Thank you for your hard work on this document and representing the needs of the different stakeholders.  As the Public Policy Committee of the Virginia Association for Behavior Analysis (VABA), we have the following comments.

On page 6, there is an error in the quote from page 2 of Cooper et al.: “practice” should be “practical.”  Further in the paragraph, the definition of behavior should be quoted from Cooper et al, page 26 “Human behavior is everything people do, including how they move, what they say, think and feel.”  Finally, it is important to acknowledge that Virginia has its own definition of behavior analysis in the regulations with the Board of Medicine, but does not confine itself to “applied.”

On page 7 and throughout the document (including page 14) the reference to “ABA Techniques and Strategies” makes it sound as if ABA is made up of these techniques and strategies rather than it being the application of a natural science.  It could give the impression of ABA being a “bag of tricks” rather than the true science that it is.  The strategies actually come from the principles of the science and should be referred to as such.  This is spelled out in the paragraph with the heading “What ABA is Not” on page 7, but references throughout the document (specifically page 14) do not appear to be consistent.  The power in the science does not come from simply knowing the principles, but from understanding how those principles affect behavior specifically in each different organism.

Please fix the trademark references on page 8.

Table 1 on page 11 does not accurately represent RBTs.  RBTs must complete training that meets the requirements of the Behavior Analyst Certification Board and is provided by a person or entity that has been approved by the BACB.  An RBT undergoes a competency assessment by a BCBA or BCBA-D and then must pass a credentialing exam administered through the BACB to earn the RBT credential. Thus “RBTs” are specifically registered with the BACB, so the description in Table 1 is factually incorrect.  In VA, there is no requirement for licensure or certification to work under the supervision of an LBA or LABA, so a behavior technician may be an RBT, or they may have another title: tutor, therapist, technician, specialist, aide etc., which are unregulated and ambiguous terms and have no training, competence, and examination requirements.  It is important that the integrity of RBT is maintained and the description should match that of the BACB and note that they receive background checks and specific training.  It is necessary to separate “RBT” from unlicensed persons in the document, throughout, as the terms are not interchangeable, but have been treated as such in many places.

On page 15, it says, “Then the LBA steps back and assists with monitoring the plan, thereby not providing direct services to the student. LBAs may also provide services to a school or division. For example, if the school division wanted to improve their implementation of functional behavior assessments, the LBA could be responsible for training staff, coaching, and monitoring.”  The word “monitoring” does not correctly convey what it is an LBA or LABA does.  We suggest changing it to “evaluating the effectiveness of” to better convey the work of making data-based decisions.

On page 39, in the Understand Your Role section, these two sentences contradict one another: “As a private provider who is serving a specific student, your role is to serve that student. Behavior analysts are trained to observe and evaluate the environment and the teacher is part of that environment. However, it is not your role to evaluate the teacher or other educational staff.”  The first says that the role is to evaluate (the environment including the teacher); the second says it is not.  We suggest instead of saying what not to do, improve the clarity about what the LBA or LABA should do with examples.  This is also mentioned on page 34 #3.

We have overall concerns that this document waters down the science of behavior and that the science continues to sometimes be misunderstood and misapplied in the public schools.  We are apprehensive that schools who employ behavior analysts may use them as a response to problem behavior rather than looking at systematic application.  It is our conclusion that this document may not promote usage of private LBAs in the schools, and we hope that the DOE will provide continued documentation on the ways to best collaborate.  Private LBAs, especially those already working with a student, can be an integral part of the student’s educational team (IEP or otherwise) and VABA hopes to see continued communication and partnership in the future, regardless of whether or not the LBA is physically providing services in the school.