Assessing the Effectiveness of First Step to Success: Are Short-Term Results the First Step to Long-Term Behavioral Improvements?
Sumi, W. Carl; Woodbridge, Michelle W.; Javitz, Harold S.; Thornton, S. Patrick; Wagner, Mary; Rouspil, Kristen; Yu, Jennifer W.; Seeley, John R.; Walker, Hill M.; Golly, Annemieke; Small, Jason W.; Feil, Edward G.; Severson, Herbert H. (2013). Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, v21 n1 p66-78 Mar 2013. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1005767
-
examining286Students, grades1-3
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: November 2025
- Practice Guide (findings for First Step to Success)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Social Skills Rating System: Academic Competence-Teacher |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
88.10 |
86.30 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III): Letter-Word Identification Subtest |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
100.60 |
102.40 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oral Reading Fluency: First-Grade Passage |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
71.10 |
71.90 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Social Skills Rating System: Social skills-Teacher |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
92.40 |
85.30 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders: ABI subscale |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
38.10 |
35.30 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Social Skills Rating System (SSRS): Problem Behavior scale - teacher report |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
115.70 |
119.20 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Social Skills Rating System: Social Skills subscale - Parent |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
94.70 |
90.40 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders: Maladaptive Behavior Index |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
28.10 |
29.70 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Academic engaged time |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.73 |
0.66 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Social Skills Rating System: Problem Behaviors scale-Parent |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
108.80 |
111.50 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
13% English language learners -
Female: 23%
Male: 77% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
California, Florida, Illinois, Oregon, West Virginia
-
Race Black 24% Other or unknown 31% White 45% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 27% Not Hispanic or Latino 73% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 73% No FRPL 28%
Study Details
Setting
This study took place in 48 elementary schools across five states: California, Illinois, West Virginia, Florida, and Oregon. 20 schools participated in the 2006-2007 school year, and the other 28 schools joined in the following school year. Three students per semester (one in each grade, Grades 1-3) participated, for a total of six students per school. Students were in general education classrooms, and some of the intervention activities took place in students' homes (with parents/caregivers).
Study sample
About one-quarter (24 percent) of the students were Black, nearly half (45 percent) White, and one-third were of another race (31 percent). Just over one-quarter (27 percent) of the students were Hispanic. Nearly three-quarters were eligible for free/reduced price lunch (73 percent). Over three-quarters of the students were male (77 percent). Students were approximately evenly divided across Grades 1 to 3.
Intervention Group
Behavior coaches (interventionists) worked with individual students in the classroom and with student's parents/caregivers at home. The intervention lasted eight weeks (about three months). During the first five days of implementation, a First Step behavior coach worked with students one-on-one and then provided modeling and consultation to teachers and students’ peers for the remaining seven weeks. Coaches received a two-day training. First Step has 30 program days and an accompanying checklist (Classroom Monitoring Form) with daily performance criteria for each student, documented by the classroom teacher. Coaches have six one-hour sessions (weekly, for six weeks) with parents in which they deliver the program components to parents/caregivers and use a homeBase monitoring Form to document their perceptions of parent/caregiver engagement in the home-Base component. The homeBase sessions focus on parenting skills and encouraging collaborative home-school working relationship. Coaches’ in-classroom activities include giving the target student visual cues (such as using a red or green card) to communicate whether or not the student is on task and using appropriate behaviors. The reward system is that if the student meets his/her behavioral goals for the day, he/she is allowed to choose an enjoyable activity for the whole class. After the five-day period, the teacher takes over the activities, and the coach supervises and provide support. Teachers also provide parents with daily reports on the student’s progress, and parents are supposed to reward students’ positive behavior with an activity such as playing a game or taking a walk together.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition implemented business as usual instruction and classroom management.
Support for implementation
Coaches attended a two-day training provided by First Step developer. The coaches modeled practice for the first week and provided support to the classroom teachers for the other seven weeks. Additionally, technical assistance was available as needed and requested and could take the form of conference calls or emails to resolve specific implementation issues.
Assessing the Effectiveness of First Step to Success: Are Short-Term Results the First Step to Long-Term Behavioral Improvements?
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2013
- Single Study Review (105 KB) (findings for First Step to Success)
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Academic engaged time (AET) |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
Full sample;
|
0.72 |
0.67 |
No |
-- | |
|
Problem behavior (PB) subscale of the social skills rating system (SSRS) for parents |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
Full sample;
|
-109.10 |
-111.98 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Academic Competence (AC) subscale of the SSRS for teachers |
First Step to Success vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
Full sample;
|
88.31 |
86.16 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
13% English language learners -
Female: 23%
Male: 77% -
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
California, Florida, Illinois, Oregon, West Virginia
-
Race Black 24% White 45% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 27% Not Hispanic or Latino 73%
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).