FBA to BIP: A Step by Step Workflow for School BCBAs

An FBA gives the team a working account of when behavior occurs and what the behavior may produce. A BIP turns that account into actions people can use during the school day (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 628-632).

The handoff fails when the hypothesis does not specify what staff should change. The plan then lists generic steps, and the team cannot tell what to do, what to measure, or when to revise.

This guide shows how to move from referral to FBA, hypothesis statement, competing behavior pathway, BIP, staff training, and data review. The examples are teaching examples. Use individual assessment, team judgment, family and student input, district procedures, and safety protocols for each student.

The short version

1. Define the behavior and the school routine precisely.
2. Review records, interview people who know the routine, and observe directly.
3. Summarize the pattern in an ABC hypothesis statement.
4. Check whether more assessment is needed before choosing intervention strategies.
5. Build a competing behavior pathway: the problem behavior, the payoff, the replacement behavior, and the desired routine behavior.
6. Translate the pathway into prevention, teaching, reinforcement, response, and measurement steps.
7. Build the implementation plan with the people who will use it.
8. Train, observe, graph, and review before deciding what to change.

Start with the question, not the template

The referral question should describe a meaningful school problem in observable terms. “He is noncompliant” does not tell the team which responses to count. “During independent math, the student puts his head down, pushes the worksheet away, and leaves the table after a direction” gives the team a behavior, a routine, and a starting condition.

Before collecting new information, review the records that may change the assessment or intervention decision. Look at prior goals, behavior plans, data, health information that the team is authorized to consider, attendance, schedule changes, instructional demands, and what has already been tried. Cooper, Heron, and Heward describe records review, interviews, and direct observation as parts of professional assessment, along with checking the integrity of prior interventions and considering generalization across settings (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 49-50).

Ask four opening questions:

• What does the behavior look and sound like?
• When and where does it happen, and when does it not happen?
• What usually happens right before and right after it?
• What would the student do instead if the same need could be met safely and efficiently?

Can a BIP be created without an FBA?

Sometimes a team may use an interim support while it gathers information, especially when immediate safety or access to instruction requires action. A durable, function-based BIP should be informed by assessment. Without an FBA or another defensible assessment process, the team is more likely to choose strategies because they are familiar, not because they address the conditions maintaining the behavior. FBA is designed to identify relations among environmental events and behavior so the team can develop an intervention that changes those relations (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 628-632).

An interim plan should say what the team knows, what it does not know, what staff will do to keep the student and others safe, what data will be collected, and when the team will review the information. Do not present a temporary response plan as a completed functional assessment.

Which should be done first, an FBA or a BIP?

Start the FBA before the full BIP. The FBA produces the information and hypothesis that the BIP is meant to address. A team may begin immediate prevention and safety supports before the FBA is complete, but label those supports as interim and continue the assessment.

The FBA to BIP workflow

1. Referral and records review

Write the referral question in a way that can guide observation. Identify the target routine, the people present, the academic or social demand, the behavior to measure, and the effect on instruction or participation.

Output: a one paragraph referral question, a preliminary operational definition, a list of people to interview, and a plan for direct observation.

2. Interview and direct observation

Talk with the teacher, paraprofessional, family, student when appropriate, and others who see the routine. Ask what happens before and after the behavior, what the student can already do, and what staff have tried. Observe the routine directly, then compare what you saw with what people reported. Interviews can guide observation, while direct observation can confirm, refine, or disconfirm those reports (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 51, 642).

Collect observations across the relevant routine rather than relying on one event. Record the antecedent, observable behavior, immediate consequence, setting events, task, people present, and whether the student used an alternative.

Output: an FBA summary that separates observed facts from interpretations.

3. Hypothesis statement

Use an ABC format:

Example:

Keep the language tied to the data. A hypothesis is not a diagnosis of the student or a statement about intent. Cooper, Heron, and Heward recommend that a hypothesis statement identify the antecedent, topography, and maintaining consequence because that format points toward possible intervention changes (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 642-643).

4. Decide whether more assessment is needed

An FBA may include indirect assessment, descriptive observation, or a functional analysis, depending on the question and the conditions of the case (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 628-632). If the descriptive pattern is clear enough for the decision being made, the team may proceed to a function-based intervention. If competing explanations remain, seek consultation and select an assessment that fits the student, risk, setting, and available expertise.

Trial-based functional analysis has been evaluated in classroom routines by embedding assessment trials in classroom activities. In one study, results corresponded with traditional functional analysis results in most cases, with partial correspondence in another case, and the authors described the approach as potentially useful when resources for a traditional analysis are unavailable (Bloom, Iwata, Fritz, Roscoe, & Carreau, 2011, pp. 19-31). A latency measure can be considered when repeated occurrences of dangerous behavior create risk, but the procedure requires qualified planning, safety protections, and careful interpretation (Thomason-Sassi, Iwata, Neidert, & Roscoe, 2011, pp. 51-67).

Do not choose an assessment format because it sounds advanced. Choose it because it answers the remaining question safely and competently.

5. Competing behavior pathway

The competing behavior pathway connects the FBA to the plan. It should show:

• Setting events or motivating conditions that make the payoff valuable.
• The antecedent or trigger.
• The problem behavior.
• The maintaining consequence or payoff.
• A replacement behavior that produces the same payoff more efficiently and safely.
• A desired behavior that supports participation in the routine.

The replacement behavior must be possible for the student, easy enough to use early in teaching, and connected to the same function as the problem behavior (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 630-632). If the problem behavior produces escape, teach an appropriate break or help request and arrange how that request will work. If the problem behavior produces attention, teach an attention request and schedule how adults will respond. If the behavior produces access to an item or activity, teach an appropriate request, waiting, or choice response. If the behavior appears automatically maintained, consult qualified professionals before assuming a socially mediated solution.

Map each hypothesis to the BIP

The FBA does not write the BIP for you. It tells you which parts of the environment deserve attention. Cooper, Heron, and Heward describe three broad intervention routes: alter antecedents, alter consequences, and teach alternative behavior (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 630-632).

The table is a planning aid, not a menu of generic interventions. Select strategies that match the individual hypothesis, the school context, student preferences, staff capacity, and safety requirements.

Three FBA to BIP examples

Example 1: Calling out during group instruction

Referral: During whole-group science, Maya calls out answers and comments over peers. The teacher responds verbally and sometimes moves closer to her.

FBA pattern: Calling out is most likely when the teacher is attending to another student. The immediate consequence is teacher attention. The working hypothesis is that calling out may be maintained by adult attention.

Competing behavior pathway:

• Setting event: long group lesson with limited individual interaction.
• Antecedent: teacher asks the group a question or responds to a peer.
• Problem behavior: Maya calls out over the speaker.
• Payoff: immediate teacher attention.
• Replacement behavior: Maya writes her answer on a response card or raises her hand.
• Desired behavior: Maya waits for her turn and contributes during the lesson.

BIP translation:

• Prevention: give Maya a response card and preview when she can contribute.
• Teaching: practice writing the answer, waiting, and raising her hand during a short rehearsal.
• Reinforcement: acknowledge the replacement response quickly and provide planned opportunities to contribute.
• Response: redirect to the response card or hand signal without adding a long conversation after calling out.
• Measurement: record opportunities, independent replacement responses, and call-outs during the defined group routine.

Review question: Is Maya using the replacement response when the teacher is busy, or does the team need to make the response faster and easier?

Example 2: Leaving independent work

Referral: During independent writing, Leo pushes materials away and walks toward the door after a writing direction.

FBA pattern: The behavior is most likely after a lengthy or unclear writing demand. Staff often remove the worksheet and direct Leo to a quiet area. The working hypothesis is that the behavior may be maintained by escape from the task.

Competing behavior pathway:

• Setting event: difficult writing assignment and uncertainty about how to begin.
• Antecedent: independent writing direction.
• Problem behavior: pushes materials away and leaves the area.
• Payoff: task delay or removal.
• Replacement behavior: points to a help card or requests a brief break.
• Desired behavior: starts the first step, works for the agreed interval, and requests help or a break appropriately.

BIP translation:

• Prevention: provide a model, a choice of writing prompts, and a clear first step.
• Teaching: practice the help and break requests, then practice returning to the first step.
• Reinforcement: provide the planned brief break or help for the taught request, then reinforce returning and completing the agreed step.
• Response: block unsafe exit according to the safety plan and prompt the taught communication response.
• Measurement: record task starts, appropriate requests, return after break, duration of engagement, and leaving behavior.

Review question: Does the replacement response produce predictable task support without requiring Leo to leave the area?

Example 3: Taking materials from peers

Referral: During centers, Sam takes preferred materials from peers and argues when an adult removes the item.

FBA pattern: Taking is most likely when a preferred item is visible and another student has it. Adults often give Sam a different item to end the argument. The working hypothesis is that taking may be maintained by access to preferred materials.

Competing behavior pathway:

• Setting event: limited access to a highly preferred center.
• Antecedent: another student has the material Sam wants.
• Problem behavior: reaches for the material and argues.
• Payoff: occasional access to the item or a different preferred item.
• Replacement behavior: points to a choice card, asks for a turn, or selects an available alternative.
• Desired behavior: waits, exchanges, or chooses another center while following the center routine.

BIP translation:

• Prevention: show the turn order, offer two available choices, and use a visible waiting cue.
• Teaching: model asking, choosing, waiting, and accepting “later.” Practice with short waits.
• Reinforcement: honor the request or choice according to the schedule and reinforce safe waiting.
• Response: calmly block grabbing, prompt the communication response, and follow the team’s safety and access procedures.
• Measurement: record appropriate requests, waiting, exchanges, and grabbing during center opportunities.

Review question: Does the taught response contact access to the same type of outcome often enough to compete with grabbing?

Common breakdowns in FBA and BIP work

Plans nobody runs

Cause: the plan requires steps that are hard to remember, takes more time than the routine allows, or assigns responsibility to “staff” without naming who does what.

Fix: write the plan in the order the routine occurs. Name the implementer, the prompt, the student response, the consequence, the measurement, and the next review. Ask an implementer to explain the plan in their own words, then practice it.

Generic plans

Cause: the plan lists praise, redirection, breaks, or visuals without connecting them to the FBA hypothesis.

Fix: for every strategy, answer “Which part of the hypothesis does this change?” If the answer is unclear, remove the strategy or gather more information. FBA-informed interventions are intended to alter antecedents or consequences and teach an alternative that contacts the relevant outcome (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 630-632).

No replacement behavior

Cause: the team focuses on stopping the problem behavior without teaching a response that works for the student.

Fix: name the payoff. Choose a response the student can perform, teach it before the difficult routine, prompt it early, and reinforce it according to the plan. Check that the response gives the student a workable way to contact the same outcome (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 630-632).

No data plan

Cause: the BIP says “monitor progress” but does not define the behavior, measurement dimension, opportunity, person responsible, or review rule.

Fix: complete this sentence:

Measurement should match the behavior and the decision the team needs to make (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2020, pp. 99-104).

Baseline and goal do not match

Cause: the baseline measures aggression while the goal measures walking to a calming area, or the plan teaches a request while the data sheet counts only problem behavior.

Fix: put the baseline behavior, replacement behavior, goal, and data sheet side by side. Each should describe the same decision path. Add separate measures when the team needs to know both whether problem behavior is changing and whether the replacement skill is being acquired.

Build the implementation plan with the team

The written BIP is not the implemented BIP. A plan becomes usable when the people who will run it help specify how it fits their routines, materials, time, and responsibilities.

Team roles

Bring a draft, not a finished verdict. Ask the team:

• Can this prevention step happen in the actual routine?
• What will the adult say or do first?
• What will the student do next?
• What will count as reinforcement?
• What happens if the replacement response is not used?
• Who records the data, and when will the graph be reviewed?

A practical timeline

Do not treat a calendar date as proof that a plan is working. Review both implementation fidelity and student data. If staff are not using the plan, first fix training, materials, prompts, time, or role clarity. If the plan is being implemented and the pattern does not change, revisit the hypothesis, measurement, and competing behavior pathway.

Keep building the system

For the broader role and systems context, visit BCBA in schools, the functional behavior assessment guide, behavior intervention plan examples, and the FBA decision matrix. If your team needs to test a hypothesis before writing the plan, get the free School FA Starter Kit for functional analysis task analyses, datasheets, and graph pages.

FBA and BIP in an IEP

FBA means functional behavior assessment. In an IEP context, the team considers behavioral supports when behavior interferes with the student’s learning or the learning of others. Federal regulations require a school to conduct a functional behavioral assessment and implement a behavior intervention plan when a disciplinary change of placement is made in the circumstances described in 34 C.F.R. § 300.530(d)(1)(ii). The IEP team must also consider positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies, when a student’s behavior impedes learning under 34 C.F.R. § 300.324(a)(2)(i).

The exact process, consent rules, documentation, and timelines can depend on the circumstances and state or district requirements. Coordinate with the case manager and follow the applicable procedures. This page is a behavior planning workflow, not legal advice.

Frequently asked questions