources or time, incapability of perform-
ing certain duties, and lack of motivation to complete work tasks in a
quality manner. Each of these reasons and corresponding corrective
actions for supervisors are addressed in the following sections.
Lack of Skills to Perform Job Duties

One relatively common reason for nonproficient performance is
staff do not have the skills to perform certain job tasks. This typically
occurs because staff have not been trained in the skills to perform the
tasks, or the training they received was not effective. In other cases,
staff may have been effectively trained in designated work skills but
over time have forgotten how to perform the duty of concern. The lat-
ter situation typically occurs with duties that staff perform infrequent-
ly such as monthly or every few months.
When nonproficient performance is due to lack of skills on the
part of staff, the appropriate supervisor action is to provide effective
training. As discussed in detail in Chapter 4, effective training involves
performance- and competency-based training strategies such as behav-
ioral skills training (BST). If staff have not received previous training,
then usually the entire BST protocol should be implemented by
supervisors in a formal training session.
If staff received previous training but the training was not totally
effective or staff have forgotten how to perform various aspects of a
task, then often the training only needs to be directed to specific as-
pects (versus all the skills necessary to perform the duty). Typically,
this type of training can be conducted informally within the staff work-
place. The supervisor summarizes what needs to be done differently,
demonstrates the target skills, and then observes as staff perform the
task. Feedback is then provided and the process continued if necessary
until staff are observed to perform the task proficiently.
Lack of Resources to Perform Job Duties

Another relatively common reason for nonproficient staff perfor-
mance is that staff lack the resources to complete a job task appropri-
ately. For example, a common duty expected of staff in residential cen-
ters for adults with severe disabilities is to promote age-appropriate
leisure activities during the evening. To successfully involve clients in
desired leisure activities, an adequate supply of leisure materials is

usually necessary—the clients must have something with which to en-
gage in an activity. A resource issue that occurs in many of these set-
tings is that there is an insufficient supply of leisure materials. It is also
relatively common that the materials that are available are intended
for use by children and not adults, so it is difficult to promote age-ap-
propriate leisure activities.
The apparent corrective action for supervisors in the situation just
illustrated is to ensure an adequate supply of age-appropriate materi-
als. It should also be noted that providing sufficient materials can be
difficult for supervisors at times. Often supervisors have inadequate
budgets for securing necessary materials or have no control over the
funds for procuring materials. In these cases, the problem of insuffi-
ciently promoting leisure activity among clients should not be viewed
as a staff performance issue; the problem is a resource issue. Staff can-
not be expected to perform their duties in a quality manner if they
lack materials necessary to complete job tasks. Supervisors must persist
in securing the needed resources or change job expectations of staff.
Sometimes the issue concerning lack of resources to perform a
duty proficiently pertains not to materials but to staff time; there is
insufficient time for staff to complete a given duty in the appropriate
manner. To illustrate, a job expectation of staff may be to embed
teaching within early morning routines associated with assisting
clients prior to leaving a group home to go to a day program site.
However, because there is often limited time to get ready to leave the
home in the early morning, staff must do tasks for clients to get every-
thing accomplished on time (i.e., because it generally takes more time
initially for staff to teach clients to perform certain activities relative to
the staff doing the tasks for the clients). In such a case, there realisti-
cally is not enough time allotted in the early morning to allow staff to
embed teaching within the preparatory routine.
When lack of desired staff performance is due to insufficient time
to perform a duty appropriately, supervisors must reconsider the
scheduled routine to adjust time allotments for the duty to be per-
formed. This can be a difficult consideration at times for supervisors.
The difficulty is due to adequately knowing if there is truly insufficient
time versus staff falsely reporting that there is not enough time. Some
staff will report they cannot complete certain duties appropriately due
to lack of time when the real reason is those staff do not want to exert
the effort to complete the duties (see later chapter section on “Lack of
Staff Motivation”).
Having an awareness of when duties are not performed due to a
reported lack of time versus insufficient staff motivation is another rea-
son supervisors should carefully specify work duties and routinely
monitor their fulfillment. When supervisors have specified how to per-
form a given job task and routinely monitored staff performance asso-
ciated with the task, they will usually know whether sufficient time
exists to complete the task. Such awareness can then facilitate correc-
tion of the problem by either adjusting the work activity schedule or
acting to better motivate staff, respectively.
Lack of proficient staff work due to insufficient

materials or time to complete a task satisfactorily is
not a staff performance problem; it is a resource or
scheduling problem that a supervisor needs to
resolve.
Incapability of Performing Duties

The jobs of direct support staff in some agencies can be quite phys-
ical in nature. To illustrate, staff may have to lift and transfer clients
who are nonambulatory, engage in strenuous physical interactions
with clients to prevent injury due to highly aggressive or self-injurious
behavior, or be required to be on their feet for long periods of time.
In certain cases, some staff may not be physically able to perform
these types of tasks appropriately due to health-related conditions
(e.g., weight issues, previous injuries).
Physical incapability to perform various duties represents another
reason for lack of proficient staff performance. This reason is not as
prevalent as lack of staff skills or resources to perform duties profi-
ciently, but nevertheless represents a situation that supervisors are like-
ly to encounter from time to time. When a supervisor becomes aware
that certain staff cannot physically perform aspects of their job duties,
there are usually two corrective actions a supervisor can implement.
The most apparent action is to change the job of those staff to reduce
or eliminate the physical demands that the staff cannot perform through
various workplace accommodations. In some cases, staff have to be
reassigned to another job within the agency, such as one that involves
working with clients who do not require the types of physical de-
mands that the staff cannot perform.
The second corrective action is to remove the staff person from the
agency’s work force, which usually requires the involvement of upper
management. Such action is typically the only recourse when there
are no jobs in an agency to which a staff person could be reassigned
that do not involve the physical demands that pose problems for the
individual. Removing a staff person from the workforce can be diffi-
cult for supervisors because it means they must discontinue an indi-
vidual’s employment. Nonetheless, it is a task supervisors must be
willing to perform when necessary.
In some cases, supervisors avoid actions that result in discontinuing
a staff person’s employment in an agency because of their concern for
the individual’s welfare. However, there are serious detriments of not tak-
ing necessary action in this regard. In particular, if a staff person cannot
physically perform aspects of the job, then those aspects will be unful-
filled and client services will not be provided appropriately. Maintaining
the staff person also can place the individual at risk of personal harm and
potentially place clients at risk as well (e.g., when a staff person cannot
safely lift or transfer a nonambulatory client). Therefore, all reasonable
attempts should be made to alter the job demands or make other accom-
modations to overcome the physical challenges or find another job for
the staff person within the agency. When such attempts fail, though, a
supervisor is left with no choice but to act to terminate the individual’s
employment in accordance with relevant agency policies.
Incapability to perform a job can also be due to mental issues in
addition to physical limitations. For example, some staff may not be
able to read proficiently to perform some tasks. Other staff may not
be able to acquire certain job skills despite repeated training efforts of
supervisors. Ideally, these limitations of staff would become apparent
during the initial screening process when they apply for a direct sup-
port position such that they would not be hired within the agency.
However, experienced supervisors are usually aware that the initial
screening process does not always function in this manner.
When it becomes apparent that staff lack certain skills that are crit-
ical to the job (e.g., adequate reading skills in some cases), or fail to
acquire necessary skills despite repeated training sessions, a supervi-

sor must implement the same corrective actions as just described with
physical incapability of performing job duties. The corrective actions
can be difficult for supervisors for the same reasons as with the diffi-
culty faced with physical limitations to performing a job. Nonetheless,
actions must still be implemented—again for the same reasons why
corrective action is needed due to physical limitations.
Corrective action due to staff incapability to per-

form a job can be especially difficult and unpleas-
ant for a supervisor, but nevertheless must be car-
ried out for the welfare of all staff and agency
clients.
Lack of Motivation
The reasons for nonproficient staff performance discussed to this
point are relevant in almost every human service agency from time to
time. However, by far the most common reason for problematic per-
formance is due to one primary factor: lack of sufficient staff motivation
to exert the time and effort to perform their work proficiently. In the lat-
ter situations, staff have the necessary work skills as well as the time,
resources, and capability to engage in quality work but are essentially
unmotivated to do so on a consistent basis. Every supervisor will likely
face periodic problems with lack of work motivation among some staff.
A considerable amount of attention has been devoted to reasons
for insufficient work motivation among direct support staff in the
human services. Lack of appropriate motivation has been considered,
for example, as a result of a restricted labor pool in some situations
for finding motivated workers to employ, lack of an acceptable work
ethic among some staff, low wages for direct support positions, and
the working conditions within certain agencies. Sometimes these ex-
planations are relevant and accurate and sometimes they are not. Re-
gardless of the relative appropriateness of the explanations, it is still a
supervisor’s job to find ways to motivate staff to perform their job
duties appropriately.
As with all aspects of a supervisor’s job, taking action to overcome

insufficient staff motivation is most likely to be effective if the action
is evidence-based. An evidence-based approach to overcoming lack of
motivation is essentially a two-step process, with each step involving
multiple components. The first step is to provide performance feedback.
The second step, which is necessary when the first step is not effective,
is to initiate disciplinary action.
Providing Feedback to Overcome Insufficient Work
Motivation. An evidence-based means of providing feedback was dis-
cussed in-depth in Chapter 6. Although the focus was on using feed-
back to support proficient performance, the same protocol for pro-
viding feedback is relevant for correcting nonproficient performance
due to lack of staff motivation. The steps constituting the protocol are
presented below.
EVIDENCE-BASED PROTOCOL FOR

PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO STAFF
Step 1. Begin feedback with a positive or empathetic

statement.
Step 2. Specify what staff performed correctly.
Step 3. Specify what staff performed incorrectly, if

applicable.
Step 4. Specify what staff need to do to correct the work

behavior identified in Step 3.
Step 5. Solicit questions from staff about the information

provided.
Step 6. Inform staff about subsequent supervisory actions

regarding the target work behavior.
Step 7. End feedback with a positive or empathetic state-

ment.
For correcting nonproficient or otherwise unacceptable staff per-

formance, the key steps of the feedback protocol are Steps 3 and 4.
These steps specify for the staff person what aspect of a work task was
not performed correctly and how the aspect should be performed. To
illustrate, in a work activity center a supervisor may observe that a
staff person is sitting at a worktable with several clients and periodi-
cally instructing clients at other tables to do their work. The desired
performance that has been previously specified in this case is for the
staff person to walk around all worktables and provide instructions to
clients privately in close physical proximity to each client. The super-
visor could pull the staff person aside and indicate that the staff per-
son should not be sitting at a table and instructing clients at other
tables (Step 3). The supervisor could further instruct the staff person
to walk around each table and talk to clients by approaching them
individually to provide necessary instructions (Step 4).
It is generally recommended, however, when correcting staff per-
formance with feedback that supervisors implement all the steps of
the feedback protocol and not just Steps 3 and 4 that pertain specifi-
cally to incorrect work behavior. This is especially the case with Step
2 that specifies what the staff person performed correctly. In the illus-
tration just referred to, this may involve an initial statement such as
“You were doing a nice job observing the clients’ work and providing
instruction when needed to promote their continued work; that is
important to do.”
Informing staff about some aspect of their performance that they
performed well when correcting other aspects of performance is im-
portant for several reasons (again refer to Chapter 6 for more detailed
discussion). One reason is that if the feedback focuses only on the
incorrect performance of staff, the feedback is entirely negative in
nature. Staff may inaccurately consider that the supervisor is being
overly critical or perhaps “picking on” them unfairly. In contrast, by
including explicit information about related work behavior that staff
performed well, the feedback will usually not be seen as overly criti-
cal and unfairly presented.
Another reason for specifically commending some aspect of staff
work performance is that the overall feedback session is generally
viewed as more pleasant by staff (which is further enhanced by Steps
1 and 7 of the feedback protocol that involve beginning and ending
the feedback session on a positive note). Commending work per-
formed appropriately also has the added benefit of supporting staff in

continuing to perform those aspects of a task in a proficient manner.
A third reason for providing positive feedback on proficient per-
formance when correcting nonproficient performance relates to future
actions a supervisor may need to take to improve staff work.
Sometimes feedback alone will not be sufficient to overcome lack of
motivation among some staff to perform their work appropriately. As
indicated in the next section, more serious steps subsequently may be
needed to bring about improvement in staff behavior through formal
disciplinary action. When disciplinary action is taken, many staff re-
spond quite defensively or in an otherwise negative manner.
Sometimes the negative effect of disciplinary action causes staff to
retaliate toward the supervisor. Some staff may complain, for exam-
ple, that the supervisor is harassing them. However, if the supervisor
has consistently commended good performance when providing cor-
rective feedback about unacceptable performance, complaints of
harassment can be quickly dismissed. It can be pointed out that the
supervisor has not been interacting in an overly critical manner with
staff; the supervisor has been pointing out both the good and bad
aspects of staff work. This process shows that it is not staff per se who
are the focus of the negative feedback (i.e., staff are not being har-
assed) but that the supervisor is engaging in the appropriate supervi-
sory activity of letting staff know what is being performed acceptably
and unacceptably.
When attempting to correct problematic staff per-

formance by providing feedback, supervisors
should not only specify what is being performed
problematically but also what performance aspects
have been performed appropriately.
Again, providing feedback is the first step a supervisor should take

to improve nonproficient performance due to lack of staff motivation.
In many if not most cases, staff performance will improve if feedback
is provided in the manner described—although it may take repeated
presentations of feedback across several days. If, however, the perfor-
mance of concern does not improve after three or four feedback ses-
sions, then a supervisor must take more significant steps to improve
the performance. Such steps usually involve disciplinary action.
Disciplinary Action for Improving Nonproficient Staff Per-
formance Due to Lack of Motivation. Disciplinary action repre-
sents one of the most unpleasant duties of a supervisor. It involves
imposing punitive sanctions with staff and, as such, usually has a neg-
ative effect on staff quality of work life. Nevertheless, if unacceptable
staff performance exists despite repeated feedback sessions (as well as
implementation of the other components of evidence-based supervi-
sion), it is a supervisor’s responsibility to take more severe action to
solve the performance problems.
Essentially every human service agency has a policy regarding
when and how to use disciplinary action. Usually the policies follow a
less-to-more severe continuum. Disciplinary action is first implement-
ed because of a staff person’s problematic performance with a rela-
tively mild punitive sanction, such as a formal counseling session that
is documented in the staff member’s personnel file. If the problemat-
ic work behavior does not improve, then more severe action is taken
with, for example, a written warning. This process continues if neces-
sary, with the final, most severe action of terminating the staff person’s
employment with the agency.
Most disciplinary action policies also have a provision for taking
punitive action with staff on a one- or two-time basis. This process
occurs for highly unacceptable work behavior such as sleeping on the
job, client abuse, use of illegal drugs or alcohol on the job, or stealing
agency property. In these cases, disciplinary action involves an imme-
diate suspension from employment, followed by job termination if the
behavior occurs again, or immediate job termination.
Supervisors typically must be prepared to use disciplinary action in
the less-to-more severe nature and the one- or two-step manner. The pri-
mary concern here is with the former process, as that is what is usually
required with performance problems due to lack of sufficient motivation
among staff. However, the issues to be discussed for effectively using dis-
ciplinary action generally apply to both ways of invoking such action.
The importance of using disciplinary action to suspend or fire a
staff person for highly unacceptable behavior in the workplace is gen-
erally well acknowledged within human service agencies. In contrast,
using disciplinary action to improve nonproficient performance of a
less severe nature is not so well acknowledged or practiced. There is

a common misconception that staff can only be fired for the most
egregious forms of work behavior, such as client abuse and other
major work infractions. This view is particularly prevalent in govern-
ment agencies such as state-operated residential facilities.
In many government agencies, nonproficient performance that is
not as severe as that warranting immediate suspension or termination
is viewed as something supervisors should strive to improve but un-
likely to result in staff being fired. In these settings, staff are rarely ter-
minated due, for example, to consistently poor teaching of clients or
inconsistent implementation of behavior support plans of clients.
However, these types of nonproficient performance can have highly
detrimental effects on client welfare and should not be tolerated by
supervisors.
A multitude of reasons are offered across various agencies why
various types of nonproficient work behavior are unlikely to result in
job termination. Many of the reasons involve inaccurate interpretation
of government-based regulations regarding workplace behavior that
warrants job termination. Most disciplinary action policies, including
those in government agencies, do allow for firing of staff because of
generally poor performance, as well as more egregious behavior. The
real reason the former performance problems usually do not result in
job termination is supervisors and agency executives do not want to
exert the time and effort required to follow through with disciplinary
action. Relatedly, supervisors and executives do not want to experi-
ence the unpleasantness usually associated with terminating a staff
person’s job.
The time, effort, and unpleasantness involved in proceeding
through the less-to-more severe disciplinary action process to eventu-
ally fire a staff person are a real phenomenon. Again, however, this
process is necessary at times and supervisors must be willing to ter-
minate a staff person’s job if all other attempts to improve perfor-
mance have failed. The focus should not be on the difficulties associ-
ated with using disciplinary action to fire a staff person for nonprofi-
cient performance of a recurring nature; the focus should be on ensur-
ing that the process is used appropriately and effectively—in this case
to remove the staff person from the agency if necessary.
There are several key considerations for effectively using discipli-
nary action when staff repeatedly perform work duties nonproficient-
ly due to lack of motivation. The first consideration is the same as

when using corrective supervision procedures in general: the previ-
ously discussed steps of evidence-based supervision are necessary pre-
requisites for effective use of disciplinary action. Formal disciplinary
action should not be implemented if performance expectations have
not been clearly specified for staff, staff have not been effectively
trained in their work duties, staff performance has not been routinely
monitored, or active support has not been provided for proficient
work behavior. When these supervisory procedures have been consis-
tently implemented though, if disciplinary action is necessary it can
usually be carried out effectively and at least relatively efficiently.
Formal disciplinary action should not be consid-

ered for nonproficient performance due to lack of
staff motivation unless the other components of evi-
dence-based supervision have been practiced by a
supervisor.
The second consideration for effectively using disciplinary action

pertains to agency policies regarding how such action should be im-
plemented. Supervisors must become astutely aware of what the poli-
cies involve regarding when and how disciplinary action should be
applied. Likewise, supervisors must then adhere to all policy require-
ments.
When nonproficient performance repeatedly occurs due to lack of
staff motivation, the goal of using disciplinary action is twofold. The
first goal is to improve the performance of concern. The second goal
is to remove the staff person from the agency’s employment if the first
goal is not met. If agency policies for using disciplinary action are not
followed, then it is likely neither of these goals will be met.
The most detrimental effect of not following relevant agency poli-
cies on supervisor success in meeting the goals of disciplinary action
is that whatever action supervisors take will be overturned or dis-
missed. Because receiving disciplinary action is an unpleasant experi-
ence for staff, many staff will retaliate toward the action. The retalia-
tion occurs because staff are aware of the serious implications of re-
ceiving disciplinary action or they do not want the action recorded in

their personnel file (even if they are aware that their work perfor-
mance has been lacking). If supervisors have not followed appropriate
disciplinary action policies, it is likely staff will be able to have the
action negated or removed by agency executives or personnel officers.
The end result is that any potential effect on improving the perfor-
mance of concern will be negated. Similarly, if a staff person’s employ-
ment has been terminated and the person challenges the action, it is
likely the individual will be reinstated in the agency if appropriate
polices were not followed in the termination process.
The effect of a supervisor’s disciplinary action being overturned by
executives or otherwise negated not only defeats the purpose of disci-
plinary action, it impedes the supervisor’s future use of disciplinary
action. Staff will become aware that even though receiving discipli-
nary action is not pleasant, the action will likely be negated if they
challenge it. Therefore, when the supervisor implements disciplinary
action at a future time, staff realize such action is only a temporary
inconvenience and they continue their (nonproficient) work as usual.
Supervisors must be knowledgeable about, and

adhere to, agency policies regarding use of discipli-
nary action for nonproficient staff performance.
A third consideration when using disciplinary action to resolve

problems with staff performance is that supervisors should inform
agency executives prior to taking such action. Informing executives
about forthcoming disciplinary action, and the documented reasons
why such action is needed, helps to obtain management support for
the action. Most importantly, it reduces the likelihood that upper man-
agement may overturn or negate the action.
If supervisors do not inform their superiors before taking discipli-
nary action, often the superiors become aware of the action when dis-
gruntled staff complain to the superiors. In turn, the executives may
form inaccurate perceptions regarding the appropriateness of the dis-
ciplinary action taken by supervisors and act to have the action negat-
ed. This situation does not represent appropriate management re-
sponse because executives have not taken the time to obtain all rele-
vant information. More specifically, the executives only consider infor-
mation presented by staff recipients of the action, and not the perfor-
mance problems observed by supervisors regarding why disciplinary
action is needed. Nevertheless, the situation occurs in many agencies
and the problems with disciplinary action being overturned as dis-
cussed previously are likely to result.
Supervisors should inform agency executives prior

to taking disciplinary action with problematic staff
performance.
The fourth consideration pertains to two common effects of disci-

plinary action. Supervisors should be aware of, and prepared for, both
short- and long-term effects. The short-term effects can be trouble-
some for supervisors. Whenever serious disciplinary action is taken,
such as suspension or job termination, there is a common reaction
among a supervisor’s staff contingent. Staff often will have empathy
for the staff recipient of the punitive action, and believe the supervi-
sor acted too harshly in taking the action with the staff person.
A result of staff reacting in the manner just described is that they
view the responsible supervisor in a negative light. The supervisor will
be the focus of staff complaints and related negative comments. This
situation can add a significant degree of unpleasantness to the super-
visor’s job. Fortunately, however, such a reaction can be temporary.
The negative reaction of staff to having one of their colleagues
receive serious disciplinary action is almost always short-lived if the
action stands in clear contrast to usual supervisory action as described
previously. It will usually be readily apparent to staff that the punitive
action represents unusual activity on the part of the supervisor. It will
likewise be apparent that the reason for the disciplinary action is fail-
ure of the respective staff person to respond to more typical, support-
ive supervisor actions. In this regard, staff are typically well aware
when one of their peers is not performing appropriately on the job.
Over time staff tend to develop respect for supervisors who will
take significant action to improve recurring performance problems of
a given staff person and if need be, remove the staff person from the
agency’s employment. The respect staff develop represents the long-
term effect of appropriate use of disciplinary action by a supervisor.
Such respect occurs in part because when a staff person is not per-
forming job duties appropriately, it makes the job of the remaining
staff more difficult. The latter staff essentially have to work extra to
perform the work that their peer is not completing. As a result, many
staff actually want supervisors to take action with a staff member who
is repeatedly performing inappropriately. Most staff also understand
that it is a supervisor’s job to remediate problematic performance is-
sues and expect supervisors to fulfill this supervisory responsibility.
In contrast, when supervisors do not act to improve recurrent per-
formance problems of a given staff person, other staff have to contin-
ue working more effortfully due to incomplete or unsatisfactory work
of their peer. In addition, staff hold supervisors responsible for their
extra work efforts. Staff are aware that supervisors are not doing their
jobs in terms of correcting inappropriate work activities. The end re-
sult in such a situation is staff lose respect for their supervisor.
The essential point is supervisors should be aware that many staff
may be displeased when disciplinary action is initially taken. Super-
visors should likewise be aware that such displeasure will be short-
lived if they routinely support proficient work and use disciplinary
action only when all other actions have failed to resolve recurring per-
formance problems. Using disciplinary action in this manner can en-
hance staff respect for supervisors.
The final consideration for using disciplinary action to resolve
recurring performance problems due to lack of staff motivation has
been referred to with the previously noted considerations: disciplinary
action should be considered a default supervisory strategy. Disciplinary
action is considered as a default strategy because it is relied on only
when all other, evidence-based supervisory procedures have failed to
correct the performance problems. It is the last thing a supervisor
should do to resolve problematic performance unless the problem is
extremely severe as referred to earlier (e.g., egregious behavior in the
workplace warranting immediate job termination).
As a default supervisory strategy, disciplinary action should not be
a routine supervisor activity. If supervisors are using disciplinary
action frequently, then something is wrong with their overall supervi-
sory approach. Usually this means that one or more of the other com-
ponent strategies of evidence-based supervision are not being prac-

ticed sufficiently often or effectively by supervisors. Frequent use of
disciplinary action results in all of the problems discussed earlier with
predominantly punitive supervisory styles.
Use of disciplinary action with recurring perfor-

mance problems due to insufficient staff motivation
should be the default supervisory strategy; it should
only be used when the other steps of evidence-
based supervision have been consistently practiced
but have failed to resolve the performance prob-
lems.
PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS DUE TO

REASONS OUTSIDE OF THE WORK PLACE
To this point, the discussion on correcting nonproficient work activ-

ities among staff has focused on reasons for problematic performance
within the workplace. There are also reasons some staff have difficulty
meeting their performance expectations that are due to factors outside
of the job. In this regard, there are many factors that can exist inde-
pendent of the job that negatively affect performance on the job. For
example, many direct support staff work one or more jobs in addition
to their job within a supervisor’s agency. Working several jobs can result
in staff fatigue that affects their job performance. Staff also may have dif-
ficult marital or familial issues that frequently require their presence at
home or elsewhere such that they have significant job absenteeism.
When nonproficient job performance is due to reasons beyond the
immediate workplace, supervisors are faced with a difficult issue. In
particular, supervisors are likely to have no control over the reasons
for the problematic performance. Additionally, it can be inappropri-
ate for supervisors to become involved in the personal activities of
staff that occur outside of the workplace, which would be necessary to
help resolve the issues.
Personal issues of staff outside of the workplace that affect job per-
formance can also be difficult for supervisors because they have empa-
thy for affected staff. Supervisors may be aware, for example, that cer-
tain staff want to do their jobs well but the personal issues present
challenges that make it exceedingly difficult to perform their work
appropriately. Nevertheless, supervisors are responsible for ensuring
proficient staff performance on the job so that clients receive the qual-
ity supports and services they deserve; supervisors must still act to
improve nonproficient work performance.
When performance problems appear to be due to staff issues
beyond the workplace, the generally recommended supervisory
action is to focus on what happens on the job. Supervisors should use
the steps of evidence-based supervision, including disciplinary action
if needed, to correct whatever problems occur on the job. Issues that
staff face separate from the job basically are beyond the responsibili-
ty of the supervisor to address. This can be a difficult approach for
supervisors who have sincere concern for the welfare of their staff but
is typically the most advisable course of action. Supervisors can
acknowledge their concerns with staff about personal issues affecting
work performance but should also acknowledge that they have the pri-
mary responsibility to ensure the job gets done and agency clients are
well served.
1. A basic pre-requisite for effectively correcting recurring problems with

staff performance is a supervisor’s routine implementation of all the com-
ponent steps of evidence-based supervision.
2. Routinely practicing the steps of evidence-based supervision, and espe-

cially supportive supervisory strategies, reduces a supervisor’s need to take
severely punitive actions to resolve problems with staff performance.
3. Common reasons for nonproficient staff performance and corrective

supervisory actions include: (1) lack of skills to perform job duties—pro-
vide BST, (2) lack of resources to perform duties—secure resources or alter
job expectations, (3) physical or mental inability to perform duties—
workplace accommodations if possible, staff job reassignment, or termi-
nation, (4) lack of motivation—provide feedback and if needed, discipli-
nary action.
4. The most pervasive reason for recurring performance problems among

direct support staff is lack of sufficient work motivation.
5. Effective use of disciplinary action requires: (1) consistent implementa-

tion of all steps of evidence-based supervision, (2) adherence to agency
policies, (3) informing agency executives prior to implementing discipli-
nary action, (4) supervisor awareness of the short- and long-term effects
of severe disciplinary action, and (5) reliance on disciplinary action as
the default supervisory procedure.
Chapter 9
PROMOTING STAFF WORK ENJOYMENT:

MAKING DISLIKED WORK TASKS
MORE ENJOYABLE TO PERFORM
T hroughout preceding chapters, a number of ways supervisors can

promote staff enjoyment with their work have been described.
Routine provision of positive feedback has been particularly empha-
sized as a readily available, effective means to help staff feel good
about their work and enhance their work enjoyment. Interacting with
staff in pleasant and socially courteous ways has likewise been
stressed, along with periodically providing special recognition for
commendable performance. Other ways to promote work enjoyment
also have been presented in regard to implementation of each step of
the evidence-based supervisory protocol.
Another way supervisors can increase staff enjoyment with their
work pertains more specifically to certain work tasks that staff are
expected to perform. Direct support jobs typically include some work
tasks that are not very enjoyable to do—or at least are less preferred
relative to other job duties. In many cases supervisors can enhance
staff work enjoyment by actively striving to make the most disliked job
tasks of staff more desirable to perform.
It has been discussed in preceding chapters that from an overall
perspective, workplace enjoyment can be enhanced by increasing the
good things associated with staffs’ work situation and decreasing the
bad things. When supervisors can make highly disliked tasks more
pleasant to perform, they are in essence turning a bad thing into a
good thing for staff (or at least reducing the negative features of a bad
thing). The purpose of this chapter is to describe a stepwise process
for supervisors to make undesired work tasks more enjoyable for staff.
169
The process to be described is the Task Enjoyment Motivation

Protocol, or TEMP. The TEMP process, like other procedures discussed
throughout this text, has been evaluated through research in the
human services to demonstrate its effectiveness—in this case for
enhancing workplace enjoyment among staff (see “Promoting Work
Enjoyment” section in the Selected Readings). Before describing spe-
cific procedures constituting the TEMP process, several general con-
siderations warrant attention for making job tasks more enjoyable for
staff.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR MAKING WORK

TASKS MORE ENJOYABLE FOR STAFF TO PERFORM
A primary consideration for making work tasks more enjoyable

for staff pertains to a main premise underlying successful supervision:
enhancing staff enjoyment should be addressed in conjunction with
promoting quality work performance of staff. Again, successful super-
vision involves supervisors working actively to ensure staff work dili-
gently and proficiently and to help staff enjoy their work. Working to
increase staff work enjoyment without promoting quality work does
not represent effective supervision.
The TEMP process for making highly disliked work tasks more
enjoyable for staff was developed in situations in which staff were per-
forming specific job tasks proficiently. However, it was apparent that
staff were not particularly enjoying their work associated with the
tasks. When supervisors implemented steps of the TEMP process, staff
continued to perform the designated duties in a proficient manner.
Evidence likewise indicated staff enjoyed performing those tasks more
after the TEMP process was carried out. In this manner, the TEMP
process coincided with the goals of supervision in terms of enhancing
staff work enjoyment while staff were performing quality work.
Making disliked work tasks more enjoyable for staff

to perform should be undertaken by supervisors
with the intent of also ensuring the tasks are per-
formed in a quality manner.
Promoting Staff Work Enjoyment 171
Another general consideration for making work tasks more enjoy-

able to perform pertains to the training part of evidence-based super-
vision. In some cases, staff do not like a given work task because they
do not feel competent performing the task; they have not been effec-
tively trained how to perform that aspect of their job. Because staff are
not sure how to complete the task in the correct manner, they tend to
be uncomfortable when expected to perform the task.
Staff dislike of a work task due to being unsure of their compe-
tence in performing the task is most common in two situations. The
first situation is with newly employed staff who are assigned certain
duties before they have had opportunities to be trained in the skills to
perform the duties. This situation occurs frequently in residential set-
tings because direct support staff usually are needed quickly in the
workplace once hired to maintain necessary staff-to-client ratios. As a
result, new staff are sometimes assigned to work with clients before
completing necessary training programs. Because new staff usually
have no experience working with people who have disabilities, the
staff are often anxious regarding how to provide various supports and
services. Being unsure how to perform certain duties increases their
anxiety and makes performing the tasks particularly unpleasant.
The second situation in which staff frequently dislike work tasks
due to concerns over their competence is when they are expected to
perform certain duties that potentially place clients at risk of harm. A
common example is when a staff person is initially assigned to feed a
client with multiple disabilities who cannot eat independently and has
physical challenges that result in frequent choking. Feeding someone
with such challenges can be very anxiety arousing for staff because
they witness the choking as they feed the individual and are afraid
they might harm the person.
The best way to prevent staff anxiety and unpleasantness when
being expected to perform duties for which staff feel unprepared is to
ensure they are well trained in the performance skills of concern. In
this regard, it is critical that the training includes the on-the-job com-
ponent discussed in Chapter 4. The on-the-job component is needed
not only to ensure the training is effective as discussed previously, but
also to allow the staff trainer (e.g., supervisor) to respond to concerns
that staff may have as they begin performing the target duty. If such
concerns are not addressed, and particularly if the concerns relate to
issues associated with immediate client welfare such as with the feed-
ing example just illustrated, staff will experience an unnecessary

amount of anxiety and unpleasantness with the task.
Ensuring staff are well trained to perform duties in which clients
may be at risk of harm, and provided with close supervision once they
initially perform the duties, cannot be overemphasized. As just indicat-
ed such training and supervision are critical for ensuring staff are well
versed in the necessary work skills and do not feel anxious performing
them, and clients are adequately protected from harm. Additionally, evi-
dence has indicated that one of the key reasons some staff resign from
human service agencies is that they never overcome the anxiety and
concern with performing these types of duties. Consequently, one
means of reducing at least some of the turnover among direct support
staff that occurs in many agencies is to ensure new staff are especially
well trained and supervised in these particular types of duties.
When staff have not been well trained to perform a

job task they often feel uncomfortable or anxious
when expected to complete the task, which results
in their dislike of the task.
An additional consideration for generally making work tasks more

enjoyable to perform is somewhat indirect in nature. Specifically,
sometimes supervisors can determine that certain tasks staff dislike are
not really necessary for the staff to perform. The unpleasantness asso-
ciated with completing the task can be eliminated simply by discon-
tinuing the task requirements. This is most commonly the case with
various types of documentation duties expected of staff.
Sometimes staff are required to provide various types of written
documentation that over time are no longer used (or needed) within
an agency. However, the paperwork (or digital) assignments of staff
continue to exist. As noted previously with documentation duties
expected of supervisors, if various types of documentation required of
staff are not routinely used for clearly apparent purposes within an
agency, such requirements should be discontinued.
Supervisors should periodically review various recordkeeping
requirements of staff and determine if the resulting information is still
needed. If not, staff should be informed that the duties associated with
the recordkeeping are no longer necessary. Staff are often very appre-
ciative of supervisors who stay knowledgeable about their job duties
and relieve them of duties that become unnecessary. This situation is
particularly relevant when staff are aware that nobody is really attend-
ing to their documentation and their recordkeeping appears to be
serving no functional purpose in terms of agency supports and ser-
vices.
A related consideration for making work tasks more enjoyable to
perform pertains to the time and effort required of staff to complete
certain job duties. Sometimes supervisors can make work tasks more
desirable for staff by reducing the time and effort involved in per-
forming the tasks yet maintaining the proficiency with which the
duties are completed. It is general human nature to dislike tasks that
are more effortful and time consuming to complete relative to tasks
that are less effortful and time consuming.
A relatively common example of work tasks that can be altered to
reduce staff time and effort also involves recordkeeping or documen-
tation duties. Again, direct support staff frequently have to complete
various types of documentation, such as collecting data on challeng-
ing behavior of clients, describing events surrounding client accidents
or unusual incidents, and summarizing progress on teaching programs.
For every documentation duty required of staff, supervisors should
review how the documentation is expected to be completed. Such
review should focus on how the documentation can be streamlined for
staff such that the amount of actual writing or typing required is as
minimal as possible, while still providing the necessary information.
The most apparent way to minimize staff time and effort to pro-
vide a necessary type of documentation is to use prepared forms or
digital tools that involve staff checking specified boxes or spaces to
provide answers to questions. Providing areas on the forms or tools to
answer questions by simply providing a checkmark should be used in
lieu of requiring staff to write or type narrative responses to the ques-
tions whenever possible. For example, instead of a general question
pertaining to an unusual incident such as “What time and place did
the incident occur?”, the form could have prepared times and places
such that the staff person only has to check or mark the time and
place. The latter process takes less time for the staff person than the
former.
Supervisors should review all documentation re-

quired of staff and devise forms or computer for-
mats that minimize the amount of writing or typing
required of staff to provide the documentation.
A final consideration for generally making disliked tasks more

desirable for staff relates to an issue also noted previously: staff should
be well aware of the reason they are required to perform the tasks.
Again, using the example of documentation requirements, sometimes
staff are instructed to complete various types of recordkeeping but are
not given a good explanation as to why the documentation is neces-
sary. When staff are required to perform certain duties but they are
unaware or unclear as to what purpose the duties serve, it almost
always results in staff disliking those duties. Supervisors should always
provide an honest and explicit reason why staff are required to com-
plete a given paperwork duty, or any duty.
AN EVIDENCE-BASED APPROACH FOR MAKING DISLIKED

WORK TASKS MORE ENJOYABLE TO PERFORM: TEMP
In order for supervisors to make disliked work tasks more enjoy-

able for staff to perform, the supervisors must know what specific job
duties are highly disliked by staff. If supervisors are routinely moni-
toring staff work performance, and particularly on an informal basis
as described in Chapter 5, they will usually be well informed regard-
ing specific job duties staff find particularly undesirable. Such infor-
mation results from the direct observation of staff work activities and
the interactions with staff that occur as supervisors provide feedback
to staff following the monitoring.
Supervisors can also obtain information regarding job duties that
staff find especially unpleasant in a more formal manner. For exam-
ple, supervisors can periodically conduct a scheduled meeting with
staff to question what aspects of their duties they find more and less
enjoyable to perform. Alternatively, supervisors can periodically de-
velop preference assessment forms and request staff to rate or rank
specific job tasks regarding the relative preferences or enjoyment asso-

ciated with performing each task.
The processes for assessing staff preferences for different work tasks
also have a benefit beyond obtaining information about highly disliked
work tasks. Specifically, the process often conveys to staff that the
supervisor is sincerely concerned about their quality of work life—pro-
vided of course that the supervisor follows up the meeting by acting to
improve something staff report they do not like. As noted repeatedly
already, when staff are aware that their supervisor is truly concerned
about their welfare, they tend to respect the supervisor and their enjoy-
ment associated with working for the supervisor is enhanced.
Once supervisors have obtained information from staff regarding
identification of a highly disliked work task, the TEMP process can be
initiated to make the task more enjoyable to perform. The process can
be conducted with an individual staff person who experiences signifi-
cant displeasure in performing a given task. However, it is usually more
efficient from a supervisory perspective if the process is undertaken
with a certain job duty that several staff seriously dislike. Regardless of
whether the process is implemented with one staff person or a group
of staff, it should be conducted in a stepwise fashion. A summary of the
basic steps of the process is presented in the following illustration.
SUPERVISORY STEPS CONSTITUTING THE TASK

ENJOYMENT MOTIVATION PROTOCOL: TEMP
Step 1: Meet with staff and solicit their opinions about

the specific aspects of the job task that make it
undesirable to perform.
Step 2: In conjunction with Step 1, solicit and discuss

ideas about what can be reasonably changed to
make the task more enjoyable to perform.
Step 3: Make as many of the changes identified in Step 2

as realistic, supplemented where possible with the
supervisor’s ideas for making the task more enjoy-
able.
Step 4: Meet again with staff to solicit their opinions

about how well the changes are working, and
obtain additional ideas if necessary about other
changes that may be needed.
TEMP Step 1: Identify Reasons Staff Dislike Performing a Work Task

The first step of the TEMP process is to meet with staff for the
explicit purpose of obtaining their opinions regarding why perform-
ing a certain job task is so disliked. Often, staff will be quite forth-
coming and readily offer explanations as to why they dislike per-
forming the task. In other cases, supervisors will need to question staff
and otherwise prompt discussion about why they dislike the task.
When supervisors find that they need to prompt staff to discuss
what they do not like about the task, a useful approach is to ask ques-
tions based on the most common reasons job duties are often disliked
as referred to in preceding sections. To illustrate, supervisors could
question whether staff do not feel totally competent in performing the
work task, or if the task seems especially effortful or time consuming
to complete. Supervisors could also ask if staff do not agree with, or
understand, the reason why the task needs to be completed. Usually
posing such questions to staff will result in a useful discussion regard-
ing reasons for the unpleasantness of the job duty of concern.
TEMP Step 2: Identify Potential Ways to Alter the Work Task

The second step of the TEMP process is to solicit staff ideas about
how the task can be changed to make it more desirable to perform.
As with the first step, often staff are quite forthcoming in expressing
ideas about how to change the task. However, supervisors should also
be prepared to question and prompt staff to express their ideas if nec-
essary. Supervisors should likewise be prepared to offer their ideas
regarding how to make performing the task more enjoyable. There-
fore, supervisors should prepare for the meeting with staff by thinking
about some possible ways to alter the task that can be shared with
staff.
Generally, ways to change a work task that is disliked by staff will
need to be based on the reason for the dislike. For example, if com-
pleting the task is reported to be overly time consuming relative to

other, competing duties expected of staff, then ways to streamline per-
forming the task could be considered. In some cases, though, neither
the staff nor supervisors will have an immediate idea about how to
change the task. In the latter cases, supervisors can indicate to staff
that they will talk with other agency personnel to obtain possibilities
for how the task could be altered. Subsequently, supervisors will need
to meet with staff again to discuss whatever ideas are generated.
In some situations, it can be challenging for supervisors to come
up with ideas about how to make a job task more desirable to per-
form, and particularly if staff themselves are not sure how the task can
be modified. Supervisors will be best equipped to provide useful ideas
in this regard if they are very familiar with the task of concern. Super-
visors will usually have the necessary familiarity if they have been
actively involved in training relevant work skills to staff and monitor-
ing their performance of the task in the manner described in Chapters
4 and 5, respectively.
There will also likely be situations from time to time for which
there are no reasonable ways to alter a job task to make it more desir-
able to perform. Supervisors should readily acknowledge when such
is the case, but only after they have consulted with other agency per-
sonnel about ways to alter the task as noted previously. Although in
these situations the ultimate goal of making the task more enjoyable
to perform will not be met, the overall TEMP process can still be ben-
eficial. In particular, often staff will be appreciative of a supervisor
who acknowledges that a given work duty is unpleasant to perform
and has actively worked with them to try to reduce the unpleasant-
ness. It can also be beneficial if, upon acknowledging that there is no
apparent way to make the task more desirable to perform, the super-
visor then initiates the TEMP process with another task that staff dis-
like performing. Hopefully, there will be more success in making the
latter task more enjoyable to perform.
TEMP Step 3: Make as Many Identified Task Changes as Possible

Following the meeting with staff, the next step of TEMP is for
supervisors to make as many of the specified changes with the work
task as reasonably possible. Again, usually the changes will need to be
based on the identified reasons regarding why performing the task is
disliked. In some cases, retraining of staff how to perform the task pro-
ficiently may be needed because staff feel unprepared to complete the

task. In other cases, supervisors may need to find ways to make per-
forming the task less time consuming or effortful. This may involve,
for example, preparing forms or computer formats for streamlining
completion of documentation duties as discussed earlier. Reducing the
time and effort to complete a task also frequently involves re-arrang-
ing the physical environment, such as by making necessary materials
for completing the task more readily accessible to staff so they do not
have to spend extra time retrieving the materials.
TEMP Step 4: Meet Again with Staff to Review

Actions and Determine Additional Actions
After the task changes have been made, the final step of the TEMP
process is to meet again with staff. The purpose of this meeting is
twofold. The first purpose is to review the changes that have been
made with staff and solicit their feedback regarding whether the
changes have been successful in making the task more desirable to
perform. The second purpose is to solicit staff ideas regarding addi-
tional changes that may be needed, based on the feedback staff pro-
vide.
Earlier it was noted that in some situations there may be undesired
work tasks for which there are no reasonable ways to alter the task
that would make it significantly less unpleasant to perform. It was like-
wise noted that when this situation occurs, it should be discussed with
staff. Meeting with staff when it is apparent that it has not been possi-
ble to effectively alter an undesired work task serves two purposes.
First, it provides staff with a rationale regarding why the task cannot
be changed. In this manner, staff are not left with the impression that
their concerns were ignored. Second, as also referred to earlier, it
makes staff aware that the supervisor has listened to them and at least
tried to resolve their concerns with the particular work task. Although
not as successful as actually making the work task nicer to perform,
fulfilling these two purposes can have a beneficial impact on staff work
enjoyment.
AN EXAMPLE OF HOW TEMP HAS BEEN USED TO MAKE

A DISLIKED WORK TASK MORE ENJOYABLE TO PERFORM
An illustration of how the TEMP process has been used to make a

highly disliked work task more enjoyable pertains to the task of writing
monthly progress notes. Most human service agencies require desig-
nated staff to complete some type of written summary regarding client
progress on various programs, such as those for teaching adaptive skills
or reducing challenging behavior. This task was selected because a
supervisor had surveyed staff in one unit of a residential facility regard-
ing liked and disliked work tasks, and writing progress notes was report-
ed to be very disliked. The example to be presented involved applying
the TEMP process with one staff person. However, the same process
subsequently was used with other staff in the facility with similar results.
When the supervisor met with the staff person to discuss why writ-
ing monthly progress notes was so disliked (Step 1 of TEMP), the staff
person indicated that the task required more time to complete than
seemed reasonable. Upon further questioning by the supervisor, the
staff person indicated that the excessive amount of time was due to fre-
quent interruptions when she was working on the notes each month.
The interruptions were due primarily to other staff interacting with
her while she was working on the notes in her routine workstation.
During the initial meeting, the supervisor and staff person also dis-
cussed various ways to reduce the amount of time to complete the
progress notes (Step 2). It was determined that if the staff person had
another place to work on the notes each month that was separate from
her usual workstation and other staff, the interruptions would likely be
avoided. Consequently, it was decided that a separate office space
would be provided one day per month for the sole purpose of the staff
person completing the progress notes.
The next step of TEMP (Step 3) involved the supervisor schedul-
ing an office for use solely by the staff person one day per month
when progress notes were assigned to be completed. The supervisor
located an office that was jointly used by other personnel at different
times and arranged with the latter individuals to free up the office for
the designated day. The staff person then began writing her progress
notes in the assigned office.
After several months, the supervisor met again with the staff per-
son to review how the new office arrangement was working (Step 4).
The staff person indicated that interruptions were eliminated and sig-
nificantly less time was required to complete the progress notes each
month relative to the previous arrangement. The staff person also
reported that completing the progress notes was no longer her most
disliked task and was now even more liked than a number of her other
routine duties.
The example just illustrated indicates how the TEMP process has
been used to have a significant, albeit somewhat circumscribed, effect
on one aspect of a staff member’s work enjoyment: the staff member’s
enjoyment with completing one routine work duty was enhanced. In
considering the example, it should not be interpreted that the same
exact procedures should be used to make progress note writing more
desirable for staff in general (nor that writing progress notes is neces-
sarily a highly disliked work task for all staff). However, the same
process for making a specific work task more desirable to perform can
be used with other job duties that are highly disliked by direct support
staff. In this regard, one of the beneficial features of the TEMP
approach is that by its nature, it is individualized across staff and work
tasks.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR ADDRESSING

HIGHLY DISLIKED WORK TASKS
By addressing common reasons why some work tasks are disliked

in general as discussed previously and using the TEMP approach with
specific work tasks, supervisors can usually reduce the unpleasantness
of performing certain duties. There are also some special considera-
tions related to staff dislike of respective work tasks that warrant atten-
tion. These include tasks that are disliked due to characteristics of cer-
tain clients, supervisor time and effort to use the TEMP approach, and
disliked tasks that cannot be altered.
Work-Task Dislike Due to Characteristics of Individual Clients

Sometimes the dislike staff experience with work tasks pertains to
a particular client with whom the tasks are associated. A relatively
common example is when staff are working with a client who displays
seriously challenging behavior such as aggression. The dislike associ-
ated with working with the client often exists because staff have been
injured by the client or are worried about being hurt by the client’s
aggressive behavior. Staff apprehension, and in the most serious cases
actual fear, about working with a given client is not always officially
recognized in human service agencies; it is essentially expected that
part of the job of direct support staff is to work with some clients who
have problem behavior. Nonetheless, staff concerns in this type of sit-
uation must be addressed by supervisors because otherwise, staff qual-
ity of work life and overall well-being on the job can be seriously com-
promised.
Staff dislike of working with certain clients who engage in harmful
behavior should be addressed by supervisors on a case-by-case basis
because each situation is different. In many cases though, the best
action involves ensuring there is an effective treatment plan to prevent
or reduce the challenging behavior, and staff have the skills and
resources to carry out the plan. It is beyond the scope of this text to
describe what constitutes appropriate treatment plans for challenging
behavior. Generally, however, it is the supervisor’s responsibility to be
aware of staff concerns about being hurt by a client and to take action
to secure an effective intervention by the appropriate clinician. It is
also the supervisor’s responsibility to inform agency executives about
the situation, as resolving the issue often requires the support of man-
agement (e.g., to obtain additional staff resources, secure more clini-
cian involvement with a client’s treatment plan). Most importantly,
supervisors should never let situations continue in which staff are
harmed or are fearful of being harmed; supervisors must work imme-
diately and actively to find some way to resolve the situations.
If staff have concerns about being harmed when

working with certain clients, supervisors must work
actively to make changes in the workplace to
address those concerns.
Focus on Most Disliked Work Tasks

To this point, discussion regarding the TEMP process has centered
on how it can be used to effectively alter disliked work tasks. There is
also a practical issue regarding TEMP that warrants attention: it often

involves relatively considerable time on the part of a supervisor to be
successful. The time investment is due in part to having to meet sev-
eral times with staff. More noticeably is the time that is frequently
required to make designated changes with a given work task. Making
specified changes (re-arranging the work environment of staff, secur-
ing additional materials, developing alternative recordkeeping pro-
cesses that are more streamlined, etc.) is often time consuming for a
supervisor.
Because of the amount of supervisor time that is frequently
required to implement all steps of the TEMP process, it is usually unre-
alistic for a supervisor to address very many work tasks that staff dis-
like at any point in time. This is especially the case when considering
that the process should only be used in conjunction with all other evi-
dence-based supervisory procedures necessary to promote quality
work. Therefore, it is recommended that a supervisor focus use of the
TEMP approach on a work task that is most disliked by several staff. As
time permits, the process can later be applied with other work tasks
that are less seriously disliked or disliked by only one staff member.
Generally, use of the TEMP process should focus on

a work task that is the most disliked by several staff.
Disliked Work Tasks That Cannot be Changed

In any job situation, there are likely to be some tasks that staff find
especially undesirable that cannot be realistically altered without neg-
atively affecting the proficiency with which the tasks are completed.
As indicated previously, when the initial steps of the TEMP process are
undertaken and it becomes apparent that a particularly disliked task
cannot be significantly altered, this situation should be directly
acknowledged by a supervisor with staff. However, staff work enjoy-
ment may still be enhanced not by changing the actual task itself but
by altering staff assignments related to completing the task.
Sometimes a task that is highly disliked by several staff can be
assigned in a manner that requires no single staff person to have to
complete the task on a frequent basis. For example, a work task that
can be disliked by a number of staff pertains to cleaning wheelchairs
of clients who are nonambulatory and do not have the physical capac-
ity to clean their wheelchairs themselves. Often with this type of task,
staff are expected to do a relatively cursory cleaning on a daily basis
and a more involved cleaning once or twice per week. The more
involved cleaning, which typically represents the most disliked aspect
of the task, could be rotated among all staff such that no individual
staff person would have to conduct the detailed cleaning every week.
When considering rotating certain disliked tasks among staff, it is
most helpful if a participative management process is used as dis-
cussed in Chapter 3. Upon acknowledging that a given work task must
be completed as it currently exists (e.g., wheelchairs must be cleaned),
a supervisor could meet with staff and discuss whether it would be
more desirable if the task assignment was rotated across staff at dif-
ferent times. With the wheelchair-cleaning task, the intense cleaning
requirement potentially could be rotated among staff such that, for ex-
ample, each staff person had to perform the task only once per month
even if they would have to do the intensive cleaning on more wheel-
chairs on a monthly basis (i.e., to intensively clean wheelchairs that
otherwise would have been cleaned by other staff during the given
week). As discussed previously, involving staff in decisions affecting
their job assignments not only takes advantage of their knowledge
about performing various duties, but the participative process also
itself is usually appreciated by staff.
1. General considerations for making work tasks more enjoyable for staff to
perform include: (1) ensuring quality work is still promoted while mak-
ing the tasks more enjoyable for staff, (2) ensuring staff are well trained
to perform the tasks and feel confident performing them, (3) discontinu-
ing disliked tasks required of staff if the tasks are not really necessary to
complete, (4) streamlining tasks where possible to make the tasks less
time consuming and effortful to perform and, (5) ensuring staff know the
reason each task needs to be performed.
2. Steps of the Task Enjoyment Motivation Protocol (TEMP) for making

highly disliked work tasks more enjoyable to perform involve: (1) meet-
ing with staff to solicit their opinions about why the task is disliked, (2)
obtaining staff ideas about how to change the task, (3) making as many
of the specified changes as reasonably possible, and (4) meeting again
with staff to solicit their feedback about the changes that were made and
obtain ideas about additional changes if needed.
3. When staff dislike a task because they are worried about being harmed
by a client while performing the task, supervisors must be especially
active in working to make changes to resolve the concerns.
4. Due to the time and effort often required of a supervisor to use the TEMP
approach to make a disliked task more enjoyable for staff to perform, the
process should primarily be used with a task that is most disliked by sev-
eral staff.
5. Sometimes the displeasure associated with performing certain tasks can

be reduced by rotating assignments for completing the tasks across differ-
ent staff.
Section III
RESOLVING COMMON
PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS
Chapter 10
RESOLVING COMMON
PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS:
OVERVIEW
C onsistent adherence to evidence-based supervisory practices usu-

ally results in successful supervision. Evidence-based supervision
as described in preceding chapters represents the most tried and test-
ed means of promoting diligent and proficient work performance
among direct support staff. Implementing steps of the evidence-based
supervisory protocol in ways discussed in preceding chapters also rep-
resents an effective means of helping staff enjoy their work.
EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISORY
PROTOCOL: A REVIEW
Step 1: Identify desired client outcomes.
Step 2: Specify what staff must do to assist clients in

attaining desired outcomes.
Step 3: Train staff in the performance skills specified in

Step 2.
Step 4: Monitor staff performance.
Step 5: Support proficient staff performance.
187
Step 6: Correct nonproficient staff performance.
Step 7: Continuously evaluate staff performance and

client outcome attainment.
In essence, the evidence-based supervisory protocol provides a

template for how supervisors should go about working with staff.
However, this does not mean that effective supervision can be provid-
ed in a cookbook fashion. What a supervisor does to affect staff work
behavior must take into consideration each respective situation relat-
ed to a performance area of concern. Component steps of the super-
visory protocol should be used as a guide for determining superviso-
ry actions that are relevant in each situation.
The importance of addressing specific situations related to a per-
formance area of concern is most apparent in regard to resolving
recurrent problems with staff performance. As emphasized in Chapter
8, resolving recurrent problems with staff work behavior must address
the reasons for the problems. There are also certain types of perfor-
mance problems that have somewhat special or idiosyncratic consid-
erations that supervisors must take into account.
It is beyond the scope of this text to discuss all the special consid-
erations necessary for resolving each performance problem that su-
pervisors may encounter. However, there are certain types of prob-
lematic performance that tend to be most common in human service
agencies. The following chapters discuss three of the most common
performance problems, and specific considerations that warrant su-
pervisor attention to resolve the problems. The chapters also illustrate
that even though different performance problems involve special con-
siderations, the evidence-based supervisory protocol is still a valuable
guide for determining how to effectively address the issues of concern.
The three performance problems to be discussed include high
absenteeism among support staff (Chapter 11), inadequate provision
of client-teaching and related therapeutic services (Chapter 12), and
frequent occurrence of staff nonwork behavior that interferes with
completion of job duties (Chapter 13). Each of these performance
problems has especially serious implications for the quality of sup-
ports and services provided to agency clients. Prior to addressing
Resolving Common Performance Problems: Overview 189
these particular performance issues, a basic premise underlying suc-

cessful supervision in regard to resolving recurrent performance prob-
lems in general warrants highlighting. The premise pertains to account-
ability associated with the job of a human service supervisor.
THE BASIC PREMISE OF SUPERVISOR ACCOUNTABILITY
In most human service agencies, direct support staff are consid-

ered accountable for the quality of client services they provide and the
degree to which clients attain associated outcomes. If clients are not
learning skills addressed by teaching programs carried out by support
staff, for example, then the proficiency with which staff are imple-
menting the programs is usually a concern. Similarly, when clients do
not make progress overcoming challenging behavior, then staff profi-
ciency in carrying out the clients’ behavior support plans is often a rel-
evant issue. Of course, in these situations other factors also must be
considered such as the quality of the programs that staff are expected
to carry out. Nonetheless, when client services are not provided ap-
propriately on a day-to-day basis, the performance of direct support
staff almost always warrants increased supervisory attention.
Holding direct support staff accountable for the services they pro-
vide is a necessary requirement for ensuring quality services. As indi-
cated in the introductory comments to this text, the most significant
determinant of the quality of an agency’s supports and services is the
proficiency with which support staff fulfill their job responsibilities.
However, accountability in this regard should not be limited to the
performance of support staff; supervisors must also be accountable.
Supervisor accountability means supervisors must view the quality of
staff performance as a direct reflection of the effectiveness of their supervision.
This premise of supervisor accountability stems directly from the
essence of supervision: actively working to improve staff performance
that is not adequate and actively working to support performance that
is adequate. When staff performance is frequently inadequate, then
supervisors are not being effective in improving staff performance.
When quality performance does not maintain over time, then super-
visors are not effectively supporting desired performance.
If supervisors are to have success in working with staff, they must
accept the premise that they are accountable for the quality with
which staff perform their duties. Supervision can only be considered
successful when staff are consistently performing their duties in a pro-

ficient manner. When staff do perform proficiently on a consistent
basis, then supervisors can feel good about their own work accom-
plishments. In short, the bottom-line indicator of a supervisor’s effec-
tiveness is that staff are consistently providing supports and services in
a quality manner—and clients are attaining desired outcomes.
Many supervisors accept the premise of accountability for the per-
formance of staff they supervise. However, many supervisors also view
the premise as unfair in some respects. The unfairness is usually based
on the view that reasons for problematic staff performance can be out-
side the supervisors’ control. A somewhat common illustration is
when, due to agency budget problems, supervisors are unable to hire
new staff to fill vacant positions when certain staff leave the agency. As
a result, there are not enough direct support staff to adequately fulfill
all work duties. This situation frequently results in staff who are pre-
sent working harder to complete expected duties. Over time the latter
staff become frustrated and lose their motivation to work diligently.
As noted in Chapter 8, supervisors will encounter situations in
which factors beyond their control tend to affect the quality of staff
performance. Nonetheless, supervisors still have the responsibility of
working actively to promote diligent and proficient staff performance.
Supervisors must make sure performance expectations of staff are
clearly specified, staff have the skills to perform expected duties, staff
performance is regularly monitored, proficient performance is active-
ly supported, and necessary actions are taken to improve performance
that is not acceptable. Supervisors should focus on fulfilling these crit-
ical responsibilities and not focus on other factors over which they
have no control. If supervisors do not consistently perform these basic
supervisory actions regardless of other factors affecting staff perfor-
mance, then in essence they will not be supervising.
Supervisors must accept responsibility for the qual-

ity of work performed by the staff they supervise.
Sometimes supervisors dismiss the premise of accountability for

staff performance by taking a cop-out attitude of supervision. The cop-
out attitude refers to situations in which supervisors are aware that

staff are not performing certain duties appropriately and view the
problematic performance as a staff problem. To illustrate, a common
scenario is when supervisors report that some staff know what to do
on the job but will not do it, or will not do it unless the supervisor is
present. The supervisors further report that their staff have no work
ethic or are otherwise unmotivated, and there is nothing they can do
with those staff.
Some staff frequently do avoid performing assigned duties and re-
present significant challenges for supervisors. However, when supervi-
sors respond to these situations by blaming the lack of work perfor-
mance on the staff themselves, the supervisors are copping out—they
are not assuming responsibility for the performance of their staff. Such
an attitude leads to ineffective supervision, persistently poor perfor-
mance of staff, and inadequate supports and services for agency clients.
Supervisors must avoid adopting the cop-out attitude, even in situ-
ations involving very difficult staff. As discussed repeatedly, there are
effective, evidence-based ways to motivate and otherwise promote
quality staff performance. There are also appropriate ways to remove
staff from an agency when their problematic performance does not
respond to repeated supervisory actions. As emphasized in Chapter 8,
removing staff from an agency due to recurrent performance prob-
lems represents the final, or default, supervisory action.
When supervisors truly accept the basic premise of supervisor
accountability, then the poor performance of staff is seen as an indi-
cation that the supervisors need to do something differently in their
work with staff. Such supervisors do not consider the inadequate per-
formance to be inherent among staff. Instead, they realize that the
work environment is not conducive to promoting quality perfor-
mance. The supervisors then work actively to improve the work situa-
tion by addressing the problems for poor work performance.
Successful supervisors avoid a cop-out attitude of

blaming staff for problematic performance; prob-
lems with staff performance are considered a result
of ineffective supervision or other issues with the
work environment.
Accepting the premise of supervisor accountability and avoiding a

cop-out attitude is a key characteristic of successful supervisors.
However, it is also important for supervisors to be aware of certain sit-
uations in which consistently promoting quality staff performance is
likely to be quite difficult. Awareness of these situations can help
supervisors be prepared to persist in their efforts to promote diligent
and proficient staff performance when encountering the situations.
SUPERVISING IN DIFFICULT SITUATIONS
Several situations supervisors are likely to face that make effective

supervision especially difficult are relatively common in a number of
agencies. One situation is when executive personnel who have posi-
tions of authority over a supervisor engage in practices that interfere
with the supervisor’s work with staff. To illustrate, some executives
may give directives to a supervisor’s staff that conflict with the super-
visor’s instructions or make decisions about staff work schedules with-
out the supervisor’s input. In other cases, an executive may repeated-
ly provide special recognition for certain staff whose performance
does not warrant such recognition. An example of the latter situation
is when an executive shows special favoritism to a staff member based
not on good work performance, but because of a particular social or
familial relationship with the staff person.
Another situation supervisors are likely to face at times that makes
their job challenging involves agencies in which the executive man-
agement style is predominantly negative. Deleterious effects of a neg-
ative management style have been discussed repeatedly in previous
chapters. Of particular concern here is a typical response of executive
personnel in these agencies whenever there is a perceived problem
with staff performance. Management essentially demands that the
supervisor take formal disciplinary action to punish the involved staff.
Relatedly, a supervisor may be directed to impose disciplinary action
with staff because an executive wants to make an example of the con-
sequences of their problematic performance as a deterrent to other
staff. Disciplinary action is mandated even if the supervisor knows the
problematic performance is not due to staff intentionally avoiding
their responsibilities (e.g., the staff try to perform appropriately but
lack the necessary resources or time to complete various duties profi-
ciently).
When supervisors are working in an agency with a predominant-

ly negative management style, they are likely to face frequent prob-
lems with effectively supporting and maintaining quality staff perfor-
mance. As noted previously, a major effect of such a management
approach is a reduction in staff work effort—staff tend to do only what
is necessary to avoid negative sanctions from management. Promoting
staff work enjoyment is likewise difficult for supervisors when the
overall management style in an agency is predominantly negative.
An additional situation that arises in some agencies that makes it
difficult for supervisors to promote quality performance, and espe-
cially work enjoyment, is when events external to an agency nega-
tively affect staff motivation. This situation is illustrated in agencies
that have experienced extremely negative press in the local media or
have been targeted by lawsuits. The negative press or litigation is usu-
ally due to an undesirable incident involving a client, such as a seri-
ous accident. In other cases an undesirable incident resulting in nega-
tive press or litigation involves inappropriate staff activities, such as
distribution of illegal substances at work. Still in other cases, there is
no undesirable incident, but someone causes negative attention to be
directed to an agency due to personal reasons, such as by a disgrun-
tled individual who was fired from the agency.
When negative attention is publicly directed to an agency as just
illustrated the work environment of staff tends to become increasing-
ly negative in nature. Management demands on staff performance
expectations are usually increased, often to the point of being unreal-
istic, and executive personnel become increasingly critical of staff per-
formance. Correspondingly, complaining among staff themselves is
likely to increase. Staff may also encounter critical comments about
the agency and their work in the agency from friends and neighbors
who become aware of negative publicity about the agency. The end
result is the increased negativity makes it difficult for staff to maintain
their motivation to work diligently and proficiently.
There is no specific way for supervisors to handle the various
types of situations just noted and maintain effective supervision of
staff. However, there are several general strategies supervisors can take
across all of the situations to enhance their likelihood of supervisory
effectiveness. These include ensuring frequent communication with
staff, staying focused on specific supervisory responsibilities, and
actively promoting their own work motivation.
Maintain Frequent Communication with Staff

Negativity resulting from the types of situations just illustrated is
often exacerbated due to poor communication between upper man-
agement and staff. Staff are readily aware of negative events in the
agency but are not sufficiently aware of why various events are occur-
ring. Staff likewise receive, through informal communication chan-
nels, inaccurate information about what is going on within an agency.
Lack of accurate information about agency events that are generally
negative in nature almost always increases staff discontent with their
work situation.
When difficult or otherwise unpleasant situations arise within an
agency, supervisors must make special efforts to ensure staff are accu-
rately informed about what is occurring. This usually means supervi-
sors must conduct frequent meetings with staff for information shar-
ing. Supervisors should also have more frequent interactions than
usual with individual staff to provide information and respond to staff
questions or inaccurate perceptions. Supervisors should strive to fre-
quently let staff know what is happening and the reasons behind each
particular situation.
Generally, the best means for supervisors to keep staff informed
about situations that evoke particular unpleasantness and negativity
within an agency is through face-to-face interactions with staff (refer to
previous discussions about the benefits of direct interactions with staff
in Chapters 6 and 7). When face-to-face interactions are logistically
difficult to provide on a frequent basis, then a supervisor should at
least increase other types of more indirect communication. The latter
may include work-related email correspondence or agency website
postings that are accessible only to the supervisor’s staff.
In some cases, supervisors feel unprepared to adequately share
with staff why certain agency events occur. The supervisors may not
be privy to relevant information or are unable to share all necessary
information because of confidentiality concerns. Nevertheless, super-
visors should provide as much information to staff as possible.
Supervisors should also acknowledge that the information they are
providing may be limited, but it represents as much information as
they possess or that they are allowed to share. Although staff may not
receive all the relevant information they would like about undesirable
events within the agency, they are usually appreciative of supervisors
who take the time to share as much information as they can. Such
appreciation helps maintain staff enjoyment associated with working

for the supervisor.
When especially unpleasant events occur within an

agency, supervisors should provide staff with as
much information as possible about what is occur-
ring and the reasons for the events.
Stay Focused on Actively Supervising Staff Performance

One advantageous way for supervisors to maintain supervisory
effectiveness during difficult times in an agency is to adopt a piece-of-
the-pie attitude to help stay focused on their supervisory responsibili-
ties. The agency represents the entire pie and a supervisor’s staff con-
tingent represents the piece of the pie. Supervisors should accept that
unpleasant events can occur within the agency as a whole over which
they have no control. However, supervisors can still affect what goes
on with their staff and focus on making those things go as well as pos-
sible. The intent is to maintain an attitude that no matter how nega-
tive the agency work environment is overall, the supervisors’ own area
of responsibility—their piece of the pie—is going to function as effec-
tively and pleasantly as possible.
Staying focused on promoting quality performance and work
enjoyment among a supervisor’s group of staff is especially important
during those times when negative press or legal issues affect an
agency’s general operation. Maintaining such a focus is also particu-
larly important when an agency is experiencing difficult financial
times such that staff layoffs have to be considered. Each of these situ-
ations usually results in significant unpleasantness for staff and gener-
al negativity within an agency. Despite all the negativity in the agency,
however, the supervisor’s staff can still function proficiently and at
least somewhat enjoyably relative to the rest of the agency if the super-
visor persists in implementing sound supervisory procedures. Again,
the supervisor focuses on the piece of the pie that represents the
supervisor’s area of responsibility and tries not to worry about what is
happening in the rest of the agency.
There is another benefit of supervisors staying focused on pro-

moting quality work and enjoyment among their specific staff contin-
gent during especially unpleasant times within an agency as a whole.
When supervisors persist with effective supervisory strategies, staff are
usually aware that their work situation is better or more enjoyable rel-
ative to that of staff in other parts of the agency. Consequently, the
supervisors’ staff are usually appreciative of the supervisors’ efforts and
their enjoyment associated with working for their particular supervi-
sor is enhanced.
Staff enjoyment associated with working for a given supervisor
during difficult times is especially enhanced if the supervisor makes
special efforts to keep staff informed about agency events as summa-
rized earlier. Difficult situations within an agency also represent times
when supervisors need to be especially visible and available to staff
(refer to Chapter 4 on the importance of supervisor visibility). Most
importantly, these are times that supervisors need to be particularly
vigilant about supporting appropriate work performance of staff and
providing frequent positive feedback. Increasing support for staff work
activities helps staff overcome the existing negativity in the agency as
a whole by in essence, counteracting the “bad things” happening with-
in the agency with more “good things” (Chapter 6).
Supervisors should increase their support for good

staff performance, and especially with positive
feedback, during particularly difficult or unpleas-
ant times in an agency.
Supervisor Self-Motivation
The importance of supervisors working actively to motivate staff to
perform their jobs proficiently and enjoy their work has been stressed
repeatedly. To be consistently successful in fulfilling this critical super-
visory function, supervisors themselves must be well motivated.
Supervisor self-motivation is especially important when difficult situa-
tions arise within an agency. If supervisors are not able to maintain
their own motivation during these times, their supervisory effective-
ness will be limited and the quality of staff performance will likely
deteriorate.
What a supervisor does to maintain self-motivation will vary across
supervisors and particular work situations. However, there is one strat-
egy that can be helpful for maintaining supervisor self-motivation in
general, regardless of ongoing events in an agency. The strategy in-
volves a three-step process: (1) establishing a supervisory work goal,
(2) performing necessary duties to achieve the goal, and (3) reinforc-
ing the work accomplishment.
Establish a Work Goal. The first step of supervisor self-motiva-
tion is for supervisors to regularly establish goals to attain on the job.
The goals should pertain directly to carrying out specific actions
designed to promote quality staff performance or work enjoyment. For
example, a supervisor could set a goal to provide face-to-face, positive
feedback to every staff person regarding some aspect of each individ-
ual’s job performance at least once during a given week. Another goal
may be to implement a special recognition procedure for deserving
staff members by the end of the week. Still another goal may be to
meet with every staff person during the week to begin the process of
making a highly disliked work task more enjoyable for staff to perform
(refer to Chapter 9).
Goals that supervisors establish to help maintain their motivation
to carry out supervisory duties should be short-term in nature.
Generally, the goals should relate to something a supervisor desires to
achieve on a daily or weekly basis, though on occasion a supervisory
goal may involve a monthly time frame. Selecting goals that can be
met relatively quickly (i.e., versus long-term goals involving several
months or a year to achieve) can help supervisors stay focused on
what should be done each day to meet the goal.
Achieve the Goal. The second step of self-motivation is for super-
visors to do whatever is necessary to actually achieve the goal. Once a
goal is established, specific action steps must be clearly specified. The
action steps are usually straightforward when the goal pertains to
actively working to promote quality staff performance or work enjoy-
ment. The supervisor simply follows through with the designated
work activities, such as giving positive feedback to each individual
staff person.
Reinforce the Accomplishment. The third step is for supervisors
to reinforce their goal achievement; supervisors should do something they
enjoy to recognize their work accomplishment. It is usually most help-

ful if the way a supervisor will reinforce a work accomplishment is
determined when the goal is initially set. Upon completing the action
steps necessary to achieve the goal, the supervisor should then engage
in the desired activities.
What a supervisor does to reinforce work accomplishments will be
highly individualized across supervisors, as everyone has their own
preferences. Some supervisors do something outside of work follow-
ing a job accomplishment, such as treating themselves to a favorite
meal or buying a desired item. Other supervisors do something enjoy-
able at work as a means of reinforcing their goal achievement, such as
working on a task that is more desired relative to other tasks.
Supervisors can promote their own work motiva-

tion by: (1) establishing a work goal, (2) completing
supervisory duties necessary to achieve the goal,
and (3) doing something enjoyable to reinforce
their work accomplishment.
Some supervisors view the self-motivation strategy, and especially

the self-reinforcement step, as being artificial or otherwise unlikely to
truly motivate them to fulfill their supervisory responsibilities.
However, there is a good evidence base that demonstrates the strate-
gy is often an effective approach to self-motivation. By its nature, the
process ensures supervisors will experience enjoyable events associat-
ed with work—whenever they achieve a goal, they do something enjoy-
able for themselves. Because the process requires supervisors to com-
plete the supervisory duties necessary to achieve the goal, they will
also be performing important duties for promoting quality staff per-
formance or staff enjoyment with their work.
There is also a less apparent but valuable benefit of supervisors
using the self-motivation strategy. The process puts supervisors in con-
trol of their motivation relative to relying on someone else to motivate
them. In this regard, sometimes executive personnel such as a super-
visor’s supervisor will be a source of motivation. However, this is not
always the case. Successful supervisors do not rely on someone else to
consistently motivate them on the job; they take charge of their own
motivation to ensure they work diligently and experience enjoyment
with their work. If other people also provide work motivation for su-
pervisors, the supervisors should be appreciative but again, not rely
solely on someone else to be responsible for their own work effort and
enjoyment.
1. Supervisors must accept the basic premise of supervisor accountability:

they are responsible for the quality with which staff perform their work.
2. Supervisors must avoid the cop-out attitude of supervision; frequent prob-

lematic performance should not be considered a staff problem but
instead, a problem with the supervision being provided or other factors
in the work environment.
3. When negative events occurring within an agency impede staff work

motivation, supervisors must have frequent communication with staff,
stay focused on fulfilling supervisory responsibilities with their staff, and
actively work to maintain their own work motivation.
4. A useful self-motivation strategy for supervisors to maintain their work

effort and enjoyment involves: (1) establishing a supervisory work goal,
(2) completing duties necessary to achieve the goal and, (3) reinforcing
their work accomplishment.
Chapter 11
REDUCING ABSENTEEISM
I n the most basic sense, absenteeism refers to staff not being present
at work when they are scheduled to be working. Because of its per-
vasive effects on client services, frequent absenteeism among direct
support staff is arguably the most serious performance problem in
human service agencies. Problems with absenteeism are most preva-
lent in residential agencies, including public and private residential
centers as well as community living arrangements of a congregate
nature.
The most apparent effect of staff absenteeism is a reduction in the
quantity of services provided to agency clients. When the number of
staff who are at work is below the number scheduled to be working,
the amount of client services provided is almost always less than what
is intended to be provided. For every staff person unexpectedly absent
on a given day, reductions in client services become more significant.
Frequent absenteeism likewise reduces the quality of client ser-
vices. When there are inconsistent numbers of staff at work due to
unexpected absences, services tend to become inconsistent in their
delivery. Duties usually performed by staff who are absent typically
have to be assigned to other staff who are present. The latter staff are
likely to perform the duties somewhat differently than the former staff.
Relatedly, staff who are re-assigned to perform client-related duties
that otherwise would be performed by absent staff typically are at least
somewhat unfamiliar with such duties, as well as the clients. The unfa-
miliarity with certain duties, such as carrying out a given client’s teach-
ing programs, often results in the duties being completed less profi-
ciently than usual.
200
Reducing Absenteeism 201
Frequent absenteeism also has detrimental effects on direct sup-

port staff. Staff who report to work usually have to work harder when
other staff are absent; the former staff have to perform their duties
plus duties left unattended by the absent staff. Additionally, it is quite
common for staff to dislike having to be re-assigned duties with which
they are less familiar, which occurs when they have to perform duties
usually completed by other staff. This is particularly the case when
staff have to work in a different setting within the agency relative to
where they usually work (e.g., staff are “pulled” to work in the setting
in which the absent staff usually work).
When the situations just noted occur frequently because of high
absenteeism, staff motivation tends to erode. Problems with motiva-
tion are also likely to be intensified because frequent absenteeism
often occurs among a circumscribed number of staff. Therefore, staff
who do routinely report to work repeatedly experience the negative
effects of persistent absenteeism among a group of their staff peers.
Another effect of high levels of staff absenteeism pertains to super-
visors. When staff do not report to work as scheduled, supervisors
have to spend extra time finding replacement staff and re-arranging
work schedules. A number of supervisors find that compensating for
frequent absenteeism in this manner represents their most time-con-
suming duty, which detracts from available time to fulfill other super-
visory responsibilities. Many supervisors likewise experience unpleas-
ant effects of absenteeism on their home or nonwork time.
Supervisors receive calls at home due to staff failing to report to work
and have to spend nonwork time to resolve problems due to staff
absences.
Still another effect of frequent absenteeism is increased financial
cost for an agency. The most common increase is with overtime pay.
Overtime is required in many cases to secure staff to work extra shifts
to cover for absent staff. Alternatively, staff may be provided with com-
pensatory time to work extra hours to cover for absent staff. Providing
compensatory time then results in staff being absent from work at a
later time to take off the accumulated, extra work time (i.e., to prevent
them from working more than the allotted amount during a work
week or pay period). In the latter case, overtime may be needed to
cover for staff who are absent due to taking off their extra work time.
Frequent absenteeism is arguably the most serious

performance problem in human service agencies; it
has negative effects on clients, staff, and supervisors
as well as the cost of agency operations.
REASONS FOR FREQUENT ABSENTEEISM
Staff absenteeism historically has been much more frequent in

human service agencies, and especially residential settings, relative to
other work situations such as jobs in business and industry. Why fre-
quent absenteeism is more prevalent in the human services is unclear,
though a number of explanations have been offered. One common
explanation centers on the relatively low wages provided for direct
support staff. It is assumed that the low pay reduces staff motivation
to report to work. It is likewise assumed that the low pay makes it dif-
ficult to consistently recruit applicants for direct support jobs who
have good work histories, which results in employment of certain staff
who are likely prone to frequent absenteeism.
It is not clear whether the relatively low pay of direct support staff
is a true cause of problematic absenteeism. Despite the somewhat
common view associating low pay with high absenteeism, several fac-
tors suggest that pay levels should not be considered a primary cause
of frequent absenteeism. One factor is that many if not most direct
support staff do not exhibit frequent absenteeism, despite being paid
commensurate with staff who are frequently absent from work. A sec-
ond factor is that there are many jobs outside of the human service
area for which staff receive less pay than direct support staff yet absen-
teeism in those jobs is much less than absenteeism in the human ser-
vices.
Another common explanation for frequent absenteeism in the
human services pertains to typical characteristics of the direct support
workforce. Most direct support staff are women and at least histori-
cally, often were not considered the primary wage earner for their
family. Consequently, when a child or other family member is sick or
otherwise requires someone to be at home, the direct support person
is expected to be at home to care for the individual instead of the pri-
mary wage earner.
Again, the degree to which common reasons offered for high lev-
els of absenteeism among direct support staff are accurate is unclear.
In this respect, certainly many direct support staff do have good work
histories prior to being employed in a direct support capacity, and
many are the primary wage earner for their families. Even if purport-
ed reasons for frequent absenteeism are accurate in some cases, super-
visors of direct support staff have essentially no control over these
potential causes of absenteeism. As with other areas of staff perfor-
mance problems, supervisors should focus their efforts on what they
can control to prevent and reduce high levels of absenteeism.
One factor affecting frequent absenteeism over which supervisors
can have control pertains to prevailing attitudes in some agencies
regarding acceptable absenteeism. As will be discussed later, agencies
typically have established policies regarding use of sick leave and
other absent time. Often these policies allow for more frequent absent
time, and particularly in publicly operated organizations such as state
agencies, relative to nonhuman service jobs. There is an underlying
attitude in many such agencies, though not always officially acknowl-
edged, that staff should be allowed to take as much sick time as a pol-
icy allows over a designated time period whether they are sick or not.
Such an attitude can increase absenteeism.
Supervisors should not espouse an attitude that staff should be
allowed to use as many sick days as a policy grants whether they are
sick or not. Sick leave is intended for use only when a staff person is
truly sick (or a family member is sick that requires staff time away
from work if agency policy provides for sick time to care for a family
member). Supervisors should actively support appropriate use of
absent time and correct inappropriate use. To successfully function in
this manner, supervisors first have to clearly delineate what constitutes
acceptable versus unacceptable absenteeism.
Supervisors must clearly specify for staff what con-

stitutes acceptable versus unacceptable absen-
teeism.
SPECIFYING ACCEPTABLE AND

UNACCEPTABLE ABSENTEEISM
As indicated previously, absenteeism in its basic sense is defined as

staff not being present at work when they are scheduled to work.
Therefore, defining absenteeism would seem rather straightforward.
Specifying what constitutes acceptable versus unacceptable absenteeism,
however, is much more complex.
The complexity in determining what constitutes acceptable levels
of absenteeism is due to the fact that some absences are expected and
even desirable to a degree. There are times when people should be
unexpectedly absent from work because, for example, they are ill and
it would be undesirable for them to report to work and potentially
infect other staff or clients. Consequently, a zero level of absenteeism
usually is not an appropriate criterion for specifying acceptable rates
of staff absences.
Most agencies have at least an implicit criterion for what consti-
tutes acceptable levels of absenteeism. The criterion is reflected in
policies regarding use of unscheduled leave time, or sick time. A com-
mon example is an agency policy that provides for a certain amount
of unscheduled leave time, such as granting one sick day per month
on average, or 12 sick days per year. It is at least implicitly assumed
that if a staff member is not absent on an unscheduled basis more than
12 days per year, then that staff member has an acceptable level of
absenteeism.
Relying on an agency policy regarding appropriate use of absent
time as just illustrated should be only a general guide for determining
acceptable and unacceptable levels of absenteeism. There are a num-
ber of factors affecting whether certain absences should be considered
acceptable or not beyond the total number of times a staff person is
absent during a given period. The most relevant factors pertain to the
pattern of absences, or what is considered different types of absen-
teeism. There are three common types of absenteeism: high frequency
absenteeism, predictable absenteeism, and extended duration absenteeism.
Specifying acceptable versus unacceptable absenteeism usually must
address certain considerations associated with the respective type of
absenteeism.
High-Frequency Absenteeism
The most common type of absenteeism problem in many agencies
is high frequency absenteeism. This type of absenteeism refers to a staff
person being absent from work much more frequently relative to the
average level of absences among an agency’s entire workforce. The
staff person also is usually absent on more days than the number of
days allotted by agency policy. The staff person typically uses the
allotted number of paid sick days within a given time period and then
continues to be absent despite not being paid for the absent days.
High frequency absenteeism is further characterized by a staff person
not being absent for extended time periods but instead, being absent
for a day or two every few weeks or several times per month.
Predictable Absenteeism
In contrast to high frequency absenteeism, predictable absenteeism
often does not involve a staff person being absent from work on more
days than what is allotted by agency policy. In many cases, staff fail to
report to work for the exact number of days that a policy allots over a
given period of time (e.g., for use of sick time). However, the fact that
absences are predictable usually means the absenteeism should be
considered unacceptable.
Predictable absenteeism means that the likelihood of a staff person
being absent on a given day is significantly greater than what would
be expected by chance. The most common example involves a staff
person who frequently fails to report to work on the day immediately
preceding or following scheduled days off, such as just before or after
a weekend or holiday. Other examples of predictable absenteeism
supervisors have experienced with certain staff include increased ab-
senteeism the day after pay day, on days when local public schools are
not in session, and during summer months.
Predictable absenteeism usually warrants a supervisor’s attention
for reduction, even when staff are not using more sick time than allot-
ted by agency policy. Again, legitimate use of sick time for absences
means a staff person (or designated family member) is sick. Sickness
usually does not occur on a predicable basis, such as immediately
before or after a holiday. Therefore, when a staff person is predictably
absent, it typically means the individual is abusing use of sick time.
Because any unscheduled absence has the deleterious effects of absen-
teeism noted earlier, predictable absences should be prevented or

reduced by supervisors.
Extended Duration Absenteeism

The third primary type of staff absences is extended duration absen-
teeism. This type of absenteeism involves a staff person being absent
from work for a number of consecutive days, usually involving at least
one week. Extended duration absenteeism is typically due to an injury
at work or elsewhere, surgery or other major medical procedure, or a
serious illness.
Extended duration absenteeism generally does not warrant as
much attention to reduce compared to high frequency and predictable
absenteeism. The reasons for extended absences as just exemplified
are usually well out of a supervisor’s control, and often the control of
the involved staff. Consequently, there is typically little a supervisor
can do to affect this type of absenteeism.
Extended duration absenteeism also does not warrant supervisory
action to reduce because in part, it often represents planned absences.
Typically, staff know in advance and inform a supervisor that they
must be absent for an extended time period such as when they are
scheduled for surgery. Also, when an injury occurs that prohibits a
staff person from reporting to work for a likely extended period, at
that time the continued absence can be considered as planned. Planned
absences, though still deleterious for an agency, are not as problemat-
ic as unplanned absences. With planned absences, a supervisor can
prepare for a person’s absence and potentially reduce the negative
effects of the absence by altering various work schedules or securing
temporary assistance.
Absenteeism warranting a supervisor’s attention

usually involves a high frequency of staff absences
across work periods or a predictable pattern of
absences.
ABSENTEE-REDUCTION STRATEGIES
Overall, strategies for reducing absenteeism should be based on

the steps constituting evidence-based supervision. The first step with
absenteeism is specifying what constitutes acceptable and unaccept-
able absences along the lines just described. Again, agency policies
regarding allotted absent time can be used as a general guide for what
constitutes acceptable absenteeism. Subsequently, if absenteeism
occurs on a high-frequency or predictable basis, then such absen-
teeism should usually be considered unacceptable and actions should
be taken to reduce the absences.
The next step of evidence-based supervision, that of performance-
and competency-based staff training, is usually not much of an issue
when addressing unacceptable absenteeism. When staff repeatedly
fail to report to work, the problem is not one of staff lacking appro-
priate work skills per se. The only staff training requirement that is
usually necessary involves ensuring staff are thoroughly aware of what
constitutes acceptable versus unacceptable levels of absenteeism.
Ensuring staff awareness of acceptable versus unacceptable absen-
teeism typically involves three key steps. First, staff must be ade-
quately informed about relevant agency policies in general regarding
absent time. Second, staff should be informed about specific criteria
related to acceptable versus unacceptable absences whenever new
strategies are implemented to reduce absenteeism. The information
usually should be based on the type of absenteeism being addressed.
Third, the consequences for acceptable and unacceptable absenteeism
should be made particularly clear to staff (see subsequent sections
relating to implementing absentee-reduction strategies).
Monitoring staff absences is also a part of evidence-based supervi-
sion that usually does not require much extra time by supervisors
when addressing absenteeism problems. Agencies typically have
established systems for maintaining records of staff absences. The
only special consideration for monitoring in regard to absenteeism is
to ensure supervisors frequently review the absentee records and re-
spond accordingly. Appropriate responding in this regard means act-
ing to support appropriate levels of work attendance and to correct
unacceptable levels of absenteeism in accordance with whatever
absentee-reduction strategy is implemented.
Supporting Acceptable Work Attendance

and Correcting Unacceptable Absenteeism
Applied research has developed a number of strategies for reduc-
ing high levels of absenteeism among direct support staff. The strate-
gies share common procedures but also have certain components that
are somewhat unique based on the type of absenteeism being ad-
dressed. Overall, however, the best strategy is to prevent unacceptable
absences from developing into a significant problem within an agency.
Preventing Absentee Problems: Promoting Work Enjoyment
as Part of Supervision. As indicated previously, the causes of fre-
quent absenteeism are not totally clear despite some commonly of-
fered reasons. However, on a most basic level, an underlying cause is
that it is more desirable for staff to stay away from work than to be at
work. This is especially the case when staff abuse their leave time but
stay within the allotted amount of absent time reflected in agency pol-
icy. In this case, staff are in essence being paid for not reporting to
work (e.g., when a staff person is paid for a day of sick leave when the
individual is not at work but is not sick).
Considering the underlying cause of absenteeism as just referred
to, it logically follows that the more staff enjoy their jobs the less they
will be absent from work in an unacceptable manner. This is one key
reason supervisors should actively promote staff enjoyment with their
work. The more supervisors effectively enhance work enjoyment among
staff along with diligent and proficient work performance, problems
with absenteeism will be less likely to occur.
Throughout this text ways supervisors can promote staff work enjoy-
ment have been highlighted. Supervisors should be constantly attending
to how their actions affect staff work enjoyment and strive to promote as
much work enjoyment as reasonably possible. No single action to en-
hance work enjoyment will likely affect how often staff report to work
but cumulatively, consistent supervisor actions to promote work enjoy-
ment can have long-term effects on preventing high levels of absenteeism.
Supervisors who consistently act to promote staff

enjoyment with their work tend to reduce problems
with unacceptable absenteeism.
The importance of supportive supervisory practices that promote

quality performance and staff enjoyment on preventing problems with
absenteeism cannot be overemphasized. However, as with other types
of performance problems, supervisors should be prepared to take cor-
rective action with unacceptable absenteeism if and when it occurs. As
discussed in previous chapters, corrective action is based on frequent
delivery of feedback and if repeated problems continue, appropriate
use of disciplinary action. Most evidence-based approaches to resolv-
ing problems with absenteeism involve both supportive and corrective
actions by supervisors. Specifically how supervisors can support good
attendance and correct unacceptable absenteeism depends in large
part on the type of absenteeism addressed and the absentee-reduction
strategy employed.
Group-Contingency Strategies. One way to reduce unaccept-
able absenteeism developed through applied research is through group
contingencies. Group contingencies involve providing positive and neg-
ative consequences for individual staff performance based on the over-
all functioning of a group of staff. In regard to absenteeism, group
contingencies involve providing consequences for all staff within a
respective group based on the overall level of absences for the entire
group.
An example of how a group contingency has been used to reduce
absenteeism pertains to a situation involving high frequency absen-
teeism in a residential facility, although predictable absenteeism was
also addressed. The primary concern was with an excessively high fre-
quency of staff absences across four-week work periods (staff work
schedules were customarily established for each four-week pay peri-
od). A secondary concern pertained to a higher frequency of staff
absences on weekends when staff were scheduled to work weekends.
In this particular situation, working weekends was especially unpopu-
lar among a significant number of staff—which presumably was a rea-
son many staff failed to report to work when scheduled for weekend
duty.
The absentee-reduction approach using a group contingency
involved the following process. First, a criterion level of acceptable
absences for four-week work periods was established, which repre-
sented a significantly smaller number of absences relative to what was
currently occurring. The criterion was established jointly between
supervisory personnel and direct support staff based on a general con-
sensus about what seemed to be a reasonable expectation for reduc-

ing absences. Second, it was determined that if the criterion was met
for a given work period, then each individual staff person would be
assigned to work fewer weekends during the next four-week period.
Changing the weekend work schedule could be achieved without
affecting client services because if staff absences on the weekend were
significantly reduced, the actual number of staff present on a given
weekend would still be acceptable. Third, if the criterion number of
absences was not met, then the group of staff for whom absences were
still unacceptable would continue with the original work schedule
involving more weekend duty.
The absentee-reduction program was applied with six groups of
staff working on six separate living units within the agency. The group-
contingency strategy was accompanied by significantly less absences
for five of the six groups. A key part of the strategy involved letting
each group of staff decide through a consensus voting procedure if
they wanted to participate in the group contingency for the forth-
coming work period. If they voted not to participate, which rarely
occurred, then that staff group continued on the original schedule that
involved being assigned to work on more weekends each period.
The staff voting procedure represented a participative supervision
component, as did staff involvement in setting the criterion for accept-
able numbers of absences each work period. The benefits of involving
staff in supervisory decision-making processes that affect staff work
activities have been discussed previously. It was also emphasized that
staff involvement in this regard is most beneficial when supervisory
actions address work issues that are particularly important to staff.
Determining specific days that staff will be assigned to work, such as
on weekends versus weekdays, is almost always a very important issue
among staff. Consequently, essentially any new program for address-
ing problems with absenteeism should include staff input into how the
program will work.
Absentee-reduction programs should be designed

by supervisors using a participative supervisory
process in which staff have input into how the pro-
grams will operate.
Including group-contingency components within absentee-reduc-

tion strategies has some unique advantages and disadvantages. The
most notable advantage is that it can evoke peer pressure among staff to
reduce unacceptable absences. Staff who have good work attendance
will encourage and otherwise act to convince staff with unacceptable
absenteeism to improve their attendance. This can be especially use-
ful when considering the common situation in which only a circum-
scribed group of staff is responsible for the primary problems with
absenteeism as described earlier. Staff with good attendance can be
especially motivated to convince the group with problematic absen-
teeism to improve their attendance because of the deleterious effects
of their absenteeism on the former staffs’ work situation.
The peer-pressure feature of group contingencies also represents the
disadvantage of this approach to reducing absenteeism: supervisors
have little control over how some staff will exert pressure on other staff,
and the means they use may not always be desirable within an agency.
Again though, high absenteeism among certain staff negatively affects
the work life of their staff peers who have good attendance. Therefore,
group contingencies are often viewed as more appropriate when deal-
ing with unacceptable absences relative to other types of staff perfor-
mance problems that may not have such pervasive effects on other staff.
Absentee-Reduction Strategies with Individual Staff. Another
strategy for reducing unacceptable absenteeism involves working with
staff on an individual basis instead of a group basis as just summa-
rized. Typically, this approach focuses on staff who have the most seri-
ous absentee problems, whether of a high-frequency or predictable
nature. Several steps of evidence-based supervision are particularly
useful for designing absentee-reduction approaches for application
with individual staff.
Initially, attendance records should be carefully studied to identify
those staff with the most serious absentee problems, which essentially
represents the monitoring step of supervision. The absences of each
staff person should be reviewed to determine if the problem consists
of high-frequency or predictable absenteeism, or both. Clearly delin-
eating why the absences are unacceptable in this regard represents the
specification step of supervision. The training step then involves meet-
ing with each individual staff person whose absenteeism is problem-
atic to discuss precisely why the absences are unacceptable (e.g., they
are too frequent or predictable).
Subsequently, supervisors should determine what will be done to

support appropriate attendance among the identified staff—constitut-
ing the supportive step of supervision. Most commonly, this step
involves providing individualized feedback in a face-to-face manner
with a given staff person on a regular schedule such as at the end of
every work period. The feedback should focus on how the staff per-
son’s performance has improved or how it is maintaining at an accept-
able level, if appropriate.
In addition to providing supportive feedback, individual absentee-
reduction programs essentially always need to involve the corrective
step of evidence-based supervision. The corrective actions should be
taken as described in Chapter 8, beginning with corrective feedback
about the specific absences that are unacceptable. If corrective feed-
back is not followed by clear improvement in a staff person’s atten-
dance, then disciplinary action should be initiated immediately.
Disciplinary action should continue as long as satisfactory improve-
ment is lacking, with the ultimate action of terminating the staff mem-
ber’s job if warranted due to repeated absentee problems.
There are several key features of using disciplinary action effec-
tively to reduce unacceptable absences among individual staff. In par-
ticular, how disciplinary action will be taken should be made very
clear to the staff person when the supervisor first meets with the indi-
vidual to begin the formal absentee-reduction process. The purpose of
clearly specifying likely disciplinary action, and what exactly the
action will involve, helps ensure the staff person is well aware of the
consequences of unacceptable absenteeism. The process also repre-
sents a professional obligation of a supervisor; it is only fair that a staff
person be informed of negative sanctions to potentially occur if the
individual’s problems with absenteeism are not corrected.
Another key feature of using disciplinary action effectively with
absenteeism is that it must be applied in a consistent and timely man-
ner by a supervisor. Often what happens is that a supervisor is aware
of a staff person’s attendance problems but does not maintain consis-
tency in reviewing the attendance records and following up with nec-
essary action. Instead, a number of supervisors attend only sporadi-
cally to the problems and take action inconsistently. The latter
approach rarely results in improved attendance over the long run.
Failure of supervisors to act quickly and consistently in response to
individual absenteeism is a major reason problems with staff absen-
teeism tend to persist in human service agencies.

Supervisors must review attendance records frequently and take
immediate action if problems with absenteeism are occurring. All of
the other means of effective use of disciplinary action (again, refer to
Chapter 8), such as informing agency superiors prior to taking initial
action and providing timely positive feedback when improvement
occurs, should also be adhered to by supervisors. Supervisors likewise
should be prepared to work individually with certain staff over many
weeks before satisfactory attendance occurs, or the staff are appropri-
ately removed from an agency through job termination.
The most common reason supervisors are unsuc-

cessful in reducing absenteeism among individual
staff is they fail to consistently monitor attendance
records and quickly follow up with supportive and
corrective action.
Implementing absentee-reduction procedures on an individual

staff basis is advantageous because the procedures can be used when-
ever a supervisor becomes aware of an absentee problem. The proce-
dures can be applied with a single staff person or with several indi-
viduals for whom attendance records are a concern. In this regard,
most approaches for reducing staff absenteeism involve working with
individual staff.
The primary disadvantage of absentee-reduction procedures used
on an individual staff basis is the process can become time consuming
for a supervisor. This is particularly the case when problems with
absenteeism involve a relatively large number of staff, such that each
staff person requires specific actions by a supervisor. In the latter situ-
ation it is usually more time efficient for a supervisor to implement a
reduction strategy for the entire group of staff. The strategy may
involve a group contingency as described previously. Alternatively, the
strategy may involve supportive and corrective procedures that are the
same for all staff based on each staff person’s attendance without mak-
ing the consequences for individual staff contingent on the overall
attendance of the entire group.
TWO FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

FOR REDUCING ABSENTEEISM
Resolving absentee problems can be a difficult and unpleasant

challenge for supervisors. The difficulty exists because often supervi-
sors must exert time and effort to resolve the problems over extended
time periods. Problems with absenteeism usually encompass at least
several work periods, requiring supervisors to address the issues con-
sistently over many weeks. The unpleasantness exists because most
absentee-reduction approaches, and particularly those taken with indi-
vidual staff, typically involve disciplinary action. Because disciplinary
action by its nature involves punitive sanctions, it is usually negative-
ly received by staff which in turn makes it a negative experience for
supervisors. Nonetheless, because of the problems excessive absen-
teeism cause within an agency and its general pervasiveness, supervi-
sors must be prepared to work actively to both prevent and reduce
problematic absenteeism.
There are two general considerations warranting supervisor atten-
tion that can assist in efforts to reduce staff absenteeism. One consid-
eration pertains to the importance of flexibility when implementing
formal absentee-reduction strategies. The second is attending to both
planned and unplanned absences.
The Importance of Flexibility with Absentee-Reduction Strategies

Implementing absentee-reduction strategies in an effective and fair
manner usually requires a degree of flexibility on the part of a super-
visor. Earlier the importance of clearly specifying for staff what con-
stitutes acceptable versus unacceptable absences was stressed.
However, supervisors should be prepared to be flexible in determin-
ing how such specification relates to certain situations and corre-
sponding supervisor actions.
Flexibility is needed in considering the acceptability of certain staff
absences because for every set of criteria or rules regarding what is
specified as acceptable or not, there are likely to be some justifiable
exceptions. Sometimes it is special circumstances within the work
environment that are resulting in what appears to be unacceptable
absenteeism. For example, many agencies experience budget issues at
times that prohibit hiring new staff to fill vacant staff positions. The
inability to hire new staff often results in excessive workloads for exist-
ing staff. The extra work may result in significant fatigue or physical
discomfort for certain staff, and especially older staff or those with pre-
existing medical conditions that are exacerbated by the increased
workload. It would be inappropriate to consider the increased absen-
teeism in such situations as a staff problem (i.e., it is an overall agency
problem) and impose negative sanctions with those staff.
In other cases, flexibility is needed because what initially appears
to be an abuse of absent time based on existing attendance criteria is
really not a misuse of leave time. To illustrate, a staff member may
have satisfactory attendance except for a certain time of the year. Such
a pattern of absences might meet the criteria for predicable absen-
teeism. However, on closer evaluation it may be determined that the
absences during the designated period are due to medical issues such
as severe allergies that tend to be seasonal in nature. It would be inap-
propriate to consider absences during the predictable time period as
unacceptable if the staff person was experiencing physical problems.
The need for flexibility in carrying out absenteeism-reduction
strategies is most relevant when dealing with individual staff absences.
This is one reason that the first step in implementing a strategy with
a staff person to reduce absenteeism is to meet with the individual to
review the pattern of absences that reflect a problem. The meeting
allows the staff person an opportunity to discuss the reasons for the
noted absences. In turn, such information can assist the supervisor in
determining whether what initially appeared to be an abuse of leave
time truly represents unacceptable absenteeism. The supervisor would
then need to be appropriately flexible in determining whether to carry
out the corrective action part of the strategy and especially the disci-
plinary action component.
An illustration of how supervisors need to be flexible in imple-
menting absenteeism-reduction strategies with individual staff is rep-
resented by issues with absenteeism that accompanied the onset of the
COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020. As the pandemic began, many
agencies and especially those providing residential services experi-
enced a serious increase in staff absences. The reasons for the
increased absences were varied, including staff fear of contracting the
virus from other staff or clients if they showed up for work, having to
stay home with children due to school closings, and actually becom-
ing ill with the virus.
Because of the varied reasons for increased absences, there was no

single strategy agencies could use to prevent and reduce absences.
Some agencies attempted to promote attendance at work (and mini-
mize the disease spreading within the agency) by initiating overt pro-
cedures to prevent staff from working if they had been infected with
the virus or they had contact with someone else affected. The proce-
dures also served the purpose of reducing staff fear about contracting
the virus if they came to work. Other agencies arranged child-care
alternatives for staff who needed such care to be able to report to
work. In short, agencies had to be flexible in working with different
staff to help them resolve issues that were causing them to be absent
from work.
Attending to Planned and Unplanned Absences

Earlier a distinction was made between planned and unplanned staff
absences. It was also noted that unplanned absences have many more
problematic effects within an agency. The discussion on reducing
absenteeism to this point has pertained to unplanned absences—when
staff are scheduled to be working but are not present on the job.
Planned absences generally refer to a staff person being absent
from work with the prior approval of the supervisor. Planned absences
can also pose a problem for supervisors at times, and particularly if
too many staff are away from work on approved leave. However,
because planned absences usually are approved by a supervisor prior
to their occurrence, they usually are not considered as problematic
absenteeism.
Planned absences are noted here because such absences can be
affected by unplanned absences. Sometimes absentee-reduction strate-
gies that reduce unplanned absenteeism have an accompanying effect
of increasing planned absences. Some staff who reduce their
unplanned absences when an absentee-reduction program is imple-
mented will increase their requests for approved time off from work.
Supervisors should be aware of this potential impact when imple-
menting specific procedures to reduce unplanned absences.
Generally, the increase in planned absences that may accompany
decreases in unplanned absences should not be considered a major
concern. Supervisors usually have considerable control over whether
requests for leave are approved or not. Therefore, they can maintain
planned absences at a level that does not involve major disruptions to

the overall work routine.
In addition, planned absences typically mean staff are using leave
time that is granted by agency policy, such as vacation leave. Agencies
typically limit how many approved leave days are granted for a given
time period based on agency policy. Therefore, if a staff person
increases requests for approved leave because of reduced unplanned
absences as a result of an absentee-reduction program, the staff per-
son will eventually use all the approved leave that the agency allows.
At that point, any absences the staff person has will be unplanned,
and subject to the consequences within the absentee-reduction proce-
dure.
1. Frequent absenteeism is a problem in many human service agencies, and

one that supervisors should be prepared to address.
2. Supervisors must clearly specify for staff what constitutes acceptable ver-
sus unacceptable absenteeism.
3. Three main types of absenteeism include high frequency absences, pre-

dictable absences, and extended-duration absences, with the first two
types representing performance problems supervisors should usually act to
resolve.
4. The best way of preventing problematic absenteeism is for supervisors to

consistently act to promote staff enjoyment with their work along with
diligent and proficient performance.
5. One evidence-based strategy for reducing problematic absenteeism

involves group contingencies in which consequences for individual staff
are based on the average level of absences among all staff in a respective
group.
6. The most common, evidence-based strategy for reducing absenteeism

involves working with individual staff to support good attendance
through positive feedback and reduce unacceptable absences through cor-
rective feedback and if necessary, disciplinary action.
7. To effectively reduce unacceptable absences among individual staff, super-

visors must frequently review attendance records and carry out support-
ive or corrective action on a timely and consistent basis.
8. Supervisors should be prepared to be flexible in implementing absentee-

reduction programs in individual situations.
9. Supervisors should be aware that as unplanned (unacceptable) absences

are decreased, planned absences may increase for a period of time.
Chapter 12
RESOLVING PROBLEMS WITH STAFF

PROVISION OF CLIENT-TEACHING SERVICES
A primary responsibility of direct support staff in most human ser-

vice agencies is teaching. Direct support staff frequently are charged
with teaching clients self-help and related skills of daily living. Many
staff are also expected to teach various communication and social
skills, vocationally related skills, leisure skills, and skills required to
function in community activities.
Client-teaching procedures expected to be carried out by direct
support staff usually are designed by agency clinicians such as teach-
ers or behavior specialists. In other agencies, administrative personnel
such as treatment team leaders write teaching plans. Regardless of
who develops teaching programs for clients, the bulk of teaching ser-
vices on a day-to-day basis is usually provided by direct support staff.
Direct support staff are generally expected to provide teaching ser-
vices in two primary ways. The first way is represented in explicitly
scheduled, circumscribed sessions or what is considered formal teach-
ing. Most commonly, set times are established for staff to work one-on-
one with a designated client for the explicit purpose of carrying out a
teaching program. The program relates directly to a formal goal or
objective as part of the client’s overall habilitation or education plan.
The second way staff are expected to provide teaching services is
to embed teaching within ongoing, daily activities of clients. This type
of naturalistic or embedded teaching involves incorporating brief instruc-
tional strategies within the daily routine to promote carry over of what
is taught in formal teaching sessions. The intent also is for clients to
be actively supported in functioning as independently as possible dur-
ing ongoing events in their routine environments.
219
A critical responsibility of direct support staff in

most human service agencies is teaching meaning-
ful skills to enhance client independence.
Although providing teaching services is a common performance

expectation of direct support staff, it is an area of service provision
that is often problematic. Teaching services frequently are not provid-
ed in the manner in which they are intended. Correspondingly, agency
clients do not make satisfactory progress in learning and using func-
tional skills. It is common to observe clients in some group homes and
adult day programs, for example, receiving the same instructional pro-
gram on a given skill area for weeks, months, and even years without
mastering the targeted skill.
There are two main reasons why teaching services are often inef-
fective in human service agencies: either the teaching procedures are
not carried out proficiently by staff or staff do not carry out assigned
teaching duties as often as the duties should be performed. As with
other performance areas of concern, however, these problems should
not be interpreted solely as a staff issue. Instead, the inadequate per-
formance usually relates directly to lack of effective supervision.
Effective supervision requires supervisors to accept responsibility for
problems with staff performance (Chapter 10). Supervisors must act to
support proficient performance—in this case appropriate implementa-
tion of teaching services—and to correct nonproficient performance.
What supervisors should do to correct inadequate teaching services
must be based on why the services are not acceptable. This usually
means addressing issues with the proficiency with which staff imple-
ment teaching procedures or staff failure to carry out teaching duties
as frequently as expected.
Resolving problems with teaching services usually

requires supervisors to take action to improve how
staff carry out teaching procedures or to increase
how often staff engage in teaching activities.
Resolving Problems with Staff Provision 221
In addition to addressing issues relating to the quality and quanti-

ty of teaching, supervisors must address the type of services that are
of concern: either teaching provided formally in assigned teaching ses-
sions or naturalistically during daily activities. This chapter focuses on
what supervisors can do to resolve problems with teaching services of
both a formal and naturalistic nature. The supervisory procedures to
be discussed also relate to other therapeutic services expected to be
provided by direct support staff such as carrying out movement exer-
cises designed by occupational or physical therapists and communi-
cation strategies established by speech and language pathologists.
IMPROVING FORMAL TEACHING SERVICES
Formal teaching is usually scheduled to occur with individual

clients during certain time periods of the workday. The teaching in-
volves implementing specific instructional strategies according to a writ-
ten plan. As noted previously, when problematic performance occurs
with implementation of formal teaching plans, the problems pertain
to staff carrying out the teaching strategies nonproficiently or not com-
pleting the teaching sessions as often as assigned. Resolving the two
types of teaching problems involves similar supervisory actions as well
as certain actions that are idiosyncratic to each respective problem.
Before discussing how supervisors can correct problematic perfor-
mance related to formal teaching, a basic prerequisite warrants atten-
tion. Specifically, it is assumed that the teaching plans staff are expect-
ed to carry out—again, typically developed and written by an agency
professional—are good plans. Teaching plans must be developed and
written in a quality manner with sound instructional procedures to
facilitate client skill acquisition. As many supervisors have experi-
enced, however, this is not always the case.
Supervisors are likely to have concerns at times with the quality of
teaching programs that their staff are charged with implementing.
How to evaluate and subsequently alter written teaching plans when
necessary is beyond the scope of this text. On a general level though,
if supervisors suspect that certain plans may be problematic (e.g., the
plans lack key instructional strategies or are written in an unclear
manner), the supervisors should consult with whomever developed
the plans to resolve the concerns.
Assuming formal teaching plans are prepared adequately, then the

plans represent in essence the first two steps of evidence-based super-
vision for promoting quality teaching by staff. The plans specify the out-
comes desired for individual clients to attain in terms of acquiring cer-
tain skills, which represents the first step of evidence-based supervi-
sion. The plans also specify staff performance expectations regarding what
staff should do on the job, which constitutes the second step of super-
vision. In this case the expectations pertain to staff implementing the
teaching procedures as written in the plans.
Improving Staff Proficiency in Conducting

Formal Teaching Procedures
When problems exist with the proficiency with which staff imple-
ment formal teaching plans, it means that staff are not carrying out the
teaching procedures in accordance with the written plans. In turn,
lack of satisfactory implementation of teaching plans usually means
either staff have not been adequately trained to carry out the plans or
they lack the motivation to consistently carry out the plans appropri-
ately. Supervisors must determine which of these issues is relevant
when problems with staff teaching proficiency become apparent.
The best way for supervisors to identify why teaching proficiency
is problematic is to observe staff teaching performance, which repre-
sents the monitoring step of supervision. Observing staff carry out teach-
ing plans usually results in supervisors determining if staff lack neces-
sary instructional skills or are not sufficiently motivated to use their
skills appropriately. For example, if supervisors observe staff carry out
some teaching sessions proficiently but display nonproficient perfor-
mance during other sessions, the problem is usually insufficient moti-
vation—staff know how to teach but do not exert the effort to consis-
tently implement teaching programs appropriately. In contrast, if super-
visors observe staff consistently make the same error with a teaching
program, it is likely the staff lack relevant skills and warrant training.
Training Staff to Teach. Ensuring staff carry out formal teaching
procedures proficiently typically requires that staff have skills in two
related areas. First, staff must have skills in basic instructional strategies
for teaching people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Second, staff must have skills in specific instructional strategies that are
individualized for respective clients within the clients’ teaching plans.
Because teaching meaningful skills to agency clients is a common

performance expectation of direct support staff, it is recommended
that all support staff receive training in basic teaching procedures early
in their employment. To illustrate, a common set of teaching proce-
dures trained to support staff in a number of agencies includes how to
assist or prompt learner responses to instructions, correct inaccurate
learner responses, and reinforce correct responses. Using the behav-
ioral skills training (BST) protocol described in Chapter 4 is ideal for
training staff in these types of basic teaching procedures.
Supervisors should strive to ensure all of their support staff receive
BST in basic ways to teach. Often this will entail soliciting the assis-
tance of professional personnel who are thoroughly skilled in teach-
ing strategies to develop a staff training program. Supervisors should
likewise be involved in the development of the staff training program
as well as the actual training of their staff. In this regard, a program
we have researched and used repeatedly to prepare supervisors to
train their staff how to teach is referenced below.
REFERENCE FOR PREPARING SUPERVISORS

TO TRAIN STAFF HOW TO TEACH
Training staff to teach people with severe disabilities: A practi-

cal, evidence-based approach for quick success (see book sec-
tion of Selected Readings for complete reference).
Supervisor involvement in training staff in basic ways to teach is

particularly important because of the nature of teaching individuals
who have disabilities. A vital component of such programs is the on-
the-job part of training (again, see Chapter 4). Once staff satisfactori-
ly complete a classroom-based program on basic teaching procedures,
the training must continue in an on-the-job manner as staff actually
teach clients. Usually, it is the staff supervisor’s responsibility to con-
duct the on-the-job training, or at least to be integrally involved in this
aspect of training with other trainers.
When staff initially implement teaching procedures with clients,
questions usually arise among staff regarding the instructional strate-
gies they are expected to use. Additionally, teaching of actual clients

is always somewhat different than teaching in a role-play situation as
occurs in most staff training programs. Consequently, supervisors should
be present when staff begin to conduct teaching sessions to answer
staff questions and otherwise support and correct staffs’ initial teach-
ing efforts.
After staff have been effectively trained in basic teaching proce-
dures, supervisors should strive to ensure staff receive training in the
specific aspects of each teaching program designed for individual cli-
ents. Each client teaching plan is likely to be a little bit different and
may include some instructional strategies with which staff are not
familiar. Accordingly, staff will need at least some training associated
with each plan they are expected to implement.
In the ideal situation from a supervisor’s perspective, the clinician
who develops a teaching plan should be the person who trains staff
who are expected to implement the plan. Even in this situation though,
supervisors must have some involvement. Supervisors need to be
familiar with all teaching plans staff are charged with carrying out to
effectively supervise their routine implementation of the plans once
trained.
In many cases, supervisors also need to be prepared to assume the
bulk of the responsibility for training staff how to implement teaching
plans developed by clinicians. Although from a professional perspec-
tive clinicians are expected to train staff to implement the plans they
develop, supervisors will likely encounter situations in which clini-
cians do not adequately fulfill this responsibility. Some clinicians will
not invest the time to adequately train staff to carry out teaching plans.
In other cases, clinicians are not skilled in how to train staff. As a re-
sult, the training they do provide for staff is not effective. When these
situations arise, supervisors must assume the responsibility of ensuring
staff have the necessary skills to carry out client teaching plans profi-
ciently.
Emphasizing the need for supervisors to train staff to implement
teaching plans that clinicians develop may seem like an unfair expec-
tation of supervisors. In some ways, the expectation is indeed unfair.
Again, however, even though clinicians are expected to train staff to
implement plans they develop according to professional standards of
most clinical fields, some clinicians do not meet this professional
requirement very well. Consequently, whether fair or not, if supervi-
sors are to fulfill their own responsibilities of promoting quality staff

performance—in this case staff implementation of teaching plans—they
must ensure staff are well trained to carry out the plans even if the
supervisors have to provide the training themselves.
One factor that can reduce the time and effort of supervisors to
train staff to carry out formal teaching plans is that the amount of
required training is often limited. This factor relates to why direct sup-
port staff should be trained in basic instructional skills as summarized
earlier. When staff are skilled in basic teaching procedures, frequently
they need only a little additional training to implement a given teach-
ing plan. This is one of the situations discussed in Chapter 4 in which
all steps of BST do not have to be carried out by the supervisor. A
description of specific components of the teaching plan will some-
times suffice, perhaps supplemented with a role-play demonstration.
Maintaining Staff Proficiency in Providing Formal Teaching
Services Following Training. Ensuring staff are well trained, both in
basic instructional procedures and strategies related to individualized
teaching programs, sets the occasion for staff to conduct formal teach-
ing sessions proficiently. However, as with other areas of staff perfor-
mance, training is a necessary step to promote proficient teaching, but
it is not sufficient. Training must be followed by on-the-job supervision.
A number of investigations have shown that without follow-up super-
vision, staff teaching proficiency frequently deteriorates as staff con-
duct teaching sessions during their work routine. Lack of effective
supervision in this regard is a primary reason that problems with inad-
equate teaching services are prevalent in human service agencies.
Maintaining staff teaching proficiency involves the same basic
supervisory procedures described in previous chapters for ensuring
proficient staff performance in general. The component steps of evi-
dence-based supervision should serve as a guide for what supervisors
do to ensure quality teaching by staff. As noted previously, the per-
formance expectation of staff in this situation is usually clear: staff
should carry out the steps specified in the written teaching plan per-
taining to each client whom they teach.
Once staff begin their assigned teaching duties (following training),
their teaching performance should be routinely monitored by supervi-
sors following the guidelines described in Chapter 5. Monitoring staff
teaching performance is facilitated if a checklist or monitoring form is
developed based on the teaching strategies within respective teaching
plans for each client being taught. Generally, a reasonable goal for
staff teaching proficiency is that across all teaching opportunities, the
staff correctly implement at least 80% of specified teaching procedures
(e.g., prompting, correcting learner errors, reinforcing correct learner
responses) during each teaching session.
Sometimes supervisors expect staff to teach at a 100% level of pro-
ficiency. However, such a goal is usually unrealistic. Essentially no one
teaches perfectly; even the most experienced and motivated teachers
make some mistakes while working with different learners. In this re-
gard, research has indicated that perfect teaching usually is not nec-
essary (though desired). As long as staff carry out teaching procedures
at a level of at least 80% proficiency, learners with even the most se-
vere disabilities usually acquire the skills targeted in teaching plans.
Monitoring a staff person’s teaching session with a client should be
followed by supportive feedback for teaching procedures implemented
correctly (Chapter 6). Considering the importance of formal teaching
sessions—in this case helping clients learn functional skills to maxi-
mize their independence—it is also advantageous if special recognition
procedures (Chapter 7) are used periodically by supervisors to support
proficient teaching. One particularly effective way to specially recog-
nize quality teaching of staff is to focus on the skill development ob-
served among clients whom the staff teach.
Specially recognizing staff teaching efforts by emphasizing skill
gains of the clients they teach has several advantages. Most staff are
aware of the importance of clients acquiring skills and displaying in-
creased independence in daily functioning. Recognizing that specific
staff are responsible for client success in this regard can help staff feel
quite good about their teaching accomplishments. Such recognition
heightens staff awareness that they are having a significant influence
on client quality of life.
Providing special recognition for client skill attainment based on staff
teaching performance can also have a somewhat unique effect on staff
motivation and work enjoyment. As discussed previously, one charac-
teristic of the job of providing direct support that decreases work moti-
vation is that staff sometimes feel they are simply doing the same thing
everyday. In turn, staff feel they are not really accomplishing anything
significant but instead, simply “putting in their time” in a repetitive man-
ner. In contrast, when clients learn how to do something as a result of
staff teaching performance, there is a clear outcome to staff work efforts.
When clients acquire skills being taught by staff, staff can experi-
ence a feeling of having completed something important. Once a
client meets a pre-specified degree of independence in performing a
skill targeted by a teaching plan, staff work associated with formally
carrying out the plan is concluded. Having a clear end to a work task
in this manner can negate a feeling of simply doing the same thing
everyday without finishing anything. It can be very motivating to staff
to realize they have successfully finished an important work task.
A good way for supervisors to support proficient

teaching services of staff is to specially recognize
client skill development that results from staff
teaching efforts.
In addition to providing supportive feedback and periodic special

recognition based on observed teaching performance of staff, supervi-
sors will also need to provide corrective feedback (Chapter 8). Corrective
feedback regarding inaccuracies with staff implementation of a teach-
ing plan typically results in improved teaching. However, in some
cases supervisors will likely need to follow repeated presentations of
corrective feedback with disciplinary action if teaching performance
does not improve.
Nonproficient teaching performance represents an area of staff
work activities that usually does not result in disciplinary action in
many agencies as noted in Chapter 8. However, failure to take disci-
plinary action with inadequate teaching that does not improve despite
repeated presentations of corrective feedback is a serious supervisory
mistake. Providing formal teaching services for clients is a critical
responsibility of most direct support staff and should be taken seri-
ously by staff and supervisors alike.
The best way for supervisors to impress upon staff the importance
of client-teaching duties is to provide frequent supportive feedback for
quality teaching and corrective feedback as necessary. Generally, those
areas of staff performance that receive the most attention from super-
visors in terms of supervisory feedback tend to be viewed by staff as
their most important job responsibilities. The importance is height-
ened further if staff are aware that repeated occurrences of inadequate

teaching will not be tolerated and will result in disciplinary action.
Ensuring Staff Conduct Formal Teaching as Often as Expected

The second primary problem pertaining to inadequacies in formal
teaching services is that some staff do not conduct teaching sessions as
often as the sessions are expected to be conducted. When staff fail to
provide teaching as frequently as expected, the failure represents a
performance problem that has serious effects on client welfare. Most
noticeably, clients do not receive the quantity of teaching services they
are intended to receive and their skill development is compromised.
The most common reason some staff do not conduct assigned
teaching sessions is insufficient motivation; staff lack the motivation to
exert the time and effort to carry out teaching programs. Before dis-
cussing supervisory actions for overcoming insufficient motivation to
teach, however, two other less common but nonetheless important rea-
sons for problematic performance in this area warrant attention. One
reason is other work duties required of staff conflict with their time to
conduct formal teaching sessions. The other reason is that conducting
teaching sessions results in challenging behavior of clients that causes
the sessions to be unpleasant for staff to conduct.
The issue of competing work duties interfering with staff comple-
tion of teaching sessions requires a degree of assessment on the part
of supervisors. Sometimes this is a real issue and sometimes it is sim-
ply an excuse on the part of some staff to avoid carrying out teaching
programs. Frequent supervisor monitoring of staff work activities—and
of particular concern here, their teaching duties—will usually inform
supervisors whether there is adequate time for staff to complete
assigned duties. If monitoring indicates there is adequate time for staff
to conduct teaching sessions, then the problem is one of insufficient
motivation. If monitoring reveals a true lack of time to teach due to
other duties, then supervisors must reassess the staff work schedule
and make refinements.
The other reason for staff failure to carry out teaching sessions as
frequently as expected can be more complex. Some clients will re-
spond to teaching programs implemented by staff with various types
of challenging behavior. Such behavior may involve disruption of
materials or property, aggression toward the staff person who is at-
tempting to teach, and even self-injury among some clients. When

these types of client behavior occur during teaching sessions, the ses-
sions can become quite unpleasant for staff and they tend to avoid
conducting subsequent sessions.
When supervisors become aware that certain staff refrain from
conducting teaching sessions because of client problem behavior, the
recommended action is to seek clinical assistance to reduce the prob-
lem behavior. There are numerous evidence-based interventions to
overcome problem behavior among individuals with developmental
and related disabilities, and agency clinicians are expected to be well
versed in the interventions. Hopefully, supervisors will have ready
access to such clinicians. If not, supervisors should seek assistance
from any other agency personnel who may be able to help devise pro-
cedures to overcome the problem behavior. The ultimate point is that
staff should not be expected to continuously carry out teaching ses-
sions if the sessions consistently result in client problem behavior.
Motivating Staff to Conduct Teaching Sessions. Promoting staff
motivation to conduct formal teaching sessions as frequently as
expected involves the same general supervisory approach for main-
taining staff proficiency in carrying out teaching plans. In this case the
performance expectation of staff is usually well specified: teaching ses-
sions should be conducted during the scheduled time. Subsequently,
supervisors should monitor frequently to obtain accurate information
regarding staff completion of assigned teaching sessions.
Monitoring staff completion of teaching sessions can also involve
supervisors checking the data staff record regarding client responses
during teaching sessions. Formal teaching sessions typically require
staff to record client responses to various instructions or steps of the
written teaching plan on prepared forms or digital tools. The com-
pleted forms and tools represent a permanent product of staff perfor-
mance in regard to having completed designated sessions (see later
discussion on data collection issues).
Monitoring of staff teaching performance and associated record-
keeping should be followed by supervisory supportive and corrective
feedback as appropriate. In some cases supervisors may also need to
follow unsatisfactory completion of teaching sessions with more severe
action. In this regard, a primary indicator of how frequently staff con-
duct assigned teaching sessions is the amount of supervisory attention
directed to this area of performance. If supervisors do not routinely
attend to teaching sessions as well as the resulting records, problems

with staff completion of such sessions will likely occur.
The more attention supervisors direct to staff com-

pletion of formal teaching sessions in terms of pro-
viding feedback for completing the sessions, the
more likely it is that sessions will be conducted as
often as they are expected to be conducted.
There are also two special considerations warranting supervisor

attention regarding staff motivation to conduct formal teaching ses-
sions as often as desired. The first consideration pertains to the view
among some support staff that in essence, they are not paid to be
teachers. Such staff believe that because various clinical personnel
have professional training in teaching strategies and are paid a pro-
fessional salary, they should be the ones to conduct teaching sessions.
These staff likewise believe they should not have to conduct teaching
sessions unless they are paid the same as professionals.
This view of some staff should be negated by supervisors immedi-
ately upon becoming aware of such a belief. Although the salary of
direct support staff relative to professional personnel can be contro-
versial, it is not an acceptable reason for supervisors to allow staff to
refuse to conduct assigned teaching sessions. It should be made clear
to staff upon employment or when initially assigned to conduct client
teaching sessions that teaching is one of their primary job responsi-
bilities. If various staff refuse to accept that responsibility, then they
should not maintain employment in a direct support capacity.
Another view of some staff that reduces their motivation to carry
out teaching sessions is somewhat more involved. Specifically, some
staff consider that clients who have severe disabilities cannot benefit
significantly from teaching programs. They believe such clients will
not learn skills that are intended to be taught and it is essentially a
waste of time to conduct teaching sessions.
Some clients do present challenges from a teaching perspective,
and especially clients with the most severe intellectual disabilities.
Nonetheless, there is a sound evidence base indicating that if well-
designed teaching strategies are carried out in the intended manner,

almost all individuals with intellectual disabilities will make progress
in learning useful skills. If supervisors suspect that some staff do not
believe conducting formal teaching sessions will benefit certain clients,
supervisors should clearly discuss this issue with the staff. It should be
explained how current teaching technology has been shown to bene-
fit the vast majority of people who have severe disabilities.
Although it is beneficial for supervisors to discuss with staff the
proven effectiveness of existing teaching technologies, such a discus-
sion does not warrant repeated attention by supervisors. The best way
for staff to acknowledge the benefits of conducting formal teaching
sessions is to observe firsthand the client skill development that results
from the sessions. If supervisors regularly attend to staff teaching per-
formances such that staff teach proficiently, the staff will usually see
the effects of their efforts on client skill acquisition.
PROMOTING NATURALISTIC TEACHING

DURING ROUTINE ACTIVITIES
Although formal teaching sessions represent a primary service

component within most human service agencies, the effectiveness of
this approach to enhancing client independence is often limited. The
number of formal teaching sessions that can be provided each day for
all clients on an individual basis is frequently restricted due to other
duties required of support staff. Most staff also spend the majority of
their time working with groups of clients such that available time for
one-to-one teaching with individual clients is reduced.
The best means for providing teaching services beyond what can
occur through formal teaching sessions is through naturalistic teaching.
As indicated previously, naturalistic teaching involves incorporating
brief instructional trials during routinely occurring client activities.
The highest quality agencies from a therapeutic perspective ensure
that teaching is not limited to formal, circumscribed teaching sessions.
The agencies promote an overall environment in which clients are
consistently being taught functional skills as they go about their daily
routine.
Many human service agencies espouse the importance of staff pro-
viding a continuous learning environment for clients by incorporating
teaching within daily activities. However, most agencies experience
significant difficulties in consistently providing a true learning envi-

ronment. Often what happens is that instead of staff instructing clients
how to perform a given activity themselves, staff perform the activity
for the clients. To illustrate, if a staff person observes a client having
difficulty putting on a jacket prior to leaving a group home, the staff
person helps the client put on the jacket instead of instructing the
client at that moment how to put on the jacket.
To effectively promote client skill development and

independence, direct support staff should consis-
tently embed teaching trials and learning opportu-
nities within daily activities.
When staff perform a task for clients instead of teaching the clients
how to do the task for themselves, staff are in essence depriving clients
of learning important skills. Staff completion of activities for clients is
usually well intended in that staff are attempting to help support the
clients. Nonetheless, the end result is clients develop dependence on
staff in contrast to acquiring independence in meeting their own needs.
In other cases, staff attempt to embed teaching trials within their
ongoing interactions with clients but do so ineffectively. A common
example is when a staff person observes a client having difficulty do-
ing something and instructs the client how to perform the task. How-
ever, the client does not have the skills to respond to the instruction.
The staff person then repeats the instruction, again without an accu-
rate response by the client. Subsequently, because the task needs to be
completed, the staff person ends up doing the task for the client. In
this type of situation, the attempted teaching of the client is ineffective
and the client does not acquire any new skills.
The examples just described illustrate two main problems that pro-
hibit an agency from providing a high-quality learning environment
for clients: staff either do not embed teaching within their interactions
with clients (i.e., they do things for clients) or when they attempt to
teach naturalistically, they do so ineffectively. Consequently, to maxi-
mize the amount of teaching services provided within an agency, staff
must be trained in naturalistic teaching skills and then use those skills
appropriately on a daily basis. Supervisors usually must address each

of these two issues.
Training Staff How to Teach During Routine Client Activities

Skills required of staff to embed teaching within routinely occur-
ring client activities represent a subset of basic teaching skills used
during formal teaching sessions. To illustrate, earlier it was noted that
a basic set of teaching skills that should be trained to all support staff
involves how to provide an instruction to a client, provide assistance
through prompting if a client does not respond to the instruction or
correct an incorrect client response, and reinforce the client’s eventu-
al correct response. Naturalistic teaching typically involves these same
basic procedures except that instead of conducting the procedures
repeatedly during a formal teaching session, the procedures are pro-
vided in one sequence when a teaching opportunity arises during the
daily routine.
Although naturalistic teaching procedures stem directly from basic
instructional strategies, staff usually need explicit training in how to
embed teaching within routine activities after they have been trained
in basic instruction. In particular, a key component of training staff to
teach naturalistically is training to recognize when a teaching oppor-
tunity exists. A useful guide in this respect is to train staff regarding
two general situations in which immediate teaching opportunities are
likely to arise.
One situation is when staff are repeatedly doing something for a
client such as buttoning a shirt or fastening a seat belt for a client. It
should be emphasized to staff that when they are repeatedly doing a
given task for a client, a more therapeutic approach would be to teach
the client do the task whenever the task needs to be performed. A sec-
ond situation that should be made apparent to staff as an opportune
time to teach naturalistically is when they observe a client having dif-
ficulty doing something, such as problems opening a bag of chips or
using a key to open a door. When a client wants to do something but
is having difficulty doing it, a good teaching opportunity exists at that
point for a staff person to intervene and teach the client how to per-
form the task.
The best way to train staff to recognize the two types of situations
just noted as opportunities to teach naturalistically is to provide a lot
of examples of the situations. Supervisors and other trainers should
role play a number of examples of the two types of situations as part

of their staff training endeavors. As each example is demonstrated, the
role play should include how the exemplified activity should be inter-
rupted by using the instruct, prompt, and reinforce process to teach
naturalistically. Subsequently, following the steps of BST, each staff
person should practice the naturalistic teaching strategy with feedback
during several role plays with different examples.
When training staff how to teach naturalistically supervisors should
explicitly stress the importance of embedding teaching within daily
activities as a primary performance expectation. Staff should be in-
structed to continuously look for things they are repeatedly doing for
clients and things clients are trying to do but are having difficulty. It
should be further emphasized that these situations are ideal times for
staff to conduct brief teaching trials with clients.
Stressing the importance to staff of incorporating teaching within
daily activities should occur when beginning a program to train staff
how to teach naturalistically and again at the end of the training ses-
sion. However, emphasizing the importance of naturalistic teaching
usually will not be sufficient to ensure staff routinely teach during typ-
ically occurring activities. Supervisors must continue to stress such im-
portance as they follow up the training with their day-to-day supervi-
sion of staff teaching performance.
Supervisors should ensure staff receive training in

how to teach naturalistically after they have been
effectively trained in basic teaching procedures.
Ensuring Staff Perform Naturalistic Teaching After Receiving Training

To ensure staff consistently embed teaching within ongoing client
activities, the same supervisory approach as described with formal
teaching sessions should be employed. Supervisors should routinely
monitor staff use of naturalistic teaching procedures and provide feed-
back. The feedback should be supportive when staff are frequently
embedding teaching within their client interactions and are doing so
proficiently. Corrective feedback should be provided if staff are not
consistently teaching in a naturalistic manner such as when they are

missing existing opportunities in which a teaching trial could be pro-
vided. Corrective feedback likewise should be presented if naturalistic
teaching strategies are not provided proficiently when they are used
by staff.
Providing feedback related to the degree to which staff are rou-
tinely embedding teaching during daily activities is especially impor-
tant. The most common problem in human service agencies associat-
ed with naturalistic teaching is that staff do not provide nearly as
much of this type of teaching as should be provided. Therefore, super-
visor attention in terms of providing feedback to staff should be espe-
cially frequent in regard to how often staff actually teach during daily
activities.
Another action supervisors should take that is especially relevant
for promoting naturalistic teaching by staff is modeling. Supervisors
should frequently model or demonstrate provision of brief teaching
trials within their own interactions with clients while in the presence
of staff. When supervisors model naturalistic teaching for staff to
observe, the modeling can function as a prompt or reminder for staff
that they should be incorporating teaching trials within their interac-
tions with clients.
Supervisors can help promote staff teaching during

daily activities by modeling the use of naturalistic
teaching strategies during their own interactions
with clients.
In some cases staff do not engage in naturalistic teaching as fre-

quently as desired because the staff lack sufficient motivation to
embed teaching services within daily activities. In particular, in some
cases it is easier for staff to do certain things for clients relative to ex-
erting the effort to teach the clients to do those things for themselves.
The lack of motivation should be addressed as discussed earlier in this
chapter with formal teaching sessions as well as in preceding chapters
regarding motivational issues with other performance areas (see espe-
cially Chapter 8).
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR OVERCOMING

PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS WITH TEACHING SERVICES
The are two special considerations in regard to overcoming prob-

lems with staff teaching performance that often warrant attention.
One consideration pertains to problems with staff data collection as
part of teaching expectations. The second consideration has to do
with staff implementation of treatment plans for challenging behavior
among clients that can impede proficient teaching by staff.
Resolving Problems with Data Collection and Documentation

It was noted earlier that formal teaching sessions involve staff re-
cording client responses to the teaching. Data on client responses are
critical for determining if the teaching procedures are having the de-
sired effect on client skill acquisition. Correspondingly, the data are
used to make decisions affecting the teaching process. If the data indi-
cate clients are not making progress, then changes in how the teach-
ing is conducted are warranted. In contrast, if the data show clients are
making satisfactory progress, then the teaching should continue in the
same manner until clients reach designated skill mastery. Data on
client responses are also used in many cases to document that teach-
ing sessions have been conducted by staff.
Because of the critical function data serve in the overall teaching
process, data collection represents an important performance expec-
tation of staff who conduct teaching sessions. However, in many agen-
cies, staff data collection represents an area of frequent concern
among supervisors and agency executives. One concern in this regard
pertains to staff not completing assigned data-collection duties—some
staff do not consistently record data on client responses to teaching
programs.
Another problem with data collection that occurs in many agen-
cies is that the data staff collect are not accurate. The most common
reason data collection is not accurate is that staff do not record client
responses when they should be recorded, which usually should hap-
pen before a formal teaching session is completed. Sometimes staff
will wait until the end of their work shift to record data, or even the
end of the work week. When staff delay their data recording, the
resulting data almost always have problems with accuracy. Accuracy
is compromised because staff cannot adequately remember client

responses to each aspect of the teaching plans that was implemented
at an earlier time.
A more significant problem with data collection that occurs in
some cases pertains to staff fabricating data. Specifically, staff record
information that has no relation to actual client responses during
teaching sessions. An example some supervisors have experienced is
when certain staff complete a week’s worth of data-collection forms at
the beginning of the week before conducting any teaching sessions.
Most supervisors will likely face problems with how certain staff
record data and related documentation at some point in time. Conse-
quently, supervisors should be prepared to resolve this type of perfor-
mance problem. The best preparation in this regard is to take steps to
prevent problems from developing with staff data recording.
A common reason staff do not perform data-recording responsi-
bilities appropriately is that they are not sufficiently aware of why they
need to record data. Often staff know it is expected to maintain
records of client responses during teaching sessions but essentially see
no reason for such recording. This situation typically occurs because
staff are not aware of, or involved in, how the recorded data are used
for any meaningful purpose.
In discussing supervisor monitoring of staff performance in
Chapter 5 it was emphasized that formal monitoring that involves
recording of information on staff performance should not be con-
ducted unless the recorded information is put to some meaningful use.
The same situation pertains to staff collection of data on client re-
sponses to teaching programs. If the data staff record are not used for
the purposes summarized earlier, then there really is no reason for
staff to collect such data. However, because data on client responses
to teaching plans is vital for ensuring teaching is effective over the long
run when used appropriately, supervisors must ensure staff are aware
of how the data are used and the importance of recording data con-
sistently and accurately.
The best way for staff to grasp the importance of collecting data
on client responses to teaching plans is to involve them in the deci-
sion-making process for which the data are used. Specifically, staff
who conduct teaching sessions and record data should be actively
involved with other appropriate personnel in evaluating the effective-
ness of teaching plans. Staff should likewise be involved in subsequent
decision-making regarding actions to refine or continue the plans—

which, again, are based on the data staff record. In this manner, staff
will be readily aware of what purpose their data recording serves.
Such awareness can heighten staff acceptance of the importance of
data and increase their likelihood of recording data in the appropriate
manner.
When staff are actively involved in decision-making

based on data they record as part of teaching
duties, they are likely to understand the importance
of data and potential problems with data collection
are prevented or reduced.
If problems with staff data collection occur even though staff are
involved in decision-making based on the data, then their perfor-
mance issues should be addressed with the same supervisory correc-
tive procedures discussed in this and preceding chapters. There is one
special situation though for which the usual supervisory process will
need to be altered. That situation is when staff are clearly fabricating
data as referred to earlier.
When staff deliberately falsify data, it represents a serious perfor-
mance issue. In essence, falsified data can lead to erroneous decisions
regarding how teaching sessions should be conducted and client learn-
ing can be compromised. Therefore, fabrication of data by staff rep-
resents one of those areas of problematic staff performance discussed
in Chapter 8 that usually should result in immediate disciplinary action.
In this respect, many agencies consider deliberate falsification of data
by staff to be a performance problem warranting job termination.
The importance of staff responsibilities with data collection should
be explained when those responsibilities are initially assigned in
accordance with conducting formal teaching sessions. Such impor-
tance can be highlighted further if it is made apparent to staff at that
point that falsification of data is not tolerated within the agency and
represents grounds for dismissal. In this regard, it is a generally ex-
pected responsibility of supervisors to inform staff beforehand regard-
ing the serious consequences for falsifying data. It would be profes-
sionally inappropriate for supervisors, as well as being unfair to staff,

if supervisors do not inform staff about the importance of accurate
data collection and the consequences for intentionally falsifying data.
Supervisors should inform staff about the impor-

tance of data collection and the consequences for
falsifying data prior to assigning data-collection
responsibilities.
Problematic Issues with Treatment Services for Challenging Behavior

The focus of this chapter has been on resolving problems with
teaching services intended to increase independent functioning of
agency clients. A related area of therapeutic services for which the
performance of direct support staff has an important impact is treat-
ing challenging behavior displayed by agency clients. Essentially
every human service agency is responsible to at least some degree for
helping clients overcome challenging behavior.
The core approach to treating challenging behavior among indi-
viduals with developmental and related disabilities usually involves
the development and implementation of formal treatment programs
to prevent or reduce the behavior, such as Behavior Support Plans
(BSPs). The BSPs typically are developed by agency clinicians. As
with formal teaching plans, BSPs developed by clinicians are expect-
ed to be carried out primarily by direct support staff.
The proficiency with which staff implement BSPs is a critical vari-
able affecting the success of an agency’s treatment of challenging
behavior. If staff do not implement BSPs consistently and proficiently,
treatment services are not likely to be effective. Concerns with how
BSPs are carried out on a daily basis are prevalent across many hu-
man service agencies. Consequently, this is a performance area that
frequently warrants supervisor action to resolve problems and main-
tain quality treatment services.
Overall, what supervisors should do to resolve problems with staff
implementation of BSPs is the same as when addressing issues with
problematic teaching and other performance areas discussed in pre-
ceding chapters. The desired client outcomes and performance expec-

tations of staff are usually straightforward, involving reduction in chal-
lenging behavior and staff implementation of treatment plans in the
manner the plans are written, respectively. Staff typically require train-
ing with BST in how to implement the plans, and their implementa-
tion performance must be routinely monitored. Providing supportive
and corrective feedback is likewise a critical supervisory action, focus-
ing on the relative proficiency with which staff carry out the plans.
There are also special considerations with effectively supervising
staff implementation of BSPs. Actually, there are many special con-
siderations in this regard, due to the seriousness of various types of
challenging behavior and the complexity of many treatment plans.
Adequately addressing all of the special considerations is beyond the
scope here. However, one source of information to which we refer
supervisors who are concerned with promoting proficient implemen-
tation of treatment plans for challenging behavior is Working with Staff
to Overcome Challenging Behavior Among People Who Have Severe Disabil-
ities: A Guide for Getting Support Plans Carried Out (2nd ed.) (see book
section of Selected Readings).
The book just noted describes an evidence-based supervisory
approach that is very similar to the supervision protocol forming the
basis of the current text. The former book also goes into detail regard-
ing considerations specifically related to staff performance in prevent-
ing and reducing challenging behavior. Readers of the current text
should find the information in Working with Staff to Overcome Challeng-
ing Behavior quite compatible with the supervisory strategies discussed
in this and preceding chapters.
1. A primary responsibility of most direct support staff is teaching mean-

ingful skills to clients both formally in structured teaching sessions and
informally or naturalistically during daily activities.
2. Resolving problems with staff teaching performance usually requires

supervisors to take action to improve: (1) how proficiently teaching is
provided and/or, (2) how often teaching occurs.
3. Direct support staff usually should be trained in basic teaching proce-

dures early in their employment and in specific procedures related to
individual teaching plans prior to the plans being implemented.
4. Promoting and maintaining proficient teaching performance among staff

requires use of evidence-based supervision: regularly monitoring staff
teaching and providing supportive and corrective feedback.
5. A useful means of supporting proficient teaching by staff involves spe-

cially recognizing client skill development resulting from the teaching.
6. Training staff to teach naturalistically during routine activities with

clients should involve training in how to recognize informal teaching
opportunities such as when: (1) staff repeatedly complete a given task for
a client and, (2) a client is having difficulty performing a desired task.
7. Supervisors can help promote staff teaching naturalistically during the

day by modeling naturalistic teaching during their own interactions with
clients while staff are present.
8. Staff should be routinely involved in decision-making processes based on

the data they collect as part of their teaching duties to help them recog-
nize the importance of collecting and recording data.
Chapter 13
REDUCING FREQUENT NONWORK BEHAVIOR
T he preceding two chapters focused on specific areas of problem-

atic staff performance that are common in many human service
agencies. This chapter focuses on a more general area of problematic
performance that almost every supervisor faces from time to time: fre-
quent nonwork behavior. Nonwork behavior, or what is sometimes re-
ferred to as off-task behavior, refers to staff engaging in activities at work
that have no relation to their assigned job duties.
Nonwork behavior involves a variety of staff activities that com-
pete with fulfillment of desired job duties. Some of the most common
types involve staff socializing with each other about topics unrelated
to the job, sitting with no apparent work activity, and engaging in per-
sonal activities such as texting friends. Other common types of non-
work behavior include staff using agency computers to play games or
surf the internet, reading newspapers or other nonwork material, and
eating a meal or snack during assigned work time.
When staff engage in nonwork behavior such as that just illustrat-
ed, by definition it means they are not completing expected duties. In
turn, supports and services are not being provided for agency clients
at the desired level. In this regard, frequent or pervasive nonwork be-
havior among direct support staff is a well-acknowledged indicator of
a poor-quality human service agency.
Excessive nonwork behavior is also a clear indication of ineffective
supervision. When staff spend large amounts of time engaging in non-
work behavior, supervisors have not been effective in promoting and
supporting quality work performance. Consequently, supervisors must
change how they are going about supervising staff work activities.
242
Reducing Frequent Nonwork Behavior 243
A key indicator of ineffective supervision is fre-

quent or pervasive amounts of nonwork behavior
among staff.
In general, nonwork behavior should be approached by supervi-

sors in an indirect manner. In contrast to directing supervisory strate-
gies on nonwork behavior per se, supervisors should focus directly on
what staff should be doing. Taking an indirect approach in this man-
ner is recommended because of the nature of how nonwork behavior
is typically most problematic.
Nonwork behavior often is most prevalent during relatively cir-
cumscribed periods of the workday. For example, in residential set-
tings for people with severe disabilities it is common for support staff
to be working diligently during the early morning when preparatory
activities for the day take place (e.g., assisting clients in getting dressed
and having breakfast) prior to clients leaving the residence to go to
work or a day support site. In contrast, in the afternoon when clients
have returned to the residence there is frequently less structure such
that staff are likely to be less busy and nonwork behavior is often
more prevalent. To reduce nonwork behavior in the latter situation it
is usually most effective for supervisors to focus their efforts on pro-
moting what staff should be doing during the afternoon period (e.g.,
prompting and praising leisure engagement among clients) rather
than attending directly to their nonwork activities.
When it is apparent that nonwork behavior is frequent during cer-
tain situations within the workday, steps of the evidence-based super-
vision protocol should be implemented to promote and maintain de-
sired work behavior during those situations. The overall approach to
applying the protocol is the same as that described in preceding chap-
ters. However, there are also special considerations in carrying out cer-
tain steps of the protocol that particularly warrant attention when non-
work behavior is prevalent.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS IN APPLYING

CERTAIN STEPS OF EVIDENCE-BASED
SUPERVISION TO REDUCE NONWORK BEHAVIOR
Special considerations when using the evidence-based supervision

protocol to reduce frequent nonwork behavior among staff pertain pri-
marily to four of the protocol steps. These include issues with the steps
of specifying work expectations, monitoring staff performance, and
providing supportive and corrective feedback. Considerations regard-
ing implementation of each of these supervisory steps are discussed
below.
Specifying Performance Expectations with Activity Schedules

One reason nonwork behavior is particularly frequent during cer-
tain situations is that what staff should be doing during those times has
not been carefully specified. To illustrate, in the afternoon leisure sit-
uation just exemplified, staff may know they are expected to promote
client leisure activity but precisely what they should do to enhance
activity engagement is not clear. To ensure staff are sufficiently aware
of their performance expectations, desired job tasks should be delin-
eated by the supervisor as explicit work behavior such as with a spe-
cific activity schedule (Chapter 3). An illustration of such an activity
schedule is provided below.
EXAMPLE OF A WORK ACTIVITY SCHEDULE FOR

PROMOTING CLIENT LEISURE ENGAGEMENT
Place: Hemlock Street Home
Responsible staff: Rose, Tanya Time: 5:00–6:30
Supper coordinator: Rose
Leisure coordinator: Tanya

Clients: all present

Supper coordinator duties:
1. Cook supper and prepare dining room table.
2. Involve at least one client in assisting (prompt and rein-

force client’s assistance with at least part of cooking sup-
per and preparing table).
Leisure coordinator duties:
1. Provide a choice of at least two leisure items for each

client.
2. After clients choose a leisure item, rotate among all

clients at least every 15 minutes and prompt each client
to engage with the item if not engaged and reinforce
(with praise) the activity of each client who is engaged.
The activity schedule just illustrated specifies job duties for each of
two staff who would typically be working in the residence in the after-
noon. One set of duties could be assigned to one staff person and the
other set to the other staff member. Alternatively, the staff themselves
could decide who will perform each set of duties.
For activity schedules to effectively promote desired work behav-
ior, staff of course must be well familiar with the schedules. Such
familiarity is best accomplished by the training step of the superviso-
ry protocol, usually in an informal manner (Chapter 4). The supervi-
sor should meet briefly with staff to describe their expected duties in
accordance with the schedule, provide a written copy of the schedule
to each staff person, and then quickly demonstrate how each duty
should be performed. Subsequently, staff should carry out each duty
during the regular job routine while the supervisor observes and pro-
vides supportive and corrective feedback as needed.
In some cases, activity schedules will be sufficient for initially de-

creasing staff nonwork behavior and increasing completion of desired
duties during certain work situations (accompanied by on-the-job train-
ing for complying with the designated schedule). However, the real
benefit of activity schedules is that they facilitate the supervisor’s job
of implementing the remaining steps of the supervisory protocol. In
turn, the latter steps have a more significant impact on decreasing the
likelihood that nonwork behavior will occur at unacceptable levels in
the future.
The Critical Role of Supervisor Monitoring

in Preventing and Decreasing Nonwork Behavior
Once performance expectations have been made clear in terms of
desired work behavior, and particularly through activity schedules,
supervisors can then formally monitor staff performance during situa-
tions in which nonwork behavior has been frequent. The monitoring
should center on the duties that staff should be performing and con-
ducted in accordance with guidelines discussed in Chapter 5. The pre-
pared activity schedule can be used to help the supervisor focus the
monitoring on the designated duties that each staff person should be
performing.
Formally monitoring staff work behavior (and indirectly nonwork
behavior) during times in which nonwork behavior has been prob-
lematic provides the supervisor with critical information regarding the
quality of staff performance. Such information then allows the super-
visor to provide supportive and corrective feedback to staff based on
the quality of their observed work activities (see later discussion). Super-
visor monitoring is also important because it makes the supervisor vis-
ible during times when nonwork behavior has been a concern.
Supervisor visibility has a number of benefits in regard to pro-
moting proficient staff performance as discussed previously (again, see
Chapter 5). Of particular concern here is the effect on nonwork be-
havior. Nonwork behavior of staff tends to occur in an inverse fashion
with supervisor visibility: the more often staff see their supervisor dur-
ing times in which nonwork behavior previously has been frequent,
the less likely nonwork behavior will continue to occur. Conversely,
the less often staff see their supervisor (e.g., the supervisor is not fre-
quently present in the workplace to monitor staff performance), the
more likely nonwork behavior will continue to be a concern.
The effect of supervisor visibility on increasing desired work per-

formance and decreasing nonwork behavior should be considered
with a qualification. Specifically, desired work behavior is likely to in-
crease only if staff are sufficiently aware of what they should be doing
during a designated time period. Again, written activity schedules,
provided with training of staff in how to perform the duties addressed
by the schedules, leave little doubt that staff will be well aware of their
expected duties during targeted situations.
Nonwork behavior of staff tends to vary inversely

with supervisor presence; the more often a supervi-
sor is present and visible in the staff workplace,
nonwork behavior is less likely to be a problem.
Focusing Positive Feedback on Desired Work Behavior

Feedback provided to staff following formal monitoring of their
performance should focus on what they should be doing during a
respective situation in which nonwork behavior has been prevalent.
Sometimes supervisors fall into the trap of focusing the feedback on
the nonwork behavior. A common scenario is that a supervisor
observes staff to be sitting with no apparent work activity and then
criticizes staff for their lack of work. Although in one sense this super-
visory action seems logical—staff should not be engaging in nonwork
behavior—it is often ineffective for promoting desired performance.
Research has indicated that providing criticism or otherwise nega-
tive comments when observing staff to be engaged in nonwork behav-
ior can result in staff changing what they are doing—they get busy.
However, such comments alone do not consistently result in staff get-
ting busy doing the specific duties that they should be doing in the
given situation. To ensure staff disengage from nonwork behavior and
then engage in the desired duties that should occur, supervisors
should provide feedback to staff that specifies what should be occur-
ring. One generally recommended way for supervisors to provide the
latter specification is to refer staff to the activity schedule and point
out what duties the schedule instructs staff to be performing.
Whenever supervisors respond to apparent nonwork behavior by

directing staff to what they should be doing, the supervisors should
return to the work site relatively quickly to again monitor staff perfor-
mance in accordance with the activity schedule. In many cases, more
desirable performance will be observed at that time such that super-
visors can then provide supportive feedback to staff. If more desirable
performance is not observed, however, and nonwork behavior is still
prevalent, then corrective feedback should be provided again. If non-
work behavior continues to be observed frequently during subsequent
observations by the supervisor, then it is likely that disciplinary action
will need to be initiated (Chapter 8).
When supervisors provide staff with feedback

regarding nonwork behavior, the feedback should
focus on what staff should be doing and not on the
nonwork behavior per se.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR REDUCING

FREQUENT NONWORK BEHAVIOR
In addition to special considerations when implementing respec-

tive steps of the evidence-based supervision protocol to reduce non-
work behavior, there are also some more general considerations war-
ranting attention. These include establishing reasonable goals relating
to nonwork behavior, maintaining flexibility in addressing nonwork
behavior, and responding to subtle types of nonwork behavior. The
latter considerations are not relevant in all cases involving concerns
over nonwork behavior but do pertain to a number of situations such
that they warrant noting.
Reasonable Goals for Nonwork Behavior

Nonwork behavior is a natural phenomenon within all jobs. No
one, staff or supervisors, spends every minute at work performing job
duties. Consequently, there essentially will always be some amount of
nonwork behavior among staff. Supervisors must determine what con-
stitutes acceptable and unacceptable amounts of nonwork behavior

among the staff they supervise.
There is no hard and fast rule for determining acceptable versus
unacceptable amounts of nonwork behavior, or goals that supervisors
should strive to attain in this regard. In an absolute sense, decisions
about whether nonwork behavior is problematic should be based on
the degree to which agency clients are attaining specified outcomes as
a function of staff work performance. If clients are attaining the de-
sired outcomes within expected timelines, then existing levels of non-
work behavior generally would not be considered problematic. How-
ever, sometimes it is difficult to precisely align what staff are doing on
a daily basis with client outcome attainment, which often takes many
days to achieve. Therefore, other considerations are also warranted
when establishing goals for acceptable levels of nonwork behavior.
One means for considering whether nonwork behavior is suffi-
ciently pervasive to represent a significant problem is to address spe-
cific situations in which nonwork behavior is most prevalent. As indi-
cated earlier, frequent nonwork behavior often is associated with cer-
tain work periods or times of day. In these cases, the recommended
strategy as described earlier is to focus on the work that staff should
be performing in the respective situations. If staff are spending the vast
majority of their time in those situations performing assigned duties,
albeit not necessarily 100% of the time, then generally nonwork
behavior is not overly problematic.
In situations as just referred to, a general guideline is that if staff
are spending around 80% or more of their time performing assigned
duties, then nonwork behavior is usually not considered a serious
issue. The 80% figure is a guideline and not a hard and fast rule.
Because some amount of nonwork behavior will essentially always oc-
cur—and as described below, sometimes necessary for the welfare of
staff—supervisors must be attentive to why nonwork behavior is occur-
ring. Supervisors should also be flexible in deciding whether nonwork
behavior represents a serious problem.
Supervisor Flexibility in Addressing

Nonwork Behavior in Certain Situations
There are three common situations in which supervisors often
have to be flexible in regard to addressing apparent nonwork behav-
ior of staff. These include nonwork behavior that follows challenging

situations for staff, break-time activities, and unusual or atypical non-
work behavior of certain staff. Each of these situations is discussed in
the following sections.
Nonwork Behavior Following Challenging Situations. Many
direct support staff engage in work activities, both scheduled and
unscheduled as part of the job routine, that can be physically chal-
lenging. A common example is when one or more staff have to inter-
vene physically with a client to prevent the individual from harming
someone, which may include restraining the individual for a period of
time. Using physical restraint for protective purposes can be physical-
ly demanding for staff, often resulting in shortness of breath and ele-
vated heart rate. Once the challenging situation is resolved, the staff
need a period of inactivity to regain their composure.
When staff rest for a period of time following a physically chal-
lenging activity, such as restraining an individual, their activity
appears as nonwork behavior (e.g., sitting quietly with no other activ-
ity). However, it would be unwise to consider such behavior as inap-
propriate given the circumstances—the rest period is necessary for the
welfare of the staff. If a supervisor entered the staff workplace during
the rest period, it would be inadvisable to immediately redirect the
staff to duties as specified in the work activity schedule for that time
period. It would be highly inappropriate to criticize or provide other
negative comments for the ongoing staff (nonwork) activity.
In the type of situation just illustrated, a supervisor must have ade-
quate knowledge of what has occurred in the workplace, either based
on observation or brief interaction with staff. Such information is nec-
essary to prevent the supervisor from taking inappropriate action with
staff for what appears on the surface to be nonwork behavior but actu-
ally is quite justified. This is yet another reason for the importance of
a supervisor frequently monitoring staff work activities. If a supervisor
is routinely present in the staff workplace, the supervisor usually
becomes quickly aware upon entering the work site that an unusual
incident has occurred. Such awareness should prompt the supervisor
to then obtain relevant information from staff about what has taken
place. The supervisor subsequently is less likely to take inappropriate
action with the involved staff.
Supervisors should acknowledge that staff may

need a break following very challenging physical
activities and not consider the break as inappropri-
ate nonwork behavior.
Consideration of Staff Break Times. The daily job routine of

direct support staff includes break periods during which no work
activities are expected of staff. Break times may be scheduled for high-
ly specific time periods, or more loosely on a daily basis as deter-
mined by staff needs as long as the breaks occur within a generally
assigned time frame. Break periods are needed for the physical and
mental well being of staff and usually required by policy and work or
union contracts. Activities staff engage in during break times usually
represent nonwork behavior, at least in terms of what the staff are
observed to be doing.
Nonwork behavior during break periods is appropriate as just
described, provided the breaks occur within the time parameters
allowed within the agency. Therefore, break periods represent anoth-
er situation for which it would be inappropriate for supervisors, upon
entering the staff work area, to redirect staff to specific work duties
(i.e., because a supervisor observes apparent nonwork behavior that
usually constitutes staff activity during breaks). Supervisors must have
adequate knowledge about when breaks are occurring so they can re-
spond accordingly if they enter the area in which staff are on break
and not performing work duties.
One factor that can facilitate a supervisor’s awareness of when staff
are taking an appropriate work break versus engaging in inappropri-
ate nonwork behavior is to ensure staff have a designated area specif-
ically for break times. Ideally the area would be a specially designat-
ed break room. If such a room is not available, then there should be
at least a specific area within a room. In this manner, when staff are
in the break area, it will be readily apparent to a supervisor that they
are taking a break and engaging in acceptable nonwork behavior that
otherwise would be considered inappropriate. It is also helpful if
supervisors maintain awareness of when breaks are expected to be
taken by staff.
In contrast, if there is not a designated break area and staff must

take their breaks in the same location in which they regularly work, it
can be difficult for supervisors to discriminate when staff are taking an
appropriate break versus engaging in inappropriate nonwork behav-
ior. Additionally, at times some staff take advantage of not having a
designated break area. To illustrate, certain staff may be engaging in
nonwork activity in the work area when they should be working.
When the latter staff see the supervisor enter the area, they mislead-
ingly inform the supervisor that they are on their scheduled break
time. This type of situation, which can be difficult for a supervisor to
resolve, can be avoided if supervisors ensure that staff have a special-
ly designated area that is used exclusively for taking work breaks.
There is an additional advantage of providing special break areas
for staff that pertains to staff work enjoyment. Having an area away
from the routine work site for break time makes it easier for staff to
disassociate from their work responsibilities, and truly relax or engage
in another desired activity for a period of time. In turn, staff tend to
enjoy their breaks more if the breaks are totally separate from all work
expectations and ongoing events in the workplace that may require
their attention. Staff also often appreciate a supervisor who ensures
that they have a break area that allows them to be away from the reg-
ular work environment for their break activities. Such appreciation
enhances staff enjoyment associated with working for a particular
supervisor, as well as with their overall work enjoyment.
Providing specified locations for staff work breaks

facilitates a supervisor’s job of determining when
staff are on an appropriate break versus engaging
in inappropriate nonwork behavior.
Consideration of Exceptions to Typically Diligent Work.

Previous chapters have emphasized the importance of supervisors
routinely interacting with staff in a pleasant and respectful manner to
help motivate staff to work diligently and enjoy their work. One
means of interacting pleasantly and respectfully pertains to supervisor
observations of a staff person’s occasional nonwork behavior that rep-
resents an exception to the individual’s typically diligent work. In this

type of situation, a supervisor usually observes the staff person to be
performing expected job duties but on occasion, observes nonwork
behavior to be occurring.
When a supervisor enters the work area and observes a staff mem-
ber to be engaged in nonwork behavior that represents an exception
to the individual’s usually diligent performance, the supervisor gener-
ally should not attend to the nonwork behavior. Instead, the supervi-
sor could briefly interact in a courteous manner with the staff person
and then go about other supervisory duties. This action is often well
appreciated by staff.
Staff know when they are not performing expected duties and they
usually realize that the supervisor is likely to be aware of their ongo-
ing, nonwork activities. When the supervisor does not respond or oth-
erwise bring attention to the occasional nonwork behavior, it indicates
that the supervisor trusts the staff person’s judgment and is not con-
cerned with what the staff person is currently doing. Having the super-
visor’s trust can help the staff person enjoy working for the supervisor
and increase enjoyment with the job overall.
The rationale for the supervisor action just noted is based on the
fact that some nonwork behavior is to be expected. Sometimes an
individual has to return an important phone call that should not wait
until break time, for example, or simply gets caught up in a personal
conversation with another staff member. As long as these activities are
infrequent and not characteristic of a staff person’s usual work perfor-
mance, they rarely interfere with completion of necessary job duties.
If a supervisor does not recognize or accept this characteristic of the
world of work and attends to every instance of nonwork behavior, the
impact on staff tends to be quite negative. The latter supervisory
action reduces staff enjoyment associated with working for the super-
visor as well as enjoyment with the job itself.
In recommending that supervisors not attend to occasional obser-
vations of staff nonwork behavior, it should be emphasized that the
recommendation pertains to those staff whom the supervisor usually
observes to be very diligent with their work performance. Disregard
for nonwork behavior should not be based on any other factor, and
particularly not on any special friendship or other nonwork relation-
ship a supervisor has with a staff person. Also, if a supervisor observes
over time that a staff person who previously appeared very diligent is
spending increasing amounts of time engaging in nonwork behavior,

then the latter activities should become a concern for the supervisor.
In turn, the supervisor should then address the problematic nonwork
behavior in the manner discussed previously.
Reducing Subtle Types of Frequent Nonwork Behavior

Sometimes supervisors must address nonwork behavior among
certain staff that is more subtle than sitting with no work activity and
other more apparent types of nonwork activities described to this point.
The most common example is when a staff member avoids complet-
ing important job duties by spending excessive amounts of time on
other, perhaps less important work activities. To illustrate, some staff
intentionally avoid direct contact work with clients for teaching or pro-
moting leisure engagement, for example, by maximizing their time
spent on paperwork or computer activities. The latter work may be
important to complete but the staff extend the amount of time spent
on the duties beyond what should be necessary to complete the duties.
When staff avoid important duties by continuously engaging in
other work activities beyond what is reasonable, the situation can be
difficult for supervisors to resolve. The problem is not what staff are
doing per se, but that they are spending too much time doing it. The
excessive amount of time spent on certain tasks interferes with com-
pletion of other important duties.
When staff spend excessive amounts of time on certain tasks that
detract from completion of other work duties, the process also can
have a negative effect on other staff. Staff are usually aware when one
of their peers is avoiding certain duties by overly attending to other
tasks, which often are less demanding that the former tasks. Staff can
become seriously disgruntled with their peer in this situation, due in
part to having to work harder to perform the duties that the peer is
not completing. Such a situation usually has a negative impact on staff
work enjoyment.
To resolve problems with staff avoiding important duties by need-
lessly expanding their time spent on other tasks, supervisors need to
have a good awareness of how much time should be necessary to com-
plete respective work tasks. The best way for supervisors to have suf-
ficient knowledge in this regard is to have staff job expectations well
specified (e.g., with activity schedules) and frequently monitor staff
performance in their work area (see Chapter 5 for elaboration). When

supervisors do have good evidence that some staff are avoiding cer-
tain duties by overly attending to selected work tasks, they should
respond to the situation in the same manner as described earlier with
less subtle types of nonwork behavior. In some cases, supervisors will
also have to provide more explicit time frames for staff regarding the
amount of allowable time to complete specific tasks.
1. Frequent nonwork behavior among staff is usually associated with cir-

cumscribed situations during the workday and warrants supervisor
attention during those situations.
2. Supervisors generally should address frequent nonwork behavior indi-

rectly by focusing their interactions with staff on what should be occur-
ring rather than the nonwork behavior per se.
3. Frequent nonwork behavior during certain situations is most readily pre-

vented or reduced by supervisors providing work activity schedules
regarding what staff should be doing during the situations, being fre-
quently present in the staff work area to monitor staff performance, and
providing feedback that focuses on the duties that staff should be per-
forming.
4. Everyone engages in some nonwork behavior on the job; supervisors must

determine if the amount of nonwork behavior is problematic on a situa-
tion-by-situation basis by focusing on whether duties expected during
each situation are being completed satisfactorily or not.
5. Supervisors must be flexible in deciding to intervene to reduce nonwork

behavior and realize that such behavior can be appropriate in some sit-
uations such as immediately after staff have been involved in physically
demanding work activities and during agency-approved break times.
Section IV
SUPERVISING FROM A DISTANCE

(TELEHEALTH)
Chapter 14
SUPERVISING FROM A DISTANCE

WITH TELEHEALTH
T hroughout preceding chapters the focus has been on supervisors

working directly with staff to promote quality job performance and
work enjoyment. The vast majority of supervisory strategies discussed
to this point represent in-person supervision because the strategies are
carried out by a supervisor within the same physical location as the
staff—typically in the staffs’ work setting. There is another approach to
supervision that involves the supervisor working with staff from a loca-
tion that is separate from the setting in which staff are working. The
latter approach is referred to as distance or remote supervision.
Supervision in the human services historically has involved the in-
person approach. Correspondingly, research that has developed evi-
dence-based supervisory strategies has focused almost exclusively on
in-person supervision. Recently, however, increased attention has be-
gun to be directed to how supervision could be provided for human
service staff from a distance.
Attention is being increasingly directed to distance supervision for
two primary reasons. One reason has been the shift in service provi-
sion for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in the
United States with the onset of the normalization movement in the lat-
ter part of the 20th century. That movement, coupled with other value-
based changes such as community inclusion, has resulted in a major
reduction in large congregate service settings in favor of smaller com-
munity settings. The change is well illustrated in the reduction and
closure of large state institutions across the country and increases in
community-living arrangements such as group homes and supported
living options.
259
As the number of small service settings in local communities be-

gan to increase, obstacles for providing in-person supervision of direct
support staff became apparent. The most noticeable obstacle pertains
to the lack of a full-time, on-site supervisor in many of the settings. It
is common, for example, for group home supervisors to be responsi-
ble for supervising staff in two or more group homes. Because the
group homes are in different physical locations, the available time for
a supervisor to be in each home to provide in-person supervision is
reduced relative to more traditional situations in which a supervisor is
continuously present in the same setting as the staff. Consequently,
concern has developed over how a supervisor can supplement in-per-
son supervision by supervising from a distance.
The second and more recent reason for attention being directed to
distance supervision pertains to the COVID-19 pandemic that began
in early 2020 in the United States. The pandemic raised serious con-
cerns over people having in-person interactions, including for purpos-
es of supervising staff performance. Although the continued presence
of COVID-19 and potentially other pandemics is uncertain, concern
over such diseases has resulted in human service agencies seeking
ways to reduce face-to-face interactions while still providing services.
Therefore, consideration seems warranted on how in-person, evi-
dence-based supervision could be reduced by providing supervision
from a distance.
Distance supervision generally involves various types of telehealth
applications. Telehealth generally refers to use of telecommunication
and information technologies to provide training and treatment inter-
ventions from a distance. Telehealth (also referred to as telemedicine
or telepractice) has been used for some time in the medical field to
provide services to patients who do not have ready access to medical
professionals, and especially for patients living in very rural areas.
Telehealth has represented a means of providing medically related
services in such situations without requiring excessive travel of pro-
fessionals or patients and thereby reducing the cost of services. Tele-
health has likewise been used within the psychiatric and psychologi-
cal professions for similar reasons. More recently, telehealth has be-
gun to be applied as a means of impacting work performance of staff
in agencies providing supports and services for people with intellec-
tual and developmental disabilities.
Supervising from a Distance with Telehealth 261
Providing supervision from a distance usually in-

volves telehealth applications using telecommuni-
cation and information technologies to impact staff
work performance.
The purpose of this chapter is to describe how telehealth can be

used to provide supervision of human service staff from a distance.
The focus is on what research has revealed to date about how specif-
ic telehealth applications have been effectively applied with staff work
performance or that of other caregivers (e.g., parents of children with
disabilities). Because research on telehealth with human service staff
has only recently begun and is therefore in its formative stage, likely
potential applications of telehealth for supervisory purposes are also
addressed. Initially, a summary is provided regarding what telehealth
involves on an overall basis as well as important considerations for its
successful use. More specific discussion is subsequently presented on
how component steps of evidence-based supervision have or poten-
tially could be addressed with telehealth applications.
SUPERVISION VIA TELEHEALTH: AN OVERVIEW
Telehealth applications in the human services have occurred in a

variety of ways. The telehealth section of the Selected Readings pro-
vides references to literature sources that provide detailed descriptions
of how respective ways have been applied and evaluated. There have
also been several informative summaries and reviews of the profes-
sional literature on telehealth applications in the human services (see
following table for a representative sample).
SUMMARIES AND REVIEWS OF

TELEHEALTH IN THE HUMAN SERVICES
Cavalari, R. N. S., Gillis, J. M., Kruser, N., & Romanczyk, R.

G. (2015). Digital communication and records in service
provision and supervision: Regulation and practice.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8, 176–189.
Fischer, A. J., Clark, R., Askings, D., & Lehman, E. (2017).

Technology and telehealth applications. In J. K. Luiselli
(Ed.), Applied behavior analysis advanced guidebook: A man-
ual for professional practice (pp. 135–163). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Ferguson, J., Craig, E. A., & Dounavi, K. (2019). Telehealth

as a model for providing behaviour analytic interven-
tions to individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A
systematic review. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 49, 582–616.
Lee, J. F., Schieltz, K. M., Suess, A. N., Wacker, D. P.,

Romani, P. W., Lindgren, S. D. . . . Dalmau, Y. C. P. (2015).
Guidelines for developing telehealth services and trou-
bleshooting problems with telehealth technology when
coaching parents to conduct functional analyses and
functional communication training in their homes.
Tomlinson, S. R. L., Gore, N., & McGill, P. (2018). Training

individuals to implement applied behavior analytic
procedures via telehealth: A systematic review of the
literature. Journal of Behavioral Education, 27, 172–222.
Zoder-Martell, K. A., Markelz, A. M., Floress, M. T.,

Skriba, H. A., & Sayyah, L. E. N. (2020). Technology to
facilitate telehealth in applied behavior analysis.
The various ways of providing distance supervision via telehealth

require certain types of resources as well as skills to use the resources
on the part of supervisors and staff. There are also a number of ethi-
cal considerations associated with use of telehealth. Each of these is-
sues is addressed in the following sections.
Ways of Providing Supervision via Telehealth

The most commonly researched application of telehealth in the
human services has involved videoconferencing. With videoconfer-
encing, a supervisor and staff can interact in real time across distance
using an on-line or internet connection with video and audio capabil-
ities that allow both parties to hear and see each other. As will be dis-
cussed later, most of the supervisory-related research with telehealth
in human service agencies has involved use of videoconferencing to
train new work skills to staff.
There are also more basic ways for supervisors and staff to inter-
act using telehealth that can be used exclusively or to supplement
videoconferencing. The latter include on-line chat rooms, text mes-
saging, and email correspondence. Traditional telephone conversations
between a supervisor and staff are also considered a type of telehealth
because the conversations occur across a distance and involve tele-
communication technology, although phone conversations historically
have not been referred to in this manner.
Required Resources for Providing Supervision via Telehealth

Resources for the most basic telehealth applications such as email
correspondence and text messaging are generally available for super-
visors and staff in human service agencies. Such resources include cel-
lular phones and computers or other internet-enabled devices. In con-
trast, necessary resources for effectively using videoconferencing are
more involved and less readily available in many agencies.
Videoconferencing typically requires digital connectivity, certain
equipment or hardware, and interactive software. Regarding connec-
tivity, internet access has become increasingly available across the
United States. However, issues still exist in rural areas. A particular
issue with connectivity necessary for videoconferencing is the speed
of transmission; some agencies and staff work sites have internet ac-
cess but digital transmission is too slow to allow for fluent video and
audio interactions. Some larger agencies have enhanced their trans-

mission capabilities by installing an in-agency system through cable
connections that allow for private virtual networking.
The equipment or hardware for videoconferencing for supervision
purposes generally begins with supervisor and staff access to a com-
puter or other internet-enabling device with webcams and micro-
phones. If the videoconferencing involves a circumscribed session
with the supervisor and a staff person in a set location such as for a
supervisor to provide feedback to the person, often the webcams and
microphones within the computers will suffice for video and audio
connections. If the videoconferencing involves a more mobile situa-
tion such as when a supervisor is monitoring staff performance as the
staff move about their work site, external cameras and microphones
may be needed that are linked to the supervisor’s computer. The staff
may likewise need to be equipped with wireless headsets with micro-
phones to allow for private communication with the supervisor.
Additionally, movable cameras may be used in the staff work site
that can be remotely controlled by the supervisor such as telehealth
robotic cameras or wheelbase cameras. In other cases, cameras that
can allow for continuous viewing along with digital recording and
storage may be installed in staff work sites similar to what are often
seen in convenience stores. Supervisors can view staff performance
live either on a scheduled or impromptu basis and then interact with
staff through the videoconferencing arrangement as described above.
Supervisors can also view previously recorded footage of staff perfor-
mance that was stored and subsequently interact with staff at a future
time.
Videoconferencing also requires certain software for use by super-
visors and staff. There are a number of commercially available types
of videoconferencing software that can be used. Often, the selection
of the particular software to use is based on practical factors. Typical
factors include existing familiarity of supervisors or staff with specific
software (e.g., Skype), special features such as those that facilitate a
supervisor videoconferencing with multiple staff simultaneously (e.g.,
Zoom), and particular privacy concerns (e.g., AdobeConnect).
Supervising staff performance via telehealth typi-

cally requires hardware and software for videocon-
ferencing along with reliable digital connectivity
and transmission so supervisors and staff can inter-
act fluidly from a distance in real time.
Skills for Supervising with Telehealth

As more research and application of telehealth services have been
reported it has become recognized that each type of telehealth appli-
cation requires unique skills for the provider (supervisor) and recipi-
ent (staff) to use successfully. With videoconferencing in particular,
skills are needed to initiate and maintain audio and visual transmis-
sion as well as adequate connectivity. Correspondingly, many if not
most supervisors and staff are likely to need at least some training to
use videoconferencing successfully. In this regard, in most of the re-
ported research with videoconferencing involving human service staff
the researchers had to provide technical training and assistance to the
recipients, often requiring in-person support at least initially. Training
is also likely to be needed in certain cases to help both supervisors
and staff overcome initial hesitancy in using telehealth due to unfa-
miliarity and perhaps feelings of intimidation associated with video-
conferencing technology.
The need for training and support in general regarding distance
supervision via telehealth is highlighted through technical problems
that have arisen in reported uses of videoconferencing. Most of the
reports of research on telehealth applications have noted such prob-
lems, typically pertaining to maintaining fluid audio and video trans-
mission as well as consistent internet connectivity. However, the re-
ports also describe how the problems usually were resolved through
“troubleshooting” by technical personnel. A useful description of
common types of technical problems and how they can be resolved is
presented in the Lee et al. (2015) reference in the summary table pro-
vided earlier.
Larger human service agencies may have in-agency personnel
(e.g., within information technology or IT departments) that can pro-
vide necessary training and support for supervisors and staff. How-
ever, smaller agencies usually do not have such personnel readily

available. Concern over access to technical support for using telehealth
is especially a concern in typical staff work sites associated with small-
er agencies, such as group homes, supported living arrangements, and
many day-support programs for adults with intellectual and develop-
mental disabilities.
Ethical Requirements for Using Telehealth

The increasing use of telehealth services has resulted in a signifi-
cant rise in ethical issues warranting attention. One issue pertains to
ensuring supervisors and staff are aware of, and comply with, relevant
state and federal privacy and security standards when using telehealth
(as well as individual agency requirements). Such standards generally
pertain to use of telehealth that involves accessing, transmitting, or
storing information to ensure protection of client and staff privacy and
confidentiality. For example, essentially all human service agencies
must comply with HIPPA (Health Insurance Portability and Account-
ability Act) regarding use of information about agency clients.
Compliance with relevant standards for client privacy and confi-
dentiality usually requires certain telehealth resources. To illustrate,
specific software may be required to prevent electronic information
from being monitored, intercepted, or hacked (e.g., antispyware, anti-
malware, or antivirus software). Relatedly, various types of virtual pri-
vate networks may need to have special firewall protection and capa-
bility of transmitting information that is encrypted.
It is beyond the scope of this text to describe the details of ethical
considerations and resource requirements associated with use of tele-
health for staff supervision purposes. The issue is raised here just to
highlight that prior to considering telehealth applications, supervisors
have to become knowledgeable in this area and ensure staff have
appropriate knowledge as well. The Cavalari et al. (2015) reference in
the summary table provides a useful discussion in this regard.
Additionally, the American Telemedicine Association is a helpful
resource regarding ethical issues for practitioner use of telehealth.
Prior to initiating distance supervision via tele-

health, supervisors and staff usually require train-
ing in using telehealth resources and ethical re-
quirements.
TELEHEALTH SPECIFICALLY FOR

IMPLEMENTING EVIDENCE-BASED
SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES FROM A DISTANCE
As suggested in the preceding overview, there are a number of pre-

requisites for use of telehealth to provide distance supervision for
human service staff. The prerequisites include securing necessary
equipment, software, and connectivity either through the internet or
in-agency private virtual networks. The prerequisites also involve pro-
viding training for supervisors and staff to become skilled in using spe-
cific telehealth applications and ensuring access to technical support
if needed. Training is likewise necessary to ensure supervisors and
staff are informed regarding relevant privacy and security issues asso-
ciated with using telehealth within their agency. Ensuring each of the
prerequisites is met typically requires a certain financial investment
for an agency, and particularly in regard to startup costs.
The following discussion on providing evidence-based supervision
from a distance via telehealth presumes that an agency has fulfilled
necessary prerequisite requirements. In this regard, many human ser-
vice agencies have invested in securing the resources to provide tele-
health services and particularly recently due to COVID-19 concerns.
As successful use of telehealth services becomes more widespread and
popularized, additional agencies are likely to consider providing vari-
ous services in this manner as well.
Use of telehealth for supervising human service staff has occurred
primarily with four basic components of evidence-based supervision.
These involve staff training, performance monitoring, supporting qual-
ity staff performance, and correcting nonproficient performance. Use
of telehealth for providing each of these aspects of evidence-based
supervision is discussed in the following sections.
Training Staff Through Telehealth

As indicated earlier, most of the research with telehealth as it per-
tains to supervision has involved training work skills to staff. In turn,
most of the staff training research with telehealth has focused on one-
to-one training with videoconferencing in which a supervisor trains
one staff person at a time. This approach has been most frequently
applied with training staff to carry out specified teaching procedures
such as discrete-trial teaching with learners who have autism. Other
work skills targeted less frequently with distance training include com-
pleting desired documentation and conducting systematic preference
assessments with clients.
Reviews of the telehealth research have concluded that this
approach to training staff from a distance is promising in regard to its
effectiveness. Staff trainees usually acquired the skills being trained,
although in many of the investigations one or more trainees required
subsequent in-person training in some format to master the skills.
Perhaps most promising, however, is that when considering the stud-
ies in total, it has been shown that all the component steps of compe-
tency- and performance-based behavioral skills training (BST) could
be implemented using a videoconferencing platform.
There are also concerns with use of videoconferencing to train
staff that warrant additional research to establish a broad evidence
base for supporting widescale application of distance training as a com-
ponent of supervision. A primary concern pertains to the on-the-job
part of BST. The research to date has primarily focused on relatively
circumscribed situations, such as a staff trainee sitting at a table with
a client to carry out a teaching process. These types of situations in
which a staff trainee remains in one set location are generally amen-
able for videoconferencing.
In contrast, other skills often desired to train to staff involve a staff
trainee moving about a work site to perform. Such skills may include,
for example, how to interact appropriately with adult clients in a
group situation, provide individual choices to clients in a group, and
how to teach clients to perform household chores that require moving
between rooms in a home. Conducting the on-the-job component of
BST with the latter types of skills would require a mobile videocon-
ferencing platform that necessitates more specialized equipment such
as mobile cameras and microphones. The latter equipment may be
difficult for supervisors and staff to access relative to laptop comput-

ers that will often suffice for videoconferencing when a staff trainee
remains basically still in one specific location.
Another concern with the staff training research to date is the rel-
atively common finding that not all trainees successfully acquired the
skills being trained. Research is warranted to identify factors associat-
ed with the lack of success with various staff trainees. To illustrate,
there may be certain prerequisite skills on the part of staff trainees
necessary to maximally benefit from distance training via videocon-
ferencing. There may also be factors associated with how certain steps
of BST are implemented with videoconferencing, such as a critical
number of trainee practice opportunities or amount of feedback that
needs to be provided to promote consistent success.
Despite some concerns with staff training using telehealth and the
need for additional investigations in this area, there has been sufficient
research to indicate this distance training approach warrants consid-
eration by supervisors when obstacles to providing in-person training
exist. Accordingly, there are some recommendations regarding how to
proceed with providing distance training. The primary recommenda-
tion pertains to careful planning by a supervisor regarding how BST
may be successfully conducted with videoconferencing (again assum-
ing necessary prerequisites for using telehealth have been met).
Although research on training staff from a distance

through videoconferencing is still in its formative
stages, investigations to date have indicated that all
the component steps of behavioral skills training
can be implemented in this manner.
If supervisors plan to train certain skills to staff using a videocon-

ferencing platform, the supervisors should carefully prepare how each
step of BST will be conducted, including the on-the-job part of BST.
Such planning would include specifying and accessing the necessary
equipment, software, and connectivity to conduct the training with
staff trainees. Subsequently, supervisors should practice carrying out
the BST steps with videoconferencing prior to the training to ensure
each step could be adequately implemented (e.g., conducting role-

play demonstrations, determining how trainee practice activities can
occur). Supervisors would then need to prepare trainees to participate
in the training session using their access to a videoconferencing plat-
form as noted earlier in this chapter. Ideally, supervisors should also
arrange readily accessible means to troubleshoot technical issues that
may arise during the actual training.
Monitoring Staff Performance Through Telehealth

The importance of monitoring staff performance as part of evi-
dence-based supervision was highlighted in Chapter 5. Strategies for
effectively monitoring staff performance were also presented. Chapter
5 likewise discussed common concerns regarding staff displeasure
with having their performance systematically observed and described
ways supervisors could monitor that tend to reduce the displeasure.
Because monitoring staff performance basically occurs in conjunc-
tion with all other component steps of evidence-based supervision,
monitoring represents an ongoing responsibility of supervisors. The
need for ongoing monitoring of staff performance renders this aspect
of supervision quite challenging when considering supervising from a
distance. The challenges are due in large part to logistical and techni-
cal issues in terms of how routine staff performance can be monitored
remotely. In light of frequent staff discontent with having their perfor-
mance monitored, challenges also exist with how distance monitoring
can occur in a way that is acceptable to staff.
Logistical and Technical Issues with Distance Monitoring.
The most amenable situation for distance monitoring generally per-
tains to when a supervisor desires to monitor an aspect of staff per-
formance that occurs at a scheduled time in a set location. An exam-
ple would be when a supervisor wants to monitor a staff person’s teach-
ing of an individual client that involves the person and client sitting at
a table as referred to earlier. In such a case, laptop computers with
built in webcams and microphones can often be used by the staff per-
son and supervisor to conduct the monitoring through videoconfer-
encing.
As also indicated earlier, this type of situation represents the most
common use of videoconferencing with staff performance reported in
the existing research. However, staff performance that occurs at a set
time in one circumscribed location usually pertains to a small (though

still important) sample of staff work behavior that warrants monitor-
ing by a supervisor. Many staff responsibilities involve the staff mov-
ing about various work sites to complete duties with different clients
who are also moving around (e.g., within separate rooms in a group
home or varying supported job sites of clients). For these common
duties of staff, more elaborate videoconferencing resources than lap-
top computers would be required (e.g., cameras and microphones in
different locations or remotely controlled, movable equipment).
One means to facilitate monitoring of staff performance that oc-
curs across multiple locations within an agency is for the agency to
install video cameras within all staff work sites such as all rooms in a
group home or all classrooms and workrooms in an adult day program.
Although use of video cameras in this manner has not been common-
place in most human service agencies historically, there have been
some agencies that have use such devices for many years. The cam-
eras typically allow for continuous video recording and storage of dig-
ital data, similar to cameras in convenience stores as noted previously.
Generally, however, use of cameras in staff work sites has not been
for the purpose of routinely monitoring staff performance in the man-
ner described in Chapter 5. For example, a common reason for hav-
ing the cameras in human service agencies has been to review the
video recordings if there is an investigation into alleged client abuse
or neglect. Nonetheless, continuous video access to staff work sites
seemingly could be used for staff monitoring purposes as part of evi-
dence-based supervision. If such is the case, then additional resources
would likely be required to allow a supervisor to remotely access the
cameras as well as to have audio capabilities to interact with staff from
a remote site.
If consideration is given to remotely monitoring staff performance
through work-site cameras and microphones, then a number of issues
would warrant attention. Some of the issues relate to the technology
associated with the monitoring, such as the initial cost to an agency to
purchase hardware, establish reliable connectivity, etc., as described
earlier with telehealth in general. Ethical issues regarding privacy, con-
fidentiality, and information security would likewise need to be ad-
dressed as similarly referred to previously. There are also other issues
that pertain more specifically to the monitoring process itself in terms
of a supervisor effectively acquiring accurate information about the
quality of staff performance and doing so in a manner acceptable to

staff.
Remote monitoring of staff performance via tele-

health has usually involved circumscribed situa-
tions in which staff are in one stationary location
for a set period of time; continuous remote moni-
toring is also possible although a number of ethical,
effectiveness, and staff acceptance issues warrant
increased attention.
Effectiveness Issues with Distance Monitoring. If an agency is

equipped for a supervisor to remotely monitor staff performance
across all staff work sites as just described, then the monitoring can
occur in several ways. One way generally coincides with overt moni-
toring by the supervisor as discussed in Chapter 5. Overt monitoring
from a distance involves staff being informed when the monitoring
device is activated such that their performance will be observed. To
illustrate, with some applications of remote monitoring a light on a
mounted camera comes on that is visible to staff when the devise is
engaged. Alternatively, staff can be informed beforehand of times dur-
ing which the device will be activated for monitoring purposes.
A primary issue with overt, in-person monitoring by a supervisor
as also discussed in Chapter 5 is potential staff reactivity when they
are aware their performance is being monitored. The issue of reactiv-
ity, which interferes with a supervisor obtaining accurate information
about typical staff performance, would likewise seem to exist when
overt monitoring occurs from a distance. It seems logical that the same
procedures for reducing reactivity with in-person monitoring would
apply to overt monitoring from a distance (e.g., monitoring frequent-
ly, monitoring on an unpredictable schedule even though staff become
aware when the monitoring is initiated, and repeat monitoring soon
after initial monitoring has been discontinued). Because research on
potential reactivity to monitoring from a distance is not readily avail-
able though, the degree to which reactivity occurs and ways to reduce
the reactivity are speculative at this point.
The other way remote monitoring can occur is covertly. With covert
monitoring staff are not aware when their performance is being mon-
itored via the video device. An example of covert monitoring is when
staff are not informed when existing video equipment is activated to
allow a supervisor to monitor their performance.
Covert monitoring can also occur when a video device is continu-
ously activated (e.g., as with security cameras in convenience stores)
and staff do not know when a supervisor is actually using the device
to monitor their performance. In this situation an argument could be
made that the monitoring is not covert because staff are aware of the
video device and that it will be used at times to monitor their work
performance. However, experience suggests that such an argument is
not likely to be accepted by staff. Because staff do not know when
their performance is actually being monitored, at least some staff are
likely to consider that the supervisor is covertly or secretly monitoring
their performance.
Staff Acceptability Issues with Distance Monitoring. It has been
noted repeatedly in this text that monitoring of staff performance is a
component of evidence-based supervision that can be seriously dis-
liked by staff. Correspondingly, an emphasis in discussing in-person
monitoring procedures has been how supervisors can effectively mon-
itor staff performance in ways acceptable to staff. Potential staff dislike
of monitoring and how to prevent such a reaction also warrant serious
attention when monitoring is conducted from a distance.
Staff dislike of monitoring, whether conducted in-person or
remotely, is usually most significant when the monitoring is conduct-
ed covertly (and staff subsequently become aware that their perfor-
mance was covertly monitored). Chapter 5 discussed the reasons for
particular dislike of (in-person) covert monitoring among staff and rec-
ommended avoiding covert monitoring except in special circum-
stances. Experience suggests that covert monitoring from a distance is
also likely to be received quite poorly by staff.
The reasons for staff dislike of remote, covert monitoring are the
same as those described when covert monitoring is conducted in-per-
son. In essence, staff tend to believe they are not trusted by their
supervisor (or upper management) and their professionalism in per-
forming their work is discredited. Such beliefs can seriously erode staff
enjoyment in working for a supervisor who covertly monitors their
performance.
It should also be noted that some agencies have reported minimal

or no staff dislike of having their performance monitored covertly via
continuous video recording in their workplace. In some of the cases it
has been reported that staff basically get used to the presence of cam-
eras and there is no apparent effect on their day-to-day work enjoy-
ment. There have also been reports in some situations that staff actu-
ally appreciate having a video record of their performance because
the record can help them if charged with false claims about inappro-
priate work activities.
Nonetheless, there have been sufficient reports of serious staff dis-
like of remote monitoring conducted covertly that monitoring in such
a manner should be approached cautiously. At this point there is insuf-
ficient research to specify how covert, distance monitoring can be con-
ducted acceptably. However, at the very least if an agency desires to
monitor staff performance in this manner, staff should be made aware
of the use of covert monitoring and the reasons for its use immediate-
ly upon employment in the agency or even during the recruitment or
interview process.
If staff performance is going to be monitored co-

vertly from a distance such as through cameras in
staffs’ work sites, it is recommended that staff be in-
formed when initially being considered for employ-
ment in the agency that their performance will be
monitored in this manner and the purpose of the
monitoring.
As with covert monitoring from a distance, research is lacking on

how to promote staff acceptance of supervisory monitoring conduct-
ed overtly from a distance. Until such research occurs it is generally
recommended that when supervisors overtly monitor staff perfor-
mance remotely, the same basic guidelines for promoting staff accep-
tance of overt, in-person monitoring be followed. These guidelines are
presented below (refer to Chapter 5 for elaboration) with alterations
to account for the monitoring occurring from a distance. In consider-
ing the guidelines it should be emphasized that they are based only
on experiences we and others have had with distance monitoring in

contrast to results of sound research. Consequently, the guidelines
should only be viewed as suggestions to consider in contrast to well-
established, evidence-based ways to promote staff acceptance of hav-
ing their performance monitored overtly from a distance.
GUIDELINES FOR MAKING (OVERT)

MONITORING ACCEPTABLE TO STAFF,
ALTERED FOR REMOTE MONITORING
1. Inform staff prior to remote monitoring what will be

monitored and why it will be monitored.
2. If technically possible, acknowledge staff upon initiat-

ing remote monitoring or at least ensure staff become
aware that the monitoring is beginning.
3. Discontinue remote monitoring and strive to secure

assistance for staff if a potentially harmful or embar-
rassing situation is apparent.
4. Provide feedback to staff soon after monitoring remote-

ly.
5. Acknowledge staff upon completion of the monitoring if

technically possible or at least ensure staff become
aware that the monitoring has been completed.
Supporting Staff Performance Through Telehealth

There has been only minimal research to date on how supervisors
can support quality staff performance in a distance format using tele-
health. Within the limited telehealth research that has been reported,
this aspect of supervision has occurred primarily in two ways. One
way has involved incorporating positive feedback within staff training
procedures conducted through videoconferencing (i.e., as one com-
ponent step within BST). The other way has been providing positive
feedback to staff in written form using email correspondence (also
referred to as electronic feedback).
In light of the critical nature of supervisors actively supporting staff
performance to promote quality work as well as work enjoyment,
increased attention seems warranted on how this aspect of supervision
can occur in a distance format. Because of the relative lack of research
though, recommendations involving evidence-based strategies for effec-
tively supporting staff performance via telehealth are not readily forth-
coming (with the possible exception of the two specific ways just
noted). However, based on the considerable body of research on tra-
ditional, in-person ways of supporting staff performance and work
enjoyment, one general recommendation may warrant consideration.
Chapters 6 and 7 stressed that supervisors should routinely pro-
vide positive feedback on an informal basis in face-to-face interactions
with staff to promote staffs’ proficient work performance. It was fur-
ther emphasized that frequent vocal feedback presented in this man-
ner can be periodically supplemented with other ways of providing
positive feedback (refer to Chapters 6 and 7 for elaboration). The rec-
ommendation of concern here is that positive feedback provided from
a distance via telehealth can be considered as one means to supplement
informal feedback provided during regularly occurring interactions a
supervisor has with staff.
The rationale for recommending that positive feedback provided
via telehealth be supplemental to regularly occurring, in-person feed-
back is based in large part on practical considerations. Chapter 6 dis-
cussed how supervisors should routinely look for staff performance to
immediately commend on an impromptu basis whenever the super-
visors are present in staff work sites for varying reasons. It is difficult
to consider how feedback could be provided in this manner through
telehealth.
To illustrate, even if a supervisor could monitor staff performance
at any time through cameras in staffs’ work sites, it would be difficult
for the supervisor to immediately and privately commend an aspect
of a staff member’s performance that was just observed. Technically,
immediate feedback could conceivably be provided in this way such
as if staff had headphones or earplugs linked to a supervisor’s com-
puter through which the supervisor could communicate privately with
staff at any time. However, arranging for this type of interaction to be
possible throughout the staff work shift would require considerable

equipment, training, and cost for the vast majority of human service
agencies.
A more common scenario would likely be for a supervisor to mon-
itor staff performance remotely and then later have an arranged inter-
action with a staff person through videoconferencing to provide feed-
back at that time. Feedback provided in this manner would typically
be considered a more formal, delayed feedback presentation. It is
therefore uncertain that this means of providing feedback from a dis-
tance would have the same impact as in-person, informal feedback
provided immediately upon a supervisor’s observation of staff perfor-
mance that warranted commendation.
It would also seem unlikely that feedback via telehealth could be
provided as readily or frequently as on-the-spot, informal feedback by
a supervisor while the supervisor is present in the staffs’ work site.
Nonetheless, if it is difficult for supervisors to be frequently present in
staff work sites (e.g., due to a supervisor’s staff being in multiple loca-
tions) or counter-indicated (e.g., due to concerns over an infectious dis-
ease), use of telehealth could be used to supplement whatever in-per-
son feedback can be provided. At this point, more research is needed
to determine the true merits of this recommendation as well as the use
of telehealth in general for supervisors to consistently support desired
staff performance.
Pending more research on how a supervisor can use

telehealth to support quality staff performance, it is
generally recommended that positive feedback
provided remotely via telehealth be considered as
a means to supplement a supervisor’s routine pre-
sentation of feedback during in-person interactions.
Correcting Staff Performance Through Telehealth

As discussed in Chapter 8, correcting nonproficient or otherwise
problematic staff performance as part of the supervision process often
involves a two-step process. The first step is to provide corrective feed-
back to a staff person regarding the performance of concern. If sever-

al presentations of corrective feedback do not result in improved per-
formance, then the second step is to initiate disciplinary action. The
disciplinary action progresses in severity until either the staff person’s
performance improves or the individual’s job in the agency is termi-
nated (see Chapter 8 for other means of correcting staff performance
based on varying reasons for performance issues).
As with strategies for supporting quality staff performance, there
has been relatively minimal research on correcting nonproficient per-
formance from a distance using telehealth. The limited research that
has been reported pertains to the same two telehealth applications
used to support staff performance. Specifically, corrective feedback
has been included within videoconferencing training programs and
email correspondence with staff.
Because of insufficient research on using telehealth for corrective
management purposes with human service staff, there are not well-
established, evidence-based strategies to recommend for supervisors
in this area. However, there is one major consideration that warrants
attention if supervisors consider using telehealth within attempts to
correct various problems with staff performance. That consideration
pertains to the importance of face-to-face interactions between a su-
pervisor and staff person when the supervisor implements corrective
management procedures.
It is generally recognized among experienced, successful supervi-
sors that actions taken with staff that are likely to be viewed negative-
ly by the staff should be carried out in person by a supervisor. There
are two primary reasons for this view. The first reason is due to the
likely impact on the staff recipient of the action. Specifically, staff tend
to be more appreciative of a supervisor who meets with them direct-
ly to convey negative information rather than having the information
presented indirectly such as through an email or by an assistant or
other representative of the supervisor. Staff likewise often express dis-
respect for a supervisor who avoids interacting with them when nega-
tive information is conveyed.
The second reason is that when a supervisor provides corrective
feedback in a face-to-face interaction with a staff person, the supervi-
sor can immediately assess the staff person’s reaction to the feedback
(see discussion in Chapter 6 concerning the advantages of providing
vocal feedback in this regard). The assessment can facilitate the super-
visor’s continued presentation of feedback in the most effective man-

ner. The assessment can also enhance the supervisor’s likelihood of
providing the feedback in a manner that is acceptable to the staff per-
son or at the least, minimizes unpleasantness for the individual.
Consequently, it is recommended that when considering use of
corrective management strategies in a telehealth format, supervisors
attend to the importance of in-person interactions. In particular, pro-
viding corrective feedback and especially that associated with disci-
plinary action through email correspondence (or text messaging)
should generally be avoided unless the information represents a fol-
low up to what was previously presented in a face-to-face manner.
Videoconferencing would be a more recommended telehealth
approach for providing corrective feedback because of its face-to-face
feature even though the supervisor and staff person are in different
locations. However, as with recommendations regarding use of tele-
health with supportive management, these recommendation regard-
ing corrective management warrant qualification. Although the rec-
ommendations are based on reports of experienced supervisors as
well as staff, the effectiveness of the suggested strategies has not been
formally validated through appropriate research.
1. Attention is being increasingly directed to supervising staff performance

from a distance due to increases in community-based staff work sites in
which a supervisor is not consistently present and concerns that arose
over in-person interactions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
2. Providing supervision from a distance usually involves telehealth appli-

cations using telecommunication and information technologies to impact
staff performance.
3. Supervising staff performance using telehealth typically requires hard-

ware and software for videoconferencing along with reliable digital con-
nectivity and transmission so supervisors and staff can interact fluidly in
real time from a distance.
4. Prior to initiating distance supervision via telehealth, supervisors and

staff usually require training in using telehealth resources and ethical
requirements.
5. Most telehealth research in the human services has involved training

skills to staff through videoconferencing, with investigations showing that
all components of behavioral skills training can be conducted in this
manner although the types of skills trained have been limited.
6. Remote monitoring of staff performance via telehealth to date has focused

on circumscribed situations in which staff are stationary in one location
for a set time period; continuous remote monitoring across more mobile
situations for longer time periods is also technically possible although a
number of ethical, effectiveness, and acceptability issues have to be
addressed.
7. Remote monitoring through telehealth can occur covertly and overtly,

with special concerns with each type of monitoring and especially in
regard to staff acceptability associated with the monitoring.
8. Because of minimal existing research on how supervisors can actively

support quality staff performance via telehealth, it is generally recom-
mended that supportive strategies implemented from a distance be used
specifically as a supplement to in-person actions a supervisor takes to
support staff performance.
9. Although research is also limited on using corrective action with staff per-
formance via telehealth, reports from experienced supervisors and staff
suggest that corrective action is best received if provided directly by the
supervisor in a face-to-face manner in contrast to indirectly such as
through email correspondence.
Section V
SELECTED READINGS
SELECTED READINGS
The readings referenced in this section provide background

research and supplemental information for topics covered in Chapters
1–14. To facilitate selection of those readings most relevant to partic-
ular topics of interest, readings are grouped according to the follow-
ing content areas. It should also be noted, however, that information
provided in individual readings often covers several different content
areas. The groupings of the readings into the following categories rep-
resent the primary topic addressed within each reading.
• Training Staff to Teach People with Intellectual and Develop-

mental Disabilities
• Training Other Work Skills to Staff
• Improving and Maintaining Ongoing Areas of Staff Perform-
ance (Varying Job Duties)
• Promoting Supportive Social Interactions with Clients
• Promoting Treatment Services Specific to Groups of Clients
• Promoting Quality Personal Care and Support for Clients
• Promoting Quality Data Collection and Recordkeeping by Staff
• Preventing and Reducing Absenteeism
• Promoting Work Enjoyment
• Distance Supervision Through Telehealth
• Review and Discussion Papers Related to Evidence-Based Super-
vision
• Books Related to Evidence-Based Supervision
• Training Curricula for Supervisors
283
TRAINING STAFF TO TEACH PEOPLE WITH

INTELLECTUAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
Aherne, C. M., & Beaulieu, L. (2019). Assessing long-term mainte-

nance of staff performance following behavior skills training in a
home-based setting. Behavioral Interventions, 34, 79–88.
Aporta, A. P., Resende, A., Nogueira, M., Goyos, C., & Pollard, J. S.
(2016). Interactive computer training to teach discrete-trial instruc-
tion to undergraduates and special educators in Brazil: A replica-
tion and extension. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 780–793.
Bowe, M., & Sellers, T. (2018). Evaluating the Performance Diagnostic
Checklist-Human Services to assess incorrect error-correction pro-
cedures by preschool paraprofessionals. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 51, 166–176.
Catania, C. N., Almeida, D., Liu-Constant, B., & Reed, F. D. D. (2009).
Video modeling to train staff to implement discrete-trial instruc-
tion. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 387–392.
Clayton, M., & Headley, A. (2019). The use of behavioral skills train-
ing to improve staff performance of discrete trial training.
Behavioral Interventions, 34, 136–143.
Davis, S., Thomson, K., & Connolly, M. (2019). A component analy-
sis of behavioral skills training with volunteers teaching motor
skills to individuals with developmental disabilities. Behavioral
Interventions, 34, 431–450.
Ducharme, J. M., & Feldman, M. A. (1992). Comparison of staff train-
ing strategies to prompt generalized teaching skills. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 165–179.
Engleman, K. K., Altus, D. E., Mosier, M. C., & Mathews, R. M.
(2003). Brief training to promote the use of less intrusive prompts
by nursing assistants in a dementia care unit. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 36, 129–132.
Fabry, P. L. & Reid, D. H. (1978). Teaching foster grandparents to train
severely handicapped persons. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
11, 111–123.
Green, D. R., Ferguson, J. L., Cihon, J. H., Torres, N., Leaf, R.,
McEachin, J. . . . Leaf, J. B. (2020). The teaching interaction pro-
cedure as a staff training tool. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 13, 421–
433.
Selected Readings 285
Hahs, A. D., & Jarynowski, J. (2019). Targeting staff treatment integri-

ty of the PEAK Training System using behavioral skills training.
Hundert, J. (1982). Training teachers in generalized writing of behav-
ior modification programs for multi-handicapped deaf children.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 111–122.
Kissel, R. C., Whitman, T. L., & Reid, D. H. (1983). An institutional
staff training and self-management program for developing multi-
ple self-care skills in severely/profoundly retarded individuals.
Lerman, D. C., Tetreault, A., Hovanetz, A., Strobel, M., & Garro, J.
(2008). Further evaluation of a brief, intensive teacher-training
model. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41, 243–248.
MacDuff, G. S., Krantz, P. J., MacDuff, M. A., & McClannahan, L. E.
(1988). Providing incidental teaching for autistic children: A rapid
training procedure for therapists. Education and Treatment of
Children, 11, 205–217.
Martocchio, N., & Rosales, R. (2016). An evaluation of pyramidal
training to teach implementation of the picture exchange commu-
nication system. Behavioral Interventions, 31, 265–282.
McGuire, P. S., Vanburen, P., Alger, K., & Thomas, D. R. (1987).
Assessing teaching opportunities in a residential treatment facility.
Behavioral Residential Treatment, 2, 199–210.
Miles, N. I., & Wilder, D. A. (2009). The effects of behavioral skills
training on caregiver implementation of guided compliance.
Morch, W. T., & Eikeseth, S. (1992). Some issues in staff training and
improvement. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 13, 43–55.
Neely, L., Castro-Villarreal, F., Hong, E. R., Ponce, K., & Gerow, S.
(2020). Clinic-based behavioral skills training to teach caregivers
adaptive skill interventions for children with autism. Advances in
Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 4, 295–307.
Nigro-Bruzzi, D., & Sturmey, P. (2010). The effects of behavioral skills
training on mand training by staff and unprompted vocal mands
by children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 757–761.
Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1999). Training basic teaching skills to
paraeducators of students with severe disabilities: A one-day pro-
gram. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31, 48–54.
Parsons, M. B., Reid, D. H., & Green, C. W. (1993). Preparing direct

service staff to teach people with severe disabilities: A compre-
hensive evaluation of an effective and acceptable training pro-
gram. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 8, 163–185.
Parsons, M. B., Reid, D. H., & Green, C. W. (1996). Training basic
teaching skills to community and institutional support staff for peo-
ple with severe disabilities: A one-day program. Research in
Developmental Disabilities, 17, 467–485.
Parsons, M. B., Reid, D. H., & Lattimore, L. P. (2009). Increasing inde-
pendence of adults with autism in community activities: A brief,
embedded teaching strategy. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 2, 40–48.
Sarokoff, R. A., & Sturmey, P. (2004). The effects of behavioral skills
training on staff implementation of discrete-trial teaching. Journal
of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 535–538.
Schepis, M. M., Ownbey, J. B., Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (2000).
Training support staff to teach young children with disabilities in
an inclusive preschool setting. Journal of Positive Behavior
Schepis, M. M., Reid, D. H., Ownbey, J., & Parsons, M. B. (2001).
Training support staff to embed teaching within natural routines of
young children with disabilities in an inclusive preschool. Journal of
Schwartz, I. S., Anderson, S. R., & Halle, J. W. (1989). Training teach-
ers to use naturalistic time delay: Effects on teacher behavior and
on the language use of students. The Journal of the Association for the
Severely Handicapped, 14, 48–57.
Severtson, J. M., & Carr, J. E. (2012). Training novice instructors to
implement errorless discrete-trial teaching: A sequential analysis.
Singer, G., Sowers, J., & Irvin, L. K. (1986). Computer-assisted video
instruction for training paraprofessionals in rural special educa-
tion. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8, 27–34.
Suberman, R., & Cividini-Motta, C. (2020). Teaching caregivers to
implement mand training using speech generating devices. Journal
Vladescu, J. C., Carroll, R., Paden, A., & Kodak, T. M. (2012). The
effects of video modeling with voiceover instruction on accurate
implementation of discrete-trial instruction. Journal of Applied
Vonderen, A.V., Duker, P., & Didden, R. (2010). Instruction and video
feedback to improve staff’s trainer behaviour and response prompt-
ing during one-to-one training with young children with severe
intellectual disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 31,
1481–1490.
TRAINING OTHER WORK SKILLS TO STAFF
Adams, G. L., Tallon, R. J., & Rimell, P. (1980). A comparison of lec-

ture versus role-playing in the training of the use of positive rein-
forcement. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 2(3), 205–
212.
Alaimo, C., Seiverling, L., Sarubbi, J., & Sturmey, P. (2018). The effects
of a behavioral skills training and general-case training package on
caregiver implementation of a food selectivity intervention.
Al-Nasser, T., Williams, W. L., & Feeney, B. (2019). A brief evaluation
of a pictorially enhanced self-instruction packet on participant
fidelity across multiple ABA procedures. Behavior Analysis in
Practice, 12, 387–395.
Anderson, T. K., Kratochwill, T. R., & Bergan, J. R. (1986). Training
teachers in behavioral consultation and therapy: An analysis of
verbal behaviors. Journal of School Psychology, 24, 229–241.
Andzik, N. R., & Schaefer, J. M. (2020). Pre-service teacher-delivered
behavioral skills training: A pyramidal training approach.
Bachmeyer-Lee, M. H., Kirkwood, C. A., Sheehan, C. M., Gibson, A.
L., Shuler, N. J., & Keane, J. A. (2020). Utilizing in-vivo feedback
for caregiver training of pediatric feeding protocols. Journal of Applied
Baker, D. J. (1998). Effects of video-based staff training with manager-
led exercises in residential support. Mental Retardation, 36, 198–
204.
Blaxall, M. C. D., Parsonson, B. S., & Robertson, N. R. (1993). The
development and evaluation of a sexual harassment contact per-
son training package. Behavior Modification, 17, 148–163.
Bovi, G. M. D., Vladescu, J. C., DeBar, R. M., Carroll, R. A., &

Sarokoff, R. A. (2017). Using video modeling with voice-over
instruction to train public school staff to implement a preference
assessment. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 72–76.
Bowles, P. E., Jr., & Nelson, R. O. (1976). Training teachers as media-
tors: Efficacy of a workshop versus the bug-in-the-ear technique.
Journal of School Psychology, 14, 15–26.
Brown, F., & Esquith, D. (1983). Effects of two grading contingencies
on practicum assignments with trainees in a severely multiply
handicapped program. Education and Training of the Mentally
Retarded, 18, 287–292.
Chok, J. T., Shlesinger, A., Studer, L., & Bird, F. L. (2012). Description
of a practitioner training program on functional analysis and treat-
ment development. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5, 25–36.
Collins, S., Higbee, T. S., & Salzberg, C. L. (2009). The effects of video
modeling on staff implementation of a problem-solving interven-
tion with adults with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied
Cooper, K. J., & Browder, D. M. (2001). Preparing staff to enhance
active participation of adults with severe disabilities by offering
choice and prompting performance during a community purchas-
ing activity. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 22, 1–20.
Cotnoir-Bichelman, N. M., Thompson, R. H., McKerchar, P. M., &
Haremza, J. L. (2006). Training student teachers to reposition
infants frequently. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 489–494.
Dancer, D. D., Braukmann, C. J., Schumaker, J. B., Kirigin, K. A.,
Willner, A. G., & Wolf, M. M. (1978). The training and validation
of behavior observation and description skills. Behavior
Modification, 2, 113–133.
Delameter, A. M., Connors, C. K., & Wells, K. C. (1984). A compari-
son of staff training procedures: Behavioral applications in the
child psychiatric inpatient setting. Behavior Modification, 8, 39–58.
Deliperi, P., Vladescu, J. C., Reeve, K. F., Reeve, S. A., & DeBar, R.
M. (2015). Training staff to implement a paired-stimulus prefer-
ence assessment using video modeling with voiceover instruction.
Demchak, M. A., & Browder, D. M. (1990). An evaluation of the pyra-
mid model of staff training in group homes for adults with severe
handicaps. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 25, 150–163.
Digennaro-Reed, F. D., Codding, R., Catania, C. N., & Maguire, H.

(2010). Effects of video modeling on treatment integrity of behav-
ioral interventions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 291–295.
Edwards, G., & Bergman, J. S. (1982). Evaluation of a feeding training
program for caregivers of individuals who are severely physically
handicapped. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 7,
93–100.
Ehrlich, R. J., Nosik, M. R., Carr, J. E., & Wine, B. (2020). Teaching
employees how to receive feedback: A preliminary investigation.
Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 40, 19–29.
Embregts, P. J. C. M. (2002). Effect of resident and direct-care staff
training on responding during social interactions. Research in Devel-
opmental Disabilities, 23, 353–366.
Erath, T. G., Reed, F. D. D., Sundermeyer, H. W., Brand, D., Novak,
M. D., & Harbison, M. J. (2020). Enhancing the training integrity
of human service staff using pyramidal behavioral skills training.
Finn, L. L., & Sturmey, P. (2009). The effect of peer-to-peer training on
staff interactions with adults with dual diagnoses. Research in
Fitzgerald, J. R., Reid, D. H., Schepis, M. M., Faw, G. D., Welty, P. A.,
& Pyfer, L. M. (1984). A rapid training procedure for teaching
manual sign language skills to multidisciplinary institutional staff.
Applied Research in Mental Retardation, 5, 451–469.
Ford, J. E. (1983). Application of a personalized system of instruction
to a large, personnel training program. Journal of Organizational
Behavior Management, 5(3/4), 57–65.
Fox, C. J., & Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1989). The effectiveness of two differ-
ent sources of feedback on staff teaching of fire evacuation skills.
Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 10(2), 19–35.
Gage, M. A., Fredericks, H. D. B., Johnson-Dorn, N., & Lindley-
Southard, B. (1982). Inservice training for staffs of group homes and
work activity centers serving developmentally disabled adults. The
Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 7, 60–70.
Gardner, J. M. (1972). Teaching behavior modification to nonprofes-
sionals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 517–521.
Graf, R. B., & Karsten, A. M. (2012). Evaluation of a self-instruction
package for conducting stimulus preference assessments. Journal of
Green, C. W., Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1993). Integrating in-

structional procedures into traditional congregate care situations
for people with severe disabilities. Behavioral Residential Treatment,
8, 243–262.
Green, C. W., & Reid, D. H. (1994). A comprehensive evaluation of a
train-the-trainers model for training education staff to assemble
adaptive switches. Journal of Mental and Physical Disabilities, 6, 219–
238.
Gutierrez, J., Reeve, S. A., Vladescu, J. C., DeBar, R. M., & Gianna-
kakos, A. R. (2020). Evaluation of manualized instruction to train
staff to implement a token economy. Behavior Analysis in Practice,
13, 158–168.
Homlitas, C., Rosales, R., & Candel, L. (2014). A further evaluation
of behavioral skills training for implementation of the Picture Ex-
change Communication System. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
47, 198–203.
Inge, K. J., & Snell, M. E. (1985). Teaching positioning and handling
techniques to public school personnel through inservice training.
The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 10,
105–110.
Jensen, J. M., Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1998). Supervisory train-
ing for teachers: Multiple, long-term effects in an education pro-
gram for adults with severe disabilities. Research in Developmental
Disabilities, 19, 449–463.
Jimenez-Gomez, C., McGarry, K., Crochet, E., & Chong, I. M. (2019).
Training behavioral technicians to implement naturalistic behav-
ioral interventions using behavioral skills training. Behavioral Inter-
ventions, 34, 396–404.
Johnson, M. D., & Fawcett, S. B. (1994). Courteous service: Its assess-
ment and modification in a human service organization. Journal of
Jones, F. H., & Eimers, R. C. (1975). Role playing to train elementary
teachers to use a classroom management “skill package.” Journal of
Jones, F. H., Fremouw, W., & Carples, S. (1977). Pyramid training of
elementary school teachers to use a classroom management “skill
package.” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 239–253.
Katz, R. C., & Lutzker, J. R. (1980). A comparison of three methods

for training timeout. Behavior Research of Severe Developmental Disbil-
ities, 1, 123–130.
Koegel, R. L., Russo, D. C., & Rincover, A. (1977). Assessing and
training teachers in the generalized use of behavior modification
with autistic children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 197–
205.
Lambert, J. M., Bloom, S. E., Kunnavatana, S. S., Collins, S. D., &
Clay, C. J. (2013). Training residential staff to conduct trial-based
functional analyses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 296–
300.
Lavie, T., & Sturmey, P. (2002). Training staff to conduct a paired-stim-
ulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35,
209–211.
Macurik, K. M., O’Kane, N. P., Malanga, P., & Reid, D. H. (2008).
Video training of support staff in intervention plans for challeng-
ing behavior: Comparison with live training. Behavioral
Maher, C. A. (1984). Training educational administrators in organiza-
tional behavior management: Program description and evaluation.
Maloney, D. M., Phillips, E. L., Fixsen, D. L., & Wolf, M. M. (1975).
Training techniques for staff in group homes for juvenile defend-
ers: An Analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 2, 195–215.
Mansdorf, I. J., & Burstein, Y. (1986). Case manager: A clinical tool
for training residential treatment staff. Behavioral Residential
Treatment, 1, 155–168.
McKeown, Jr., D., Adams, H. E., & Forehand, R. (1975). Generali-
zation to the classroom of principles of behavior modification
taught to teachers. Behavior Research & Therapy, 13, 85–92.
Moore, J. W., & Fisher, W. W. (2007). The effects of videotape model-
ing on staff acquisition of functional analysis methodology. Journal
Moser, A. J. (1973). Training nonprofessional behavioral change
agents. Journal of School Psychology, 11, 251–255.
Neef, N. A., Trachtenberg, S., Loeb, J., & Sterner, K. (1991). Video-
based training of respite care providers: An interactional analysis
of presentation format. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 473–
486.
Page, T. J., Christian, J. G., Iwata, B. A., Reid, D. H., Crow, R. E., &
Dorsey, M. F. (1981). Evaluating and training interdisciplinary
teams in writing IPP goals and objectives. Mental Retardation, 19,
25–27.
Page, T. J., Iwata, B. A., & Reid, D. H. (1982). Pyramidal training: A
large-scale application with institutional staff. Journal of Applied
Pangborn, M. M., Borrero, C. S. W., & Borreo, J. C. (2013). Sequential
application of caregiver training to implement pediatric feeding
protocols. Behavioral Interventions, 28, 107–130.
Panyan, M. C., & Patterson, E. T. (1974). Teaching attendants the
applied aspects of behavior modification. Mental Retardation, 12,
30–32.
Parsons, M. B., McCarn, J. E., & Reid, D. H. (1993). Evaluating and
increasing meal-related choices throughout a service setting for
people with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons
with Severe Handicaps, 18, 253–260.
Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1995). Training residential supervisors
to provide feedback for maintaining staff teaching skills with peo-
ple who have severe disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
28, 317–322.
Parsons, M. B., Rollyson, J. H., & Reid, D. H. (2012). Evidence-based
staff training: A guide for practitioners. Behavior Analysis in Practice,
5, 2–11.
Pence, S. T., St. Peter, C. C., &Tetreault, A. S. (2012). Increasing accu-
rate preference assessment implementation through pyramidal
training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 345–359.
Pritchard, D., Hoerger, M., Penney, H., Eiri, L., Hellawell, L.,
Fothergill, S., & Mace, F. C. (2017). Training staff to avoid problem
behavior related to restricting access to preferred activities.
Quilitch, H. R., Miller, S. M., McConnell, M. A., & Bryant, S. (1975).
Teaching personnel to implement behavioral programs.
Educational Technology, 27–31.
Realon, R. E., Wheeler, A. J., Spring, B., & Springer, M. (1986).
Evaluating the quality of training delivered by direct-care staff in a
state mental retardation center. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 1,
199–212.
Reid, D. H., & Green, C. W. (2020). Instructor behavior associated

with trainee attentiveness during behavioral training workshops. A
preliminary assessment. Behavioral Interventions, 35, 402–403.
Reid, D. H., Green, C. W., Parsons, M. B., & Rotholz, D. A. (2019).
The best and worst things staff report about behavioral training
workshops: A large-scale evaluation. Behavior Analysis in Practice,
12, 523–535.
Reid, D. H., Rotholz, D. A., Parsons, M. B., Morris, L., Braswell, B.
A., Green, C. W., & Schell, R. M. (2003). Training human service
supervisors in aspects of positive behavior support: Evaluation of
a state-wide, performance-based program. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 5, 35–46.
Rispoli, M., Burke, M. D., Hatton, H., Ninci, J., Zaini, S., & Sanchez,
L. (2015). Training Head Start teachers to conduct trial-based func-
tional analysis of challenging behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior
Rosales, R., Gongola, L, & Homlitas, C. (2015). An evaluation of
video modeling with embedded instructions to teach implementa-
tion of stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 48, 209–214.
Rosales, R., Stone, K., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2009). The effects of behav-
ioral skills training on implementation of the Picture Exchange
Communication system. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42,
541–549.
Roscoe, E. M., & Fisher, W. W. (2008). Evaluation of an efficient
method for training staff to implement stimulus preference assess-
ments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41, 249–254.
Roscoe, E. M., Fisher, W. W., Glover, A. C., & Volkert, V. M. (2006).
Evaluating the relative effects of feedback and contingent money
for staff training of stimulus preference assessments. Journal of
Rosen, H. S., Yerushalmi, C. J., & Walker, J. C. (1986). Training com-
munity residential staff: Evaluation and follow-up. Behavioral
Residential Treatment, 1, 15–38.
Sanson-Fister, R. W., Seymour, F. W., & Baer, D. M. (1976). Training
institutional staff to alter delinquents’ conversation. Journal of
Behavior Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry, 7, 243–247.
Schepis, M. M., & Reid, D. H. (1993). Training direct service staff in

congregate settings to interact with people with severe disabilities:
A quick, effective, and acceptable program. Behavioral Interventions,
1, 13–26.
Schinke, S. P., & Wong, S. E. (1977). Evaluation of staff training in group
homes for retarded persons. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
82, 130–136.
Schinke, S. P., & Wong, S. E. (1978). Teaching child care workers: A
behavioral approach. Child Care Quarterly, 7, 45–61.
Scott, J., Lerman, D. C., & Luck, K. (2018). Computer-based training
to detect antecedents and consequences of problem behavior.
Shane, H. (1974). Command performance: A behavior modification
technique in a game format. Mental Retardation, 12, 18–20.
Shapiro, M., Kazemi, E., Pogosjana, M., Rios, D., & Mendoza, M.
(2016). Preference assessment training via self-instruction: A repli-
cation and extension. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 794–
808.
Shore, B. A., Iwata, B. A., Vollmer, T. R., Lerman, D. C., & Zarcone,
J. R. (1995). Pyramidal staff training in the extension of treatment
for severe behavior disorders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
28, 323–332.
Sigafoos, J., Roberts, D., Couzens, D., & Caycho, L. (1992). Improving
instruction for adults with developmental disabilities: Evaluation
of a staff training package. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 7, 283–
297.
Sloat, K. C. M., Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1977). The incremen-
tal effectiveness of classroom-based teacher-training techniques.
Behavior Therapy, 8, 810–818.
Smth, T., Parker, T., Taubman, M., & Lovass, O. I. (1992). Transfer of
staff training from workshops to group homes: A failure to gener-
alize across settings. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 13, 57–71.
Speidel, G. E., & Tharp, R. G. (1978). Teacher-training workshop strat-
egy: Instructions, discrimination training, modeling, guided prac-
tice, and video feedback. Behavior Therapy, 9, 735–739.
Stein, T. J. (1975). Some ethical considerations of short-term work-
shops in the principles and methods of behavior modification.
Stern, K., & Gonzalez, M. L. (2017). Brief Behavioral Knowledge

Questionnaire: Measuring change in caregiver’s knowledge follow-
ing participation in a brief behavioral training. Behavioral Inter-
ventions, 32, 35–53.
Stoddard, L. T., McIlvane, W. J., McDonagh, E. C., & Kledaras, J. B.
(1986). The use of picture programs in teaching direct care staff.
Applied Research in Mental Retardation, 7, 349–358.
Stumphauzer, J. S., & Davis, L. C. (1983). Training Mexican American
mental health personnel in behavior therapy. Journal of Behavior
Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry, 14, 215–217.
Taber, T. A., Lambright, N., & Luiselli, J. K. (2017). Video modeling
training effects on types of attention delivered by educational care-
providers. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 189–194.
Templeman, T. P., Fredericks, H. D. B., Bunse, C., & Moses, C. (1983).
Teaching research in-service training model. Education and Training
of the Mentally Retarded, 28, 245–252.
Tynam, W. D., & Gengo, V. (1992). Staff training in a pediatric reha-
bilitation hospital: Development of behavioral engineers. Journal of
Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 4, 299–306.
van den Pol, R. A., Reid, D. H., & Fuqua, R. W. (1983). Peer training
of safety-related skills to institutional staff: Benefits for trainers and
trainees. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16, 139–156.
Ward-Horner, J., & Sturmey, P. (2012). Component analysis of behav-
ior skills training in functional analysis. Behavioral Interventions, 27,
75–92.
Watson, L. S., Jr., Gardner, J. M., & Sanders, C. (1971). Shaping and
maintaining behavior modification skills in staff members in a MR
institution: Columbus State Institute Behavior Modification
Program. Mental Retardation, 9, 39–42.
Watson, L. S., Jr., & Uzzell, R. (1980). A program for teaching behav-
ior modification skills to institutional staff. Applied Research in
Mental Retardation, 1, 41–53.
Weldy, C. R., Rapp, J. T., & Capocasa, K. (2014). Training staff to
implement brief stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied
Willner, A. G., Braukmann, C. J., Kirigin, K. A., Fixsen, D. L., Phillips,
E. L., & Wolf, M. M. (1977). The training and validation of youth-
preferred social behaviors of child-care personnel. Journal of
Wishnowski, A., Yu, C. T., Pear, J., Chand, C., & Saltel, L. (2018).
Effects of computer-aided instruction on the implementation of the
MSWO stimulus preference assessment. Behavioral Interventions, 33,
56–68.
Ziarnik, J. P., & Bernstein, G. S. (1982). A critical examination of the
effect of inservice training on staff performance. Mental Retardation,
20, 109–114.
Zlomke, L. C., & Benjamin, V. A., Jr. (1983). Staff in-service:
Measuring effectiveness through client behavior change. Education
and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 18, 125–130.
IMPROVING AND MAINTAINING ONGOING AREAS

OF STAFF PERFORMANCE (VARYING JOB DUTIES)
Andrasik, F., & McNamara, J. R. (1977). Optimizing staff performance

in an institutional behavior change system: A pilot study. Behavior
Modification, 1, 235.
Aragon, A., & Holmes, P. A. (1990). Engagement of patients and staff
on a psychiatric hospital ward. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 11(2), 171–188.
Azrin, N. H., Jammer, J. P., & Besalel, V. A. (1989). Student learning
as the basis for reinforcement to the instructor. Behavioral Resi-
dential Treatment, 4, 159–170.
Azrin, N. H., & Pye, G. E. (1989). Staff management by behavioral
contracting. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 4, 89–98.
Barrowclough, C., & Fleming, I. (1986). Training direct care staff in
goal planning with elderly people. Behavioral Psychotherapy, 14,
192–209.
Bible, G. H., & Sneed, T. J. (1976). Some effects of an accreditation
survey on program completion at a state institution. Mental
Retardation, 14, 14–15.
Bourdon, R. (1982). Measuring and tracking management perfor-
mance for accountability. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 4(3/4), 101–112.
Brackett, L., Reid, D. H., & Green, C. W. (2005). Effects of reactivity
to observations on staff performance. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 40, 191–195.
Bricker, W. A., Morgan, D. G., & Grabowski, J. G. (1972). Develop-

ment and maintenance of a behavior modification repertoire of
cottage attendants through TV feedback. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 77, 128–136.
Burke, R. V., Howard, M. R., Peterson, J. L., Peterson, R. W., & Allen,
K. D. (2012). Visual performance feedback: Effects on targeted and
nontargeted staff. Behavior Modification, 36, 687–704.
Byrd, G. R., Sawyer, B. P., & Locke, B. J. (1983). Improving direct care
via minimal changes in conventional resources: An empirical
analysis. Mental Retardation, 21, 164–168.
Calpin, J. P., Edelstein, B., & Redmon, W. K. (1988). Performance
feedback and goal setting to improve mental health center staff
productivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 9(2), 35–
58.
Carr, J. E., Wilder, D. A., Majdalany, L, Mathisen, D., & Strain, L. A.
(2013). An assessment-based solution to a human-service employ-
ee performance problem: An initial evaluation of the Performance
Diagnostic Checklist-Human Services. Behavior Analysis in Practice,
6, 16–32.
Codding, R. S., Feinberg, A. B., Dunn, E. K., & Pace, G. M. (2005).
Effects of immediate performance feedback on implementation of
behavior support plans. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38,
205–219.
Codding, R. S., Livanis, A., Pace, G. M., & Vaca, L. (2008). Using per-
formance feedback to improve treatment integrity of classwide
behavior plans: An investigation of observer reactivity. Journal of
Cook, T., & Dixon, M. R. (2005). Performance feedback and proba-
bilistic bonus contingencies among employees in a human service
organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 25(3),
45–63.
Cruz, N. J., Wilder, D. A., Phillabaum, C., Thomas, R., Cusick, M, &
Gravina, N. (2019). Further evaluation of the Performance
Diagnostic Checklist-Safety (PDC-Safety). Journal of Organizational
Behavior Management, 39, 266–279.
Dib, N., & Sturmey, P. (2007). Reducing student stereotypy by improv-
ing teachers’ implementation of discrete-trial teaching. Journal of
DiGennaro, F. D., Martens, B. K., & Kleinmann, A. E. (2007). A com-

parison of performance feedback procedures on teachers’ treatment
implementation integrity and students’ inappropriate behavior in
special education classrooms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
40, 447–461.
Ditzian, K., Wilder, D. A., King, A., & Tanz, J. (2015). An evaluation
of the Performance Diagnostic Checklist-Human Services to assess
an employee performance problem in a center-based autism treat-
ment facility. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, 199–203.
Durward, L., & Whatmore, R. (1976). Testing measures of the quality
of residential care: A pilot study. Behavior Research & Therapy, 14,
149–157.
Dyer, K., Schwartz, I. S., & Luce, S. C. (1984). A supervision program
for increasing functional activities for severely handicapped stu-
dents in a residential setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17,
249–259.
Faw, G. D., Reid, D. H., Schepis, M. M., Fitzgerald, J. R., & Welty, P.
A. (1981). Involving institutional staff in the development and
maintenance of sign language skills with profoundly retarded per-
sons. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 411–423.
Fleming, R. K., & Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1989). Enhancing quality of
teaching by direct care staff through performance feedback on the
job. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 4, 377–395.
Fleming, R. K., & Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1992). Reciprocal peer manage-
ment: Improving staff instruction in a vocational training program.
Ford, J. E. (1984). A comparison of three feedback procedures for
improving teaching skills. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage-
ment, 6(1), 65–77.
Gladstone, B. W., & Spencer, C. J. (1977). The effects of modeling on
the contingent praise of mental retardation counselors. Journal of
Goings, K., Carr, L., Maguire, H., Harper, J. M., & Luiselli, J. K.
(2019). Improving classroom appearance and organization through
a supervisory performance improvement intervention. Behavior
Analysis in Practice, 12, 430–434.
Green, C. W., Canipe, V. C., Way, P. J., & Reid, D. H. (1986).
Improving the functional utility and effectiveness of classroom ser-
vices for students with profound multiple handicaps. The Journal of
the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 11, 162–170.
Green, C. W., Reid, D. H., Perkins, L. I., & Gardner, S. M. (1991).

Increasing habilitative services for persons with profound handi-
caps: An application of structural analysis to staff management.
Green, C. W., Rollyson, J. H., Passante, S. C., & Reid, D. H. (2002).
Maintaining proficient supervisor performance with direct support
personnel: An analysis of two management approaches. Journal of
Greene, B. F., Willis, B. S., Levy, R., & Bailey, J. S. (1978). Measuring
client gains from staff-implemented programs. Journal of Applied
Griffin, M., Gravina, N. E., Matey, N., Pritchard, J., & Wine, B. (2019).
Using scorecards and a lottery to improve the performance of
behavior technicians in two autism treatment clinics. Journal of
Organizational Behavior Management, 39, 280–292.
Gross, A. M., & Ekstrand, M. (1983). Increasing and maintaining rates
of teacher praise: A study using public posting and feedback fad-
ing. Behavior Modification, 7, 126–135.
Hagan, R. L., Craighead, W. E., & Paul, G. L. (1975). Staff reactivity
to evaluative behavioral observations. Behavior Therapy, 6, 201–
205.
Hall, R. V., Panyan, M., Rabon, D., & Broden, M. (1968). Instructing
beginning teachers in reinforcement procedures which improve
classroom control. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 315–322.
Harchick, A. E., Sherman, J. A., Sheldon, J. B., & Strouse, M. C.
(1992). Ongoing consultation as a method of improving perfor-
mance of staff members in a group home. Journal of Applied
Hardesty, S. L., Hagopian, L. P., Mclvor, M. M., Wagner, L. L.,
Sigurdsson, S. O., & Bowman, L. G. (2014). Effects of specified per-
formance criterion and performance feedback on staff behavior: A
component analysis. Behavior Modification, 38, 760–773.
Hawkins, A. M., Burgio, L. D., Langford, A., & Engel, B. T. (1992).
The effects of verbal and written feedback on staff compliance
with assigned prompted voiding in a nursing home. Journal of
Organizational Behavior Management, 13(1), 137–150.
Hollander, M. A., & Plutchik, R. (1972). A reinforcement program for
psychiatric attendants. Journal of Behavior Therapy & Experimental
Psychiatry, 3, 297–300.
Hollander, M. A., & Plutchik, R., & Horner, V. (1973). Interaction of

patient and attendant reinforcement programs: The “piggyback”
effect. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41, 43–47.
Horner, R. H., Thompsen, L. S., & Storey, K. (1990). Effects of case
manager feedback on the quality of individual habilitation plan
objectives. Mental Retardation, 28, 227–231.
Horton, G. O. (1975). Generalization of teacher behavior as a function
of subject matter specific discrimination training. Journal of Applied
Hrydowy, E. R., & Martin, G. L. (1994). A practical staff management
package for use in a training program for persons with develop-
mental disabilities. Behavior Modification, 18, 66–88.
Ingham, P., & Greer, R. D. (1992). Changes in student and teacher
responses in observed and generalized settings as a function of
supervisor observations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25,
153–164.
Katz, R. C., Johnson, C. A., & Gelfand, S. (1972). Modifying the dis-
pensing of reinforcers: Some implications for behavior modifica-
tion with hospitalized patients. Behavior Therapy, 3, 579–588.
Kolko, D. J., McCanna, M. W., & Donaldson, L. (1989). Sequential
assessment of staff administration of contingency management
procedures on a child psychiatric unit. Behavior Modification, 13,
216–244.
Kreitner, R., Reif, W. E., & Morris, M. (1977). Measuring the impact
of feedback on the performance of mental health technicians.
Langone, J., Koorland, M., & Oseroff, A. (1987). Producing changes
in the instructional behavior of teachers of the mentally handi-
capped through inservice education. Education and Treatment of
Children, 10, 146–164.
Leach, D. J., & Dolan, N. K., (1985). Helping teachers increase student
academic engagement rate: The evaluation of a minimal feedback
procedure. Behavior Modification, 9, 55–71.
LeBlanc, L. A., Sump, L. A., Leaf, J. B., & Cihon, J. (2020). The effects
of standard and enhanced data sheets and brief video training on
implementation of conditional discrimination training. Behavior
Analysis in Practice, 13, 53–62.
Marshall, B. D., Jr., Banzett, L., Keuhnel, T., & Moore, J. (1983).
Maintaining nursing staff performance on an intensive behavior
therapy unit. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 3,
193–204.
McGimsey, J. F., Greene, B. F., & Lutzker, J. R. (1995). Competence in
aspects of behavioral treatment and consultation: Implications for
service delivery and graduate training. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 28, 301–315.
Methot, L. L., Williams, W. L., Cummings, A., & Bradshaw, B. (1996).
Measuring the effects of a manager-supervisor training program
through the generalized performance of managers, supervisors,
front-line staff, and clients in a human service setting. Journal of
Minor, L., DuBard, M., & Luiselli, J. K. (2014). Improving interven-
tion integrity of direct-service practitioners through performance
feedback and problem solving consulting. Behavioral Interventions,
29, 145–156.
Mouzakitis, A., Codding, R. S., & Tryon, G. (2015). The effects of self-
monitoring and performance feedback on the treatment integrity
of behavior intervention plan implementation and generalization.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 17, 223–234.
Neef, N. A., Shafer, M. S., Egel, A. L., Cataldo, M. R., & Parrish, J. M.
(1983). The class specific effects of compliance training with “do”
and “don’t” requests: Analogue analysis and classroom applica-
tion. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16, 81–99.
Newcomb, E. T., Camblin, J. G., Jones, F. D., & Wine, B. (2019). On
the implementation of a gamified professional development sys-
tem for direct care staff. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 39, 293–307.
Ng, Y. Y., Fischer, D., & Witts, B. N. (2019). Task clarification and feed-
back improves room tidiness and safety in a training center.
O’Reilly, M. F., Renzaglia, A., Hutchins, M., Koterba-Buss, L.,
Clayton, M., Halle, J. W., & Izen, C. (1992). Teaching systematic
instruction competencies to special education student teachers: An
applied behavioral supervision model. Journal of the Association for
Persons with Severe Handicaps, 17, 104–111.
Panyan, M., Boozer, H., & Morris, N. (1970). Feedback to attendants

as a reinforcer for applying operant techniques. Journal of Applied
Parsons, M. B., Rollyson, J. H., & Reid, D. H. (2004). Improving day-
treatment services for adults with severe disabilities: A norm-ref-
erenced application of outcome management. Journal of Applied
Parsons, M. B., Schepis, M. M., Reid, D. H., McCarn, J. E., & Green,
C. W. (1987). Expanding the impact of behavioral staff manage-
ment: A large-scale, long-term application in schools serving
severely handicapped students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
20, 139–150.
Parsonson, B. S., Baer, A. M., & Baer, D. M. (1974). The application
of generalized correct social contingencies: An evaluation of a
training program. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 427–437.
Patterson, R., Cooke, C., & Liberman, R. P. (1972). Reinforcing the
reinforcers: A method of supplying feedback to nursing personnel.
Patterson, E. T., Griffin, J. C., & Panyan, M. C. (1976). Incentive main-
tenance of self-help skill training programs for nonprofessional
personnel. Journal of Behavior Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry, 7,
249–253.
Perrin, C. J., Fredrick, A., & Klick, S. (2016). Effects of public posting
and goal setting on team performance in a residential setting.
Petscher, E. S., & Bailey, J. S. (2006). Effects of training, prompting,
and self-monitoring on staff behavior in a classroom for students
with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 215–226.
Plavnick, J. B., Ferreri, S. J., & Maupin, A. N. (2010). The effects of
self-monitoring on the procedural integrity of a behavioral inter-
vention for young children with developmental disabilities. Journal
Pomerleau, O. F., Bobrove, P. H., & Smith, R. H. (1973). Rewarding
psychiatric aides for the behavioral improvement of assigned
patients. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 383–390.
Pommer, D. A., & Streedbeck, D. (1974). Motivating staff performance
in an operant learning program for children. Journal of Applied
Prue, D. M., Krapfl, J. E., Noah, J. C., Cannon, S., & Maley, R. F.
(1980). Managing the treatment activities of state hospital staff.
Quilitch, H. R. (1975). A comparison of three staff-management pro-
cedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 59–66.
Quilitch, H. R., de Longchamps, G. D., Warden, R. A., &
Szczepaniak, C. J. (1977). The effects of announced health inspec-
tions upon employee cleaning performance. Journal of Organiza-
tional Behavior Management, 1(1), 79–88.
Realon, R. E., Lewallen, J. D., & Wheeler, A. J. (1983). Verbal feed-
back vs. verbal feedback plus praise: The effects on direct care
staff’s training behaviors. Mental Retardation, 21, 209–212.
Reid, D. H., Green, C. W., & Parsons, M. B. (2003). An outcome man-
agement program for extending advances in choice research into
choice opportunities for supported workers with severe multiple
disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 575–578.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., Lattimore, L. P., Towery, D. L., & Reade,
K. K. (2005). Improving staff performance through clinician appli-
cation of outcome management. Research in Developmental
Disabilities, 26, 101–116.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., McCarn, J. E., Green, C. W., Phillips, J.
F., & Schepis, M. M. (1985). Providing a more appropriate educa-
tion for severely handicapped persons: Increasing and validating
functional classroom tasks. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18,
289–301.
Reinoehl, R. B., & Halle, J. W. (1994). Increasing the assessment
probe performance of teacher aides through written prompts.
Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 32–42.
Repp, A. C., & Barton, L. E. (1980). Naturalistic observations of insti-
tutionalized retarded persons: A comparison of licensure decisions
and behavioral observations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13,
333–341.
Repp, A. C., Barton, L. E., & Brulle, A. R. (1981). Correspondence
between effectiveness and staff use of instructions for severely
retarded persons. Applied Research in Mental Retardation, 2, 237–245.
Richman, G. S., Riordan, M. R., Reiss, M. L., Pyles, D. A. M., &
Bailey, J. S. (1988). The effects of self-monitoring and supervisor
feedback on staff performance in a residential setting. Journal of
Rubio, E. K., & Sigurdsson, S. O. (2014). Sustained effects of a visual

prompt on dish storage in a hospital unit. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 47, 845–849.
Sanetti, L. M. H., Williamson, K. M., Long, A. C. J., & Kratochwill,
T. R. (2018). Increasing in-service teacher implementation of class-
room management practices through consultation, implementa-
tion planning, and participant modeling. Journal of Positive Behavior
Sanson-Fisher, R. W., Poole, A. D., & Harker, J. (1979). Behavioral
analysis of ward rounds within a general hospital psychiatric unit.
Behavior Research & Therapy, 17, 333–348.
Sasaki, G., & Noro, F. (2017). Promoting verbal reports and action
plans by staff during monthly meetings in a Japanese residential
home. Behavioral Interventions, 32, 445–452.
Seys, D., & Duker, P. (1988). Effects of staff management on the qual-
ity of residential care for mentally retarded individuals. American
Journal on Mental Retardation, 93, 290–299.
Seys, D. M. & Duker, P. C. (1993). Staff management procedures and
changes in the distribution of nontargeted activities by residential
staff members: A secondary analysis. Behavioral Residential Treat-
ment, 8, 21–28.
Seys, D., Kersten, H., & Duker, P. (1990). Evaluating a ward staff pro-
gram for increasing spontaneous and varied communicative ges-
turing with individuals who are mentally retarded. Behavioral
Sneed, T. J., & Bible, G. H. (1979). An administrative procedure for
improving staff performance in an institutional setting for retarded
persons. Mental Retardation, 17, 92–94.
Strohmeier, C., Mule, C., & Luiselli, J. K. (2014). Social validity assess-
ment of training methods to improve treatment integrity of special
education service providers. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 7, 15–20.
Towery, D., Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (2014). Increasing indepen-
dence within adult services: A program for reducing staff comple-
tion of daily routines for consumers with developmental disabili-
ties. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 7, 61–69.
Van Houton, R., & Sullivan, K. (1975). Effects of an audio-cueing sys-
tem on the rate of teacher praise. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 8, 197–201.
Wallace, C. J., Davis, J. R., Liberman, R. P., & Baker, V. (1973).

Modeling and staff behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 41, 422–425.
Warman, A. S., Wine, B., Newcomb, E. T., Chen, T., & Morgan, C. A.
(2019). An evaluation of static versus variable antecedents on
employee performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage-
ment, 39, 257–265.
Welsch, W. V., Ludwig, C., Radiker, J. E., & Krapfl, J. E. (1973). Effects
of feedback on daily completion of behavior modification projects.
Whatmore, R., Durward, L., & Kushlick, A. (1975). Measuring the
quality of residential care. Behavior Research & Therapy, 13, 227–
236.
Whyte, R. A., Van Houten, R., & Hunter, W. (1983). The effects of
public posting on teachers’ performance of supervision duties.
Education and Treatment of Children, 6, 21–28.
Wilder, D. A., Lipschultz, J., & Gehrman, C. (2018). An evaluation of
the Performance Diagnostic Checklist–Human Services (PDC-HS)
across domains. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 11, 129–138.
Wilson, P. G., Reid, D. H., & Korabek-Pinkowski, C. A. (1991).
Analysis of public verbal feedback as a staff management proce-
dure. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 6, 263–277.
Wine, B., Lewis, K., Newcomb, E. T., Camblin, J. G., Chen, T.,
Liesfeld, J. E., . . . Newcomb, B. B. (2019). The effects of temporal
placement of feedback on performance with and without goals.
Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 39, 308–316.
PROMOTING SUPPORTIVE SOCIAL

INTERACTIONS WITH CLIENTS
Baldwin, S., & Hattersley, J. (1984). Use of self-recording to maintain

staff-resident interaction. Journal of Mental Deficiency Research, 28,
57–66.
Brown, K. M., Willis, B. S., & Reid, D. H. (1981). Differential effects
of supervisor verbal feedback and feedback plus approval on insti-
tutional staff performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 3(1), 57–68.
Burg, M. M., Reid, D. H., & Lattimore, J. (1979). Use of a self-record-

ing and supervision program to change institutional staff behavior.
Burgio, L. D., Whitman, T. L. & Reid, D. H. (1983). A participative
management approach for improving direct-care staff performance
in an institutional setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16,
37–53.
Coles, E., & Blunden R. (1981). Maintaining new procedures using
feedback to staff, a hierarchical reporting system, and a multidis-
ciplinary management group. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Doerner, M., Miltenberger, R. G., & Bakken, J. (1989). The effects of
staff self-management on positive social interactions in a group
home setting. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 4, 313–330.
Hile, M. G., & Walbran, B. B. (1991). Observing staff-resident inter-
actions: What staff do, what residents receive. Mental Retardation,
29, 35–41.
Montegar, C. A., Reid, D. H., Madsen, C. H., Jr., & Ewell, M. D.
(1977). Increasing institutional staff to resident interactions
through in-service training and supervisor approval. Behavior
Therapy, 8, 533–540.
Seys, D. M., & Duker, P. C. (1986). Effects of a supervisory treatment
package on staff-mentally retarded resident interactions. American
Journal of Mental Deficiency, 90, 388–394.
Spreat, S., Piper, T., Deaton, S., Savoy-Paff, D., Brantner, J., Lipinski,
D., Dorsey, M., & Baker-Potts, J. C. (1985). The impact of supervi-
sory feedback on staff and client behavior. Education and Training
of the Mentally Retarded. 20, 196–203.
Suda, K. T., & Miltenberger, R. G. (1993). Evaluation of staff man-
agement strategies to increase positive interactions in a vocational
setting. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 8, 69–88.
Venn, M. L., & Wolery, M. (1992). Increasing day care staff members’
interactions during caregiving routines. Journal of Early Intervention,
16, 304–319.
PROMOTING TREATMENT SERVICES

SPECIFIC TO GROUPS OF CLIENTS
Arco, L (1991). Effects of outcome performance feedback on mainte-

nance of client and staff behavior in a residential setting. Behavioral
Breuning, S. E., Davis, V. J., & Lewis, J. R. (1981). Examination of
methods of selecting goal-directed activities for institutionalized re-
tarded adults. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 16, 5–
12.
Burch, M. R., Reiss, M. L., & Bailey, J. S. (1987). A competency-based
“hands-on” training package for direct care staff. Journal of the
Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 12, 67–71.
Cowen, R. J., Jones, F. H., & Bellack, A. S. (1979). Grandma’s rule with
group contingencies—A cost-efficient means of classroom manage-
ment. Behavior Modification, 3, 397–418
Dowrick, P. W., & Johns, E. M. (1976). Video feedback effects on ther-
apist attention to on-task behaviors of disturbed children. Journal of
Behavior Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry, 7, 255–257.
Green, C. W., Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1993). Integrating
instructional procedures into traditional congregate care situations
for people with severe disabilities. Behavioral Residential Treatment,
8, 243–262.
Kaprowy, E. A., Norton, G. R., & Melnychuk, E. E. (1986). Parametric
reinforcement effects in a programmed activities environment for
the severely retarded. Behavior Modification, 10, 19–36.
LeLaurin, K., & Risley, T. R. (1972). The organization of day care
environments: “zone” versus “man-to-man” staff assignments.
Mansell, J., Felce, D., de Kock, U., & Jenkins, J. (1982). Increasing pur-
poseful activity of severely and profoundly mentally-handicapped
adults. Behavior Research & Therapy, 20, 593–604.
McCormick, L., Cooper, M., & Goldman, R., (1979). Training teach-
ers to maximize instructional time provided to severely and pro-
foundly handicapped children. AAESPH Review, 4, 301–310.
Parsons, M. B., Cash, V. B., & Reid, D. H. (1989). Improving residen-
tial treatment services: Implementation and norm-reference evalu-
ation of a comprehensive management system. Journal of Applied
Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1993). Evaluating and improving resi-

dential treatment during group leisure situations: A program repli-
cation and refinement. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 14, 67–
85.
Porterfield, J., Blunden, R., & Blewitt, E. (1980). Improving environ-
ments for profoundly handicapped adults using prompts and social
attention to maintain high group engagement. Behavior Modification,
4, 225–241.
Quilitch, H. R., & Gray, J. D. (1974). Purposeful activity for the PMR:
A demonstration project. Mental Retardation, 12, 28–29.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., & Jensen, J. M. (2017). Maintaining staff
performance following a training intervention: Suggestions from a
30-year case example. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 12–21.
Seys, D. M., & Duker, P. C. (1978). Improving residential care for the
retarded by differential reinforcement of high rates of ward-staff
behavior. Behavioral Analysis and Modification, 2, 203–210.
Spangler, P. F., & Marshall, A. M. (1983). The unit play manager as
facilitator of purposeful activities among institutionalized pro-
foundly and severely retarded boys. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 16, 345–349.
Sturmey, P., & Crisp, A. G. (1989). Organizing staff to provide indi-
vidual teaching in a group: A critical review of room management
and related procedures. Australia and New Zealand Journal of
Ward, M. H., & Baker, B. L. (1968). Reinforcement therapy in the
classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 323–328.
PROMOTING QUALITY PERSONAL

CARE AND SUPPORT FOR CLIENTS
Alavosious, M. P., & Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1986). The effects of perfor-

mance feedback on the safety of client lifting and transfer. Journal
Alavosious, M. P., & Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1990). Acquisition and main-
tenance of health-care routines as a function of feedback density.
Babcock, R. A., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., Sanderson, M., & Scibak, J. (1992).

Increasing nurses’ use of feedback to promote infection-control
practices in head-injury treatment. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 25, 621–627.
Casella, S. E., Wilder, D. A., Neidert, P., Rey, C., Compton, M., &
Chong, I. (2010). The effects of response effort on safe perfor-
mance by therapists at an autism treatment facility. Journal of
Ivancic, M. T., Reid, D. H., Iwata, B. A., Faw, G. D., & Page, T. J.
(1981). Evaluating a supervision program for developing and
maintaining therapeutic staff-resident interactions during institu-
tional care routines. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 95–107.
Iwata, B. A., Bailey, J. S., Brown, K. M., Foshee, T. J., & Alpern, M.
(1976). A performance-based lottery to improve residential care
and training by institutional staff. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 9, 417–431.
Kneringer, M., & Page, T. J. (1999). Improving staff nutritional prac-
tices in community-based group homes: Evaluation, training, and
management. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 221–224.
Korabek, C. A., Reid, D. H., & Ivancic, M. T. (1981). Improving need-
ed food intake of profoundly handicapped children through effec-
tive supervision of institutional staff performance. Applied Research
in Mental Retardation, 2, 69–88.
Kunz, G. G. R., Lutzker, J. R., Cuvo, A. J., Eddleman, J., Lutzker, S.
Z., Megson, D., & Gulley, B. (1982). Evaluating strategies to
improve careprovider performance on health and developmental
tasks in an infant care facility. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
15, 521–531.
Lattimore, J., Stephens, T. E., Favell, J. E., & Risley, T. R. (1984).
Increasing direct care staff compliance to individualized physical
therapy body positioning prescriptions: Prescriptive checklists.
McMorrow, M. J., Sheeley, R., Levinson, M., Maedke, J., Treworgy, S.,
Tripp, T., . . . Hunter, R. (1991). The use of publicly-posted per-
formance feedback in an inpatient psychiatric treatment setting.
Nabeyama, B., & Sturmey, P. (2010). Using behavioral skills training

to promote safe and correct staff guarding and ambulation dis-
tance of students with multiple physical disabilities. Journal of Applied
Nielsen, D., Sigurdsson, S. O., & Austin, J. (2009). Preventing back
injuries in hospital settings: The effects of video modeling on safe
patient lifting by nurses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42,
551–561.
PROMOTING QUALITY DATA COLLECTION

AND RECORDKEEPING BY STAFF
Christian, W. P., Norris, M. B., Anderson, S. R., & Blew, P. A. (1983).

Improving the record-keeping performance of direct service per-
sonnel. Journal of Mental Health Administration, 11, 4–7.
Egan, P., Luce, S. C., & Hall, R. V. (1988). Use of a concurrent treat-
ment design to analyze the effects of a peer review system in a res-
idential setting. Behavior Modification, 12, 35–56.
Epstein, L. H., & Wolff, E. (1978). A multiple baseline analysis of im-
plementing components of the problem-oriented medical record.
Farmer, R., Wolery, M., Gast, D. L., & Page, J. L. (1988). Individual
staff training to increase the frequency of data collection in an inte-
grated preschool program. Education and Treatment of Children, 11,
127–142.
Feldstein, S., & Feldstein, J. H. (1990). Positive reinforcement for sub-
mission of timely reports by professional staff in a residential facil-
ity. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 25, 188–192.
Gerald, D., Keeler, L., Mackey, K., Merrill, R., & Luiselli, J. K. (2019).
Application of a self-management intervention to improve data
recording of educational care providers. Behavioral Interventions, 34,
388–395.
Hutchison, J. M., Jarman, P. H., & Bailey, J. S. (1980). Public posting
with habilitation teams: Effects on attendance and performance.
Behavior Modification, 4, 57–70.
Jones, H. H., Morris, E. K., & Barnard, J. D. (1986). Increasing staff
completion of civil commitment forms through instructions and
graphed group performance feedback. Journal of Organizational
Behavior Management, 7(3/4), 29–43.
Lovett, S. B., Bosmajian, C. P., Frederiksen, L. W., & Elder, J. P. (1983).

Monitoring professional service delivery: An organizational level
intervention. Behavior Therapy, 14, 170–177.
Mozingo, D. B., Smith, T., Riordan, M. R., Reiss, M. L., & Bailey, J. S.
(2006). Enhancing frequency recording by developmental disabil-
ities treatment staff. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 253–256.
Quilitch, H. R. (1978). Using a simple feedback procedure to rein-
force the submission of written suggestions by mental health em-
ployees. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 1(2), 155–163.
Reis, M. H., Wine, B., & Brutzman, B. (2013). Enhancing the accura-
cy of low-frequency behavior data collection by direct-care staff.
Repp, A. C., & Deitz, D. E. D. (1979). Improving administrative-relat-
ed staff behaviors at a state institution. Mental Retardation, 17, 185–
192.
Romani, P. W., Alcorn, A. S., & Linares, J. (2018). Improving accura-
cy of data collection on a psychiatric unit for children diagnosed
with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Behavior Analysis in
Practice, 11, 307–314.
Shook, G. L., Johnson, C. M., & Uhlman, W. F. (1978). The effect of
response effort reduction, instructions, group and individual feed-
back, and reinforcement of staff performance. Journal of Organiza-
Smith, D. W., & Wells, M. E. (1983). Use of a microcomputer to assist
staff in documenting resident progress. Mental Retardation, 21, 111–
115.
Thompson, T. J., Thornhill, C. A., Realon, R. E., & Ervin, K. M.
(1991). Improving accuracy in documentation of restrictive inter-
ventions by direct-care personnel. Mental Retardation, 29, 201–205.
Welsh, T. M., Miller, L. K., & Altus, D. E. (1994). Programming for sur-
vival: A meeting system that survives 8 years later. Journal of
PREVENTING AND REDUCING ABSENTEEISM
Boudreau, C. A., Christian, W. P., & Thibadeau, S. F. (1993). Reducing

absenteeism in a human service setting: A low cost alternative.
Briggs, R. M. (1990). Reducing direct-care staff absenteeism: Effects of

a combined reinforcement and punishment procedure. Mental
Retardation, 28, 163–168.
Brown, N., & Redmon, W. K. (1989). The effects of a group rein-
forcement contingency on staff use of unscheduled sick leave.
Durand, V. M. (1983). Behavioral ecology of a staff incentive program:
Effects on absenteeism and resident disruptive behavior. Behavior
Modification, 7, 165–181.
Durand, V. M. (1985). Employee absenteeism: A selective review of
antecedents and consequences. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 7(1/2), 135–167.
Ford, J. E. (1981). A simple punishment procedure for controlling
employee absenteeism. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage-
ment, 3(2), 71–78.
Gardner, J. M. (1970). Effects of reinforcement conditions on lateness
and absence among institutional personnel. Ohio Research Quarterly,
3, 315–316.
Pierce, P. S., Hoffman, J. L., & Pelletier, L. P. (1974). The 4-day work
week versus the 5-day work week: Comparative use of sick time
and overtime by direct care personnel in an institutional facility for
the severely and profoundly retarded. Mental Retardation, 12, 22–
24.
Reid, D. H., Schuh-Wear, C. L., & Brannon, M. E. (1978). Use of a
group contingency to decrease staff absenteeism in a state institu-
tion. Behavior Modification, 2, 251–266.
Shoemaker, J., & Reid, D. H. (1980). Decreasing chronic absenteeism
among institutional staff: Effects of a low-cost attendance program.
Strouse, M. C., Carroll-Hernandez, T. A., Sherman, J.A., & Sheldon,
J. B. (2003). Turning over turnover: The evaluation of a staff sched-
uling system in a community-based program for adults with devel-
opmental disabilities. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management,
23(2/3), 45–63.
Zaharia, E. S., & Baumeister, A. A. (1978). Technician turnover and
absenteeism in public residential facilities. American Journal of
Mental Deficiency, 82, 580–593.
PROMOTING WORK ENJOYMENT
Davis, J. R., Rawana, E. P., & Capponi, D. R. (1989). Acceptability of

behavioral staff management techniques. Behavioral Residential
Treatment, 4, 23–44.
Davis, J. R., & Russell, R. H. (1990). Behavioral staff management: An
analogue study of acceptability and its behavioral correlates.
Green, C. W., & Reid, D. H. (1991). Reinforcing staff performance in
residential facilities: A survey of common managerial practices.
Green, C. W., Reid, D. H., Passante, S., & Canipe, V. (2008). Changing
less-preferred duties to more-preferred: A potential strategy for
improving supervisor work enjoyment. Journal of Organizational
Behavior Management, 28(2), 90–109.
Miltenberger, R. G., Larson, J., Doerner, M., & Orvedal, L. (1992).
Assessing the acceptability of staff management procedures to direct
care and supervisory staff. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 7, 23–
34.
Parsons, M. B. (1998). A review of procedural acceptability in organi-
zational behavior management. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 18(2/3), 173–190.
Parsons, M. B., Reid, D. H., & Crow, R. E. (2003). The best and worst
ways to motivate staff in community agencies: A brief survey of
supervisors. Mental Retardation, 41, 96–102.
Reid, D. H., & Parsons, M. B. (1995). Comparing choice and ques-
tionnaire measures of the acceptability of a staff training proce-
dure. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 95–96.
Reid, D. H., & Parsons, M. B. (1996). A comparison of staff accept-
ability of immediate versus delayed verbal feedback in staff train-
ing. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 16(2), 35–47.
Wilder, D. A., Therrien, K., & Wine, B. (2005). A comparison between
survey and verbal choice methods of identifying potential rein-
forcers among employees. Journal of Organizational Behavior
DISTANCE SUPERVISION THROUGH TELEHEALTH
Alnemary, F. M., Wallace, M., Symon, J. B. G., & Barry, L. M. (2015).

Using international videoconferencing to provide staff training on
functional behavioral assessment. Behavioral Interventions, 30, 73–
86.
Barkaia, A., Stokes, T. F., & Mikiashvili, T. (2017). Intercontinental
telehealth coaching of therapists to improve verbalizations by chil-
dren with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50, 582–589.
Cavalari, R. N. S., Gillis, J. M., Kruser, N., & Romanczyk, R. G.
(2015). Digital communication and records in service provision
and supervision: Regulation and practice. Behavior Analysis in
Practice, 8, 176–189.
Erath, T. G., & Reed, F. D. D. (2020). A brief review of technology-
based antecedent training procedures. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 53, 1162–1169.
Fischer, A. J., Clark, R., Askings, D., & Lehman, E. (2017). Technology
and telehealth applications. In J. K. Luiselli (Ed.), Applied behavior
analysis advanced guidebook: A manual for professional practice (pp.
135–163). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Ferguson, J., Craig, E. A., & Dounavi, K. (2019). Telehealth as a model
for providing behaviour analytic interventions to individuals with
autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 49, 582–616.
Frieder, J. E., Peterson, S. M., Woodward, J., Crane, J., & Garner, M.
(2009). Teleconsultation in school settings: Linking classroom
teachers and behavior analysts through web-based technology.
Higgins, W. J., Luczynski, K. C., Carroll, R. A., Fisher, W. W., &
Mudford, O. C. (2017). Evaluation of a telehealth training package
to remotely train staff to conduct a preference assessment. Journal
King, E. K., Harrell, A. R., & Richling, S. M. (2020). Best practices:
Caregiver training resources derived from remote behavioral ser-
vice delivery within the foster care system. Behavior Analysis in
Practice, 13, 527–531.
LeBlanc, L. A., Lerman, D. C., & Normand, M. P. (2020). Behavior
analytic contributions to public health and telehealth. Journal of
Lee, J. F., Schieltz, K. M., Suess, A. N., Wacker, D. P., Romani, P. W.,
Lindgren, S. D. . . . Dalmau, Y. C. P. (2015). Guidelines for devel-
oping telehealth services and troubleshooting problems with tele-
health technology when coaching parents to conduct functional
analyses and functional communication training in their homes.
Lerman, D. C., O’Brien, M. J., Neely, L, Call, N. A., Loukia, T.,
Schieltz, K. M., . . . Cooper-Brown, L. J. (2020). Remote coaching
of caregivers via telehealth: Challenges and potential solutions.
Journal of Behavioral Education, 29, 195–221.
Neely, L., Rispoli, M., Boles, M., Morin, K., Gregori, E., Ninci, J., &
Hagan-Burke, S. (2019). Interventionist acquisition of incidental
teaching using pyramidal training via telehealth. Behavior Modi-
fication, 43, 711–733.
O’Flaherty, C., Barton, E. E., Winchester, C., & Domingo, M. (2019).
Coaching teachers to promote social interactions with toddlers.
Rathel, J. M., Drasgow, E., Brown, W. H., & Marshall, K. J. (2014).
Increasing induction-level teachers’ positive-to-negative communi-
cation ratio and use of behavior-specific praise through e-mailed
performance feedback and its effect on students’ task engagement.
Rispoli, M., & Machalicek, W. (2020). Advances in telehealth and
behavioral assessment and intervention in education: Introduction
to the special issue. Journal of Behavioral Education, 29, 189–194.
Suess, A. N., Wacker, D. P., Schwartz, J. E., Lustig, N., & Detrick, J.
(2016). Preliminary evidence on the use of telehealth in an outpa-
tient behavior clinic. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 686–
692.
Tomlinson, S. R. L., Gore, N., & McGill, P. (2018). Training individu-
als to implement applied behavior analytic procedures via tele-
health: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Behavioral
Education, 27, 172–222.
Unholz-Bowden, E., McComas, J. J., McMaster, K. L., Girtler, S. N.,
Kolb, R. L., & Alefyah, S. (2020). Caregiver training via telehealth
on behavioral procedures: A systematic review. Journal of
Behavioral Education, 29, 246–281.
Wacker, D. P., Lee, J. F., Dalmau, Y. C. P., Kopelman, T. G., Lindgren,

S. D., Kuhle, J., . . . Waldron, D. B. (2013). Conducting functional
analyses of problem behavior via telehealth. Journal of Applied
Zoder-Martell, K. A., Markelz, A. M., Floress, M. T., Skriba, H. A., &
Sayyah, L. E. N. (2020). Technology to facilitate telehealth in
applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 13, 596–603.
REVIEW AND DISCUSSION PAPERS

RELATED TO EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISION
Adkins, V. K. (1996). Discussion: Behavioral procedures for training

direct care staff in facilities serving dependent populations. Behavioral
Arco, L. (1993). A case for researching performance pay in human
service management. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management,
14(1), 117–136.
Arco, L., & Birnbrauer, J. S. (1990). Performance feedback and main-
tenance of staff behavior in residential settings. Behavioral
Balcazar, F., Hopkins, B. L., & Suarez, Y. (1986). A critical, objective
review of performance feedback. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 7(3/4), 65–89.
Bell, C. & Zemki, R. (1992). How do employees in service jobs find
out how they’re doing? Good feedback systems. Training, 36–44.
Bernstein, G. S. (1982). Training behavior change agents: A concep-
tual review. Behavior Therapy, 13, 1–23.
Bernstein, G. S, & Karan, O. C. (1978). Preservice training of profes-
sionals as behavior managers: A review. Behavior Therapy, 9, 124–
126.
Christian, W. P. (1983). A case study in the programming and mainte-
nance of institutional change. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 5(3/4), 99–153.
Davis, M. (1986). Systematic staff training. Mental Health and Mental
Retardation Quarterly Digest, 5. (Available from Mental Health and
Mental Retardation Services, Topeka, Kansas).
Demchak, M. A. (1987). A review of behavioral staff training in spe-
cial education settings. Education and Training in Mental Retardation,
22, 205–217.
Egelston, J. D. (1986). Organizational behavior management in public

residential facilities. Mental Retardation Systems, 3, 35–48.
Favell, J. E., Favel, J. E., Riddle, J. I., & Risley, T. R. (1984). Promoting
change in mental retardation facilities: Getting services from the
paper to the people. In W.P. Christian, G. T. Hannah, & T. J. Glahn
(Eds.), Programming effective human services: Strategies for institutional
change and client transition (pp. 15–37). New York: Plenum.
Flanagan, S. G., Cray, M. E., & Meter, D. V. (1983). A facility-wide con-
sultation and training team as a catalyst in promoting institutional
change. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 3, 151–
169.
Fleming, R. K., & Reile, P. A. (1993). A descriptive analysis of client
outcomes associated with staff interventions in developmental dis-
abilities. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 8, 29–43.
Ford, J. E. (1980). A classification system for feedback procedures.
Frazier, T. W. (1972). Training institutional staff in behavior modifica-
tion principles and techniques. In R. D. Ruben, H. Fensterheim, J.
D. Henderson & L. P. Ullmann (Eds.), Advances in behavior therapy:
Proceedings of the fourth conference of the association for advancement of
behavior therapy (pp. 171–178). New York: Academic Press.
Gardner, J. M. (1973). Training the trainers. A review of research on
teaching behavior modification. In R. D. Rubin, J. P. Brady, & J. D.
Henderson (Eds.), Advances in behavior therapy (Vol. 4, pp. 145–158).
New York: Academic Press.
Gianoumis, S., & Sturmey, P. (2012). Generalization procedures in
training interventionists for individuals with developmental dis-
abilities. Behavior Modification, 36, 619–629.
Harchik, A. E., Sherman, J. A., Hopkins, B. L., Strouse, M. C., &
Sheldon, J. B. (1989). Use of behavioral techniques by paraprofes-
sional staff: A review and proposal. Behavioral Residential Treatment,
4, 331–357.
Hastings, R. P., & Reminton, B. (1994). Rules of engagement. Toward
an analysis of staff responses to challenging behavior. Research in
Karsten, A. M., Axe, J. B., & Mann, C. C. (2015). Review and discus-
sion of strategies to address low trainer-to-staff ratios. Behavioral
Loeber, R., & Weisman, R. G. (1975). Contingencies of therapist and

trainer performance: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 660–688.
Mayhew, G. L., Enyart, P., & Cone, J. D. (1979). Approaches to
employee management: Policies and preferences. Journal of Organi-
zational Behavior Management, 2(2), 103–111.
Mazza, J., & Pumroy, D. K. (1975). A review of evaluation of behav-
ior modification programs. The Psychological Record, 25, 111–121.
McInnis, T. (1978). Training and motivating staff members. In D.
Marholin (Ed.), Child behavior therapy (pp. 434–445). New York:
Gardner Press.
Miller, R., & Lewin, L. M. (1980). Training and management of the
psychiatric aide: A critical review. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 2(4), 295–315.
Neef, N. A. (1995). Research on training trainers in program imple-
mentation: An introduction and future directions. Journal of Applied
Oorsouw, W. M. W. J., Embregts, P. J. C. M., Bosman, A. M. T., &
Jahoda, A. (2009). Training staff serving clients with intellectual
disabilities: A meta-analysis of aspects determining effectiveness.
Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30, 503–511.
Pollack, M. J., Fleming, R. K., & Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1994). Enhancing
professional performance through organizational change.
Prue, D. M., & Fairbank, J. A. (1981). Performance feedback in orga-
nizational behavior management: A review. Journal of Organiza-
Quilitch, H. R. (1979). Applied behavior analysis studies for institu-
tional management. In L. A. Hamerlynck (Ed.), Behavioral systems
for the developmentally disabled: II. Institutional, clinic and community
environments (pp. 70–81). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Rapp, S. R., Carstensen, L. L., & Prue, D. M. (1983). Organizational
Behavior Management 1978–1982: An annotated bibliography.
Reid, D. H. (2004). Training and supervising direct support personnel
to carry out behavioral procedures. In J. L. Matson, R. B. Laud, &
M. L. Matson (Eds.), Behavior modification for persons with develop-
mental disabilities: Treatments and supports (pp. 73–99). Kingston, NY:
NADD Press.
Reid, D. H. (2017). Competency-based staff training. In J. K. Luiselli

(Ed.), Applied behavior analysis advanced guidebook: A manual for pro-
fessional practice (pp. 21–40). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Reid, D. H. (2019). Training staff to provide quality support for adults
with autism spectrum disorder: Recommended practices and tar-
get skills. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 3, 457–467.
Reid, D. H., & Fitch, W. H. (2013). Training staff and parents:
Evidence-based approaches. In J. L. Matson & P. Sturmey (Eds.),
International handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders
(pp. 509–519). New York: Springer.
Reid, D. H., & Green, C. W. (1990). Staff training. In J. L. Matson
(Ed.), Handbook of behavior modification with the mentally retarded (2nd
ed., pp. 71–90). New York: Plenum Press.
Reid, D. H., O’Kane, N. P., & Macurik, K. M. (2011). Staff training and
management. In W. W. Fisher, C. C. Piazza, & Roane, H. S. (Eds.),
Handbook of applied behavior analysis (pp. 281–294). New York:
Guilford Press.
Reid, D. H., & Parsons, M. B. (2000). Organizational behavior man-
agement in human service settings. In J. Austin & J. E. Carr (Eds.),
Handbook of applied behavior analysis (pp. 275–294). Reno, NV:
Context Press.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., & Green, C. W. (1989). Treating aberrant
behavior through effective staff management: A developing tech-
nology. In E. Cipani (Ed.), AAMR Monograph: The treatment of severe
behavior disorders: Behavior analysis approaches (pp. 175–190).
Washington, D.C.: American Association on Mental Retardation.
Reid, D. H., & Schepis, M. M. (1986). Direct care staff training. In R.
P. Barrett (Ed.), Severe behavior disorders in the mentally retarded: Non-
drug approaches to treatment (pp. 297–322). New York: Plenum Press.
Reid, D. H., Schepis, M. M., & Fitzgerald, J. R. (1984). Innovations in
organizational behavior management in institutions for the devel-
opmentally disabled. In S. E. Breuning, J. L. Matson, & R. P.
Barrett (Eds.), Advances in mental retardation and developmental dis-
abilities (Vol. 2, pp. 181–204). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Reid, D. H., & Shoemaker, J. (1984). Behavioral supervision: Methods
of improving institutional staff performance. In W. P. Christian, G.
T. Hannah, & T. J. Glahn (Eds.), Programming effective human services:
Strategies for institutional change and client transition (pp. 39–61). New
York: Plenum Press.
Reid, D. H., & Whitman, T. L. (1983). Behavioral staff management in

institutions: A critical review of effectiveness and acceptability.
Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 3, 131–149.
Risley, T. R., & Favell, J. (1979). Constructing a living environment in
an institution. In L. A. Hamerlynck (Ed.), Behavioral systems for the
developmentally disabled: II. Institutional, clinic, and community environ-
ments (pp. 3–24). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Slama, K. M., & Bannerman, D. J. (1983). Implementing and main-
taining a behavioral treatment system in an institutional setting.
Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 3, 171–191.
Sulzer-Azaroff, B., Pollack, M. J., Hamad, C., & Howley, T. (1998).
Promoting widespread, durable service quality via interlocking
contingencies. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 19, 39–61.
Williams, W. L., Vittorio, T. D., & Hausherr, L. (2002). A description
and extension of a human services management model. Journal of
BOOKS RELATED TO EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISION
Christian, W. P., Hannah, G. T., & Glahn, T. J. (Eds.). (1984). Pro-

gramming effective human services: Strategies for institutional change and
client transition. New York: Plenum.
Daniels, A. C. (1994). Bringing out the best in people: How to apply the
astonishing power of positive reinforcement. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Daniels, A. C., & Daniels, J. E. (2005). Measure of a leader: An actionable
formula for legendary leadership. Atlanta: Performance Management
Publications.
LaVigna, G. W., Willis, T. J., Shaull, J. F., Abedi, M., & Sweitzer, M.
(1994). The periodic service review: A total quality assurance system for
human services and education. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
LeBlanc, L. A., Sellers, T. P., & Ala’i, S. (2020). Building and sustaining
meaningful and effective relationships as a supervisor and mentor.
Cornwall on Hudson, NY: Sloan Publishing.
Miller, L. M. (1978). Behavior management: The new science of managing
people at work. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Reid, D. H. (Ed.). (1998). Organizational behavior management and devel-
opmental disabilities services: Accomplishments and future directions.
Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
Reid, D. H., & Parsons, M. B. (2006). Motivating human service staff:

Supervisory strategies for maximizing work effort and work enjoyment
(2nd ed.). Morganton, NC: Habilitative Management Consultants,
Inc.
Reid, D. H., & Parsons, M. B. (2018). Working with staff to overcome chal-
lenging behavior among people who have severe disabilities: A guide for get-
ting support plans carried out (2nd ed.). Morganton, NC: Habilitative
Management Consultants.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., & Green, C. W. (1989). Staff management
in human services: Behavioral research and application. Springfield, IL:
Charles C Thomas.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., & Green, C. W. (2021). Training staff to
teach people with severe disabilities: A practical, evidence-based approach
for quick success. Cornwall on Hudson, NY: Sloan Publishing.
Wetzel, R. J., & Hoschoer, R. L. (1984). Residential teaching communities:
Program development and staff training for developmentally disabled per-
sons. Glenview IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.
TRAINING CURRICULA FOR SUPERVISORS
Courtney, W. T., Hartley, B. K., LaMarca, V. J., Rosswurm, M., & Reid,
D. H. (2017). The training curriculum for supervisors of ABA technicians
in autism programs. Cornwall on Hudson, NW: Sloan Publishing.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., & Green, C. W. (2011). The supervisor train-
ing curriculum: Evidence-based ways to promote work quality and enjoy-
ment among support staff. Washington, DC: American Association
on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.
INDEX
A D
absenteeism, 6, 8, 29, 61, 208–218 data collection, 70–71, 236–239

abuse, 160–161 disciplinary action, 159–166, 192, 212,
acceptability (among staff), 6–8, 19–20, 215
41, 273–275 documentation (see also data collection),
of general supervisor interactions, 6– 173, 236–239
8, 108
of monitoring procedures, 19, 82–89 E
of training procedures, 43, 47, 64–66
activity schedules, 36–38, 54, 72, 74, ethics, 266
244–246 evaluation, 18–19, 69, 71, 86, 188
awards (see special recognition) evidence-based (definition), 8–9
executive personnel, 49, 105, 116, 141–
B 143, 164, 181, 192
behavioral skills training (see also train- F

ing), 16, 42–67, 268–269
behavior support plans, 30, 48, 52 feedback, 51, 59, 91–126, 127–147,
break times, 251–252 148–168, 234, 275–279
burnout, 6, 91 corrective, 74, 148–168, 227, 234,
277–
C 279
diagnostic, 151
challenging behavior, 30, 180, 239–240, electronic, 114, 267
250–251 evidence-based protocol, 95–102
choice, 32–33 formal, 96, 276
clinicians, 48–49, 55, 93, 224 group, 117–118
compensatory time, 201 immediate vs. delayed, 121–122
corrective supervision, 18, 49–50, 148– individual, 96–97, 117
168 informal, 97, 110–112, 276
COVID-19, 215, 260, 267 negative (see corrective)
outcome-based, 122–125
positive (see also supportive), 95, 107,
158, 247–248, 276
323
private, 107 formal, 69–76

public (see also group), 107–108, forms, 73
119–121 frequency recording, 74
publicly posted (see also group), 119– informal, 76–78
121 overt vs. covert, 78, 81–82, 272–273
supportive, 95, 226 performance checklists, 72, 74
vocal, 112, 114–115, 125 remote, 267, 270–272
written, 112–117 motivation
of staff, 5, 7, 18, 66, 91–93, 156–157,
G 201, 222, 229–231
of supervisors, 190–193, 196–199
goals (for clients), 15, 25
goal setting, 197, 248–249 N
group contingencies, 209–211
negative supervisory styles, 19, 92–94,
H 150–151, 190–195
nonwork behavior, 242–255
HIPPA, 226
O
I
off task, 242
Injuries, 171–172, 206 outcome management, 14
interactions (with clients), 6–7, 25–26, outcomes (among clients), 13–15, 17,
73 21, 25, 30, 188
Intermediate Care Facilities (ICFs), 58 overtime, 201
J P
job retention, 94, 151, 172 participative supervision, 39–40, 87,

job termination, 155, 160–161, 164– 210
165 pay raises, 145–146
peer pressure, 211
L performance checklists (see also moni-
toring), 34–36, 41, 46
leisure activities, 152–153 Performance Diagnostic Checklist—
Human Services, 151
M performance lotteries, 133–135
praise (see also supportive feedback), 95,
merit pay, 145–146 107
mission statements, 25 professional staff, 221, 223
modeling, 235
monitoring (of staff performance), 17– R
18, 31–32, 68–90, 207, 226, 246–
247 reactivity (to monitoring), 78–81, 272
digital tools, 72, 74 recordkeeping (see also data collection),
173
Index 325
rehearsal, 50–51 naturalistic, 219, 231–235

reinforcement, 197 team process, 15
residential agencies, 29 training, 14, 16, 42–67
role playing, 49–51, 53–55, 59 classroom-based, 58
competency-based, 16, 45, 51
S media-based, 60–61
on-the-job, 52, 56–57, 59, 61, 171,
self-motivation, 196–199 223–
self-reinforcement, 197–198 224
sick leave, 203–205 orientation, 42–45
special recognition, 127–147, 226 peer training, 62–64
activities, 136–145 performance-based, 16, 44–45
appreciation events, 132–133 pyramidal training, 62–64
awards, 129–131 via telehealth, 267–270
supported work, 53, 55 telehealth, 259–280
supportive supervision, 14, 17, 208–209 turnover, 94, 172
T V
task analysis, 34 videoconferencing, 263–265

Task Enjoyment Motivation Protocol visibility (of supervisor), 77, 246
(TEMP), 170–184
teaching (of clients by staff), 55, 219– W
241
formal, 219, 221–231 work privileges, 144–145
CHARRLES C THOMA
AS • PUBLISHER,, LTD
T .
PAARENT TA
AL ALIEN NATATION— CUL
C LTURAL
T DIVERSITY Y,, IN
NCLUSION
S
SCIENCE AND LAW AW A
AND JUSTICE
b Demosthenes Lorrandos and William Bernet
by b Georrgge Henderrsson
by
6 pp.. (7 x 10) • 4 illusstrations • 12 tables
682 2 pp.. (7 x 10)
238
$
$74.95 (hard) • $74.95 (ebook) $
$37.95 (paper) • $37.95 (eboo ok)
WHEN PARENTS HA
W AVE PROBLEMS THE HANDBOOK OF CHIL
T LD LIFE
( rdd Edition)
(3r (
(2nd Edition)
b Susan B. Miller
by b Richard H. Thompson
by
130 pp.. (7 x 10) 6 pp.. (7 x 10) • 7 illustration
642 ns • 14 tables
$
$19.95 (paper) • $19.95 (ebook) $
$59.95 (paper) • $59.95 (eboook)
SOCIAL AND CUL

S LTTURAL PERSPECTIVES
ON BLINDNESS UNDERST TA
ANDING
(2nd Edition) PARENT
PA TA
AL ALIENAT ATION
by C . Edwin VaVaugha an and by K
Kare
aren WoWoodall and Nick Woodall
Frreedric K. Schrro
oederr 252 pp. (7 x 10) • 6 illustration
ns
274 pp. (7 x 10) • 6 tablles $39.95 (paper) • $39.95 (eboo ok)
$39.95 (p(paper)
p ) • $39.95 ((ebook))
SOCIAL WORK IN JUVENIILE AND
S
TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
T C DYNAMICS C
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTE EMS
O MUL
OF LT
TICUL LT
TUR RALISM ( Edition)
(4th
b Marrtin Guevara Urbina
by b David W.
by W. Springer and Alb bert R. Roberrts
3 pp.. (7 x 10) • 16 illustrations • 1 table
372 4 pp.. (8 x 10) • 30 illustratio
418 ons • 17 tables
$
$59.95 (paper) • $59..95 (ebook) $
$64.95 (paper) • $64.95 (eboo ok)
CASE MANAGEME
C ENT EMIGRA
E ATTING FROM CHIN NA
I SOCIAL WORK
IN K TO THE UNITED ST TA
ATES
(
(2nd Edition) (
(2nd Edition)
b Julius R. Ballew and
by a Georrgge Mink b Yu
by Yushi (Boni) Li
3 pp.. (7 x 10) • 23 illustrations
334 2 pp.. (7 x 10) • 36 illustratio
270 ons
$
$53.95 (p
(paper)
p ) • $53.95 ((ebook)) $
$34.95 (paper) • $34.95 (eboook)
IINTRODUCTION TO T HUMAN
CHILD ABUSE INVESTIGA
C ATIONS
R ATIONS STUD
RELAT DIES
b Donald A. Hayden
by
b Georrgge Henderrsso
by on and We
Wesley C. Long
3 pp.. (7 x 10) • 25 illustratio
3 pp.. (7 x 10)
364
$
$49.95 (paper) • $49.95 (eboo ok)
$
$62.95 (paper) • $62..95 (ebook)
BEHA
B AV
VIORAL GUIDE TO THE SOCIOLOGY OF DEVIANCE
T
P
PERSONALITY DIS
SORDERS (DSM-5) (
(2nd Edition)
b Douglas H. Ruben
by b Robert J. Franzese
by
2 pp.. (7 x 10) • 31 illustrations • 1 table
272 3 pp.. (7 x 10) • 21 illustratio
$
$42.95 (paper)
(p p ) • $42..95 ((ebook)) $
$64.95 (paper) • $64.95 (eboook)
PAARENT TA
AL ALIEN NAT ATION
CHILD LIFE IN HOSPIT
C TALS
b Demosthenes Lorrandos,
by
b Richard H. Thompson and
by d Gene Stanford
W
William Bernet and S. Richard Sauber
2 pp.. (6 x 9) • 1 table
284
5 pp.. (7 x 10) • 2 illustrations
550
$
$45.95 (paper) • $45.95 (eboo
ok)
$
$89.95 (hard) • $89.995 (ebook)
F
FREE DOMESTIC SHIPPING ON RETTA
AIL ORDERS THROUGH OU
UR WEBSITE!*
*
*Available on retail purchases through our website
w only
y to domestic shipping addresses in
i the United States
T ORDER: 1-800-258-8980 • [email protected]

TO b • www.ccthomas.com
FACEBOOK.COM/CCTPUBLISHER
SIGN UP FOR OUR ENEWWSLETTER AT: WWW.CCTHOMAS.C
WWW CCTHOMAS C
COM!

Untitled

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Untitled

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

CHARLES C THOMAS • PUBLISHER, LTD.

This book is protected by copyright. No part of

© 2021 by CHARLES C THOMAS • PUBLISHER, LTD.

ISBN 978-0-398-09360-0 (paper)

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2021001371 (print)

With THOMAS BOOKS careful attention is given to all details of manufacturing

Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Reid, Dennis H., author. | Parsons, Marsha B., author. |

T he job of a supervisor of direct support staff in the human services is one

Chapter 1. The Importance of Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Chapter 2. An Evidence-Based Protocol for Supervising Staff

CRITICAL SUPERVISORY SKILLS

Chapter 3. Specifying Staff Work Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Strategies for Specifying Performance Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Chapter 4. Training Work Skills to Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Chapter 5. Monitoring Staff Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Chapter 6. Supporting Proficient Work Performance: Positive

Chapter 7. Supporting Proficient Work Performance: Special

Chapter 8. Correcting Nonproficient Work Performance . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Chapter 9. Promoting Staff Work Enjoyment: Making Disliked

RESOLVING COMMON PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS

Chapter 10. Resolving Common Performance Problems: Overview . . . 187

Chapter 11. Reducing Absenteeism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200

Chapter 12. Resolving Problems with Staff Provision of Client-

Chapter 13. Reducing Frequent Nonwork Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242

SUPERVISING FROM A DISTANCE (TELEHEALTH)

Chapter 14. Supervising from a Distance With Telehealth . . . . . . . . . . 259

Selected Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283

THE IMPORTANCE OF SUPERVISION

T he most significant determinant of the effectiveness of human ser-

As just indicated, supervisors of direct support staff have many

ents. However, there is a third component of supervision that also war-

The essence of supervision is taking action to im-

SUCCESSFUL SUPERVISION INVOLVES

Staff enjoyment with their jobs is a primary indicator of a highly

For the reasons just noted, as well as others to be discussed later,

Successful supervision involves supervisors work-

In describing supervision to this point, an emphasis has been on

When supervisors do not rely on evidence-based strategies for

Supervisory strategies for impacting staff work per-

Reliance on evidence-based strategies to improve and maintain

PURPOSE OF THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK

The purpose of The Supervisor’s Guidebook is to describe an evi-

INTENDED AUDIENCE OF THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK

This book is intended for supervisors of direct support staff, and

ORGANIZATION OF THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK

This book is organized into five sections. Section I, Introduction to

ing staff performance. In Section II, Critical Supervisory Skills (Chapters

CHAPTER SUMMARY: KEY POINTS

1. The essence of supervision is taking action to improve inadequate staff

3. Supervisory actions to improve inadequate performance, support and

AN EVIDENCE-BASED PROTOCOL FOR

A s indicated in Chapter 1, a comprehensive set of evidence-based

Successful supervision is an active process, requir-

In one sense, the time and effort required to successfully practice

In Chapter 1 it was noted that the most significant determinant of

agencies focus on outcomes associated with obtainment of real jobs

A PROTOCOL FOR EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISION

Step 1: Identify desired client outcomes.

Step 1: Identify Client Outcomes

identifying those outcomes and then promoting and maintaining staff