MENTAL HEALTH, SOCIAL-

EMOTIONAL, AND
BEHAVIORAL SCREENING
AND EVALUATION
COMPENDIUM (2 ND ED)

Ohio Department of Education

Center for School-Based Mental Health Programs

Ohio Mental Health Network for School Success

1
 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................................... 5
Introduction to the Compendium ................................................................................................................. 6
Comparison of Select No-Cost Screening and Evaluation Tools ................................................................. 8
A Safe Environment for Every Kid-Parent Questionnaire (SEEK-PQ; Dubowitz et al., 2012) ..................... 17
Acceptance of Couple Violence (Foshee, Fothergill & Stuart, 1992) .......................................................... 18
Brief Impairment Scale (BIS; Bird, Canino, Davies, Ramirez, Chavez, Duarte & Shen, 2005) .................... 19
California School Climate and Safety Survey (CSCSS; Furlong, Morrison, & Boles, 1991) ......................... 20
Car, Relax, Alone, Forget, Friends, Trouble (CRAFFT; Knight et al., 1999) ................................................. 21
Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale for Children (CES-DC; Weissman, Orvaschel &
Padian, 1980) .............................................................................................................................................. 22
Child/Adolescent Psychiatry Screen (CAPS; Bostic, 2004) ......................................................................... 23
Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM-28; Ungar & Liebenberg, 2011; 2013) .................................. 24
Childhood Severity of Psychiatric Illness (CSPI-3.1; Praed Foundation, 2002) .......................................... 25
Childhood Trust Events Survey 2.0 (CTES; Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, 2006) ............ 26
Children’s Eating Attitudes Test (ChEAT; Maloney, McGuire, Daniels & Specker, 1989) .......................... 27
Children’s Impact of Event Scale 8 (CRIES-8; Children and War Foundation, 1998) ................................. 28
Classroom Climate Scale (developed by Vessels, 1998; modified by the Multisite Violence Prevention
Project, 2004) .............................................................................................................................................. 29
Columbia Impairment Scale (CIS; Bird, Shaffer, Fisher & Gould, 1993) ..................................................... 30
Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS; Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc., 2008) . 31
Community and Youth Collaborative Institute – School Engagement Scale (CAYCI-SES; Anderson-Butcher
et al., 2013) ................................................................................................................................................. 32
COPE Inventory (COPE, Carver, Scheier, & Weintraub, 1989; Brief COPE, Carver, 1997) .......................... 33
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales (DASS; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) ............................................ 34
Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004).................................................... 35
Disruptive Behavior Disorder Rating Scale (DBD; Pelham, Evans, Gnagy, & Greenslade, 1992) ............... 36
Early Childhood Screening Assessment (ECSA; Gleason, Zeanah & Dickstein, 2006) ................................ 37
Early Screening Project (ESP; Walker, Severson & Feil, 1995) ................................................................... 38
Early Warning System (EWS; Heppen, O’Cummings, & Therriault, 2008) ................................................. 39
General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE; Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995) .............................................................. 40
Georgia Student Health Survey 2.0 (GSHS 2.0, La Salle & Meyers, 2014) ................................................. 41
Guidelines for Adolescent Prevention Survey (GAPS; American Medical Association, 1997) ................... 42

2
HEADS-ED (Cappelli, Bragg, Cloutier, Doucet, Glennie, Gray, Jabbour, Lyons & Zemek, 2011) ................ 43
Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL; Cohen & Hoberman, 1983)................................................... 44
KINDL-Questionnaire (KINDL; Ravens-Sieberer & Bullinger, 1998) ............................................................ 45
Kutcher Adolescent Depression Scale (KADS-6 & KADS-11; Kutcher, 2006) ............................................. 46
Mental Health Inventory (MHI; Veit & Ware, 1983) ................................................................................... 47
Mental Health Screening Tool (MHST; California Institute for Mental Health, 2000) ............................... 48
Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS; Kay, Wolkenfeld & Murrill, 1988) ............................................ 49
Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ & SMFQ; Angold & Costello, 1987) .......................................... 50
Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9A; Johnson, 2003 & PHQ-2; Kroenke, Spitzer, & Williams, 1999) .. 51
Pediatric Symptom Checklist (PSC-35; Jellinek & Murphy, 1988 & PSC-17; Gardner & Kelleher, 1999) ... 52
Personal Wellbeing Index (PWI-SC & PWI-PS, Cummins & Lau, 2005; PWI-A, International Wellbeing
Group, 2013) ............................................................................................................................................... 53
Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers (POSIT; Rahdert, 1991) ....................................... 54
Profile of Mood States - Adolescent (POMS-A; Terry, Lane, Lane, & Keohane, 1999) .............................. 55
Responses to Stress Questionnaire (RSQ; Connor-Smith, Compas, Wadsworth, Thomsen, & Saltzman,
2000) ........................................................................................................................................................... 56
Revised Children’s Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS; Chorpita, Yim, Moffitt, Umemoto & Francis,
1998; 2003 for RCADS-P) ............................................................................................................................ 57
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES; Rosenberg, 1965; 1989).................................................................... 58
Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders (SCARED; Birmaher, Khetarpal, Cully, Brent & Mckenzie,
1995) ........................................................................................................................................................... 59
Adapted-SAD PERSONS (Juhnke, 1996) ..................................................................................................... 60
SNAP-IV-C Rating Scale (Swanson et al., 2001) .......................................................................................... 61
Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS; Kilgus, Chafouleas, Riley-Tillman &
von der Embse, 2013) ................................................................................................................................. 62
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 1997) ............................................................. 63
Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1994) ............................................................................ 64
Student-Teacher Relationship Scale (STRS; Pianta, 1991) ......................................................................... 65
Survey of Wellbeing of Young Children (SWYC; Perrin & Sheldrick, 2014) ................................................ 66
Vanderbilt ADHD Diagnostic Rating Scales (VDRS; Wolraich, 1996) .......................................................... 67
Comparison of Select At-Cost Screening and Evaluation Tools ................................................................ 68
Adaptive Behavior Assessment System®-Second Edition (ABAS-II; Harrison & Oakland, 2003) ............... 79
Ages & Stages Questionnaire: Social Emotional™--Second Edition (ASQ:SE-2; Squires, Bricker, &
Twombly, 2015) .......................................................................................................................................... 80
Battelle Developmental Inventory™—Second Edition (BDI-2; Newborg, 2004) ....................................... 80

3
Bayley Scales for Infant Development®—Third Edition (Bayley-III; Bayley, 2005) .................................... 82
Behavior Assessment System for Children—Third Edition (BASC-3; Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2015) ......... 83
Behavior Rating Profile (BRP-2; Brown & Hammill, 1990) ..................................................................... 84
BASC™-3 Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BASC-3 BESS; Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2015) ..... 85
Brief Problem Monitor™ (BPM; Achenbach, 2011) ................................................................................... 86
Brief Screen for Adolescent Depression (BSAD; Screening for Mental Health, Inc., 2009) ....................... 87
Brief Symptom Inventory® (BSI; Derogatis, 1993) ..................................................................................... 88
Brigance® Inventory of Early Development III (IED-III; Curriculum Associates, LLC, 2013) ....................... 89
Caregiver-Teacher Report Form© (C-TRF; Achenbach, 2000) ................................................................... 90
Child Behavior Checklist© (CBCL; Achenbach, 2000) ................................................................................ 91
Children’s Interview for Psychiatric Syndromes (P-ChIPS or ChIPS; Weller, Weller, Fristad, & Rooney,
1999) ........................................................................................................................................................... 92
Conners Parent Teacher Rating Scale—Third Edition™ (Conners 3; Conners, 2008) ................................. 93
Devereux Early Childhood Assessment© (DECA-I/T, DECA-P2 & DECA-C; LeBuffe & Naglieri, 1999) ....... 94
Devereux Student Strengths Assessment© (DESSA & DESSA-Mini; LeBuffe, Shapiro, & Naglieri, 2009) . 95
Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory™ & Sutter-Eyberg Student Behavior Inventory-Revised™ (ECBI & SESBI-
R; Eyberg, 1999) .......................................................................................................................................... 96
Infant-Toddler Developmental Assessment™ (IDA; Provence, Erikson, Vater, & Palmeri, 1995) ............. 97
Infant-Toddler Social Emotional Assessment™ (ITSEA & BITSEA; Carter & Briggs-Gowan, 2006)............. 98
Learning Accomplishment Profile System™ (LAP System; CHTOP, Inc., 1972 & 1975) ............................. 99
Manifestation of Symptomatology Scale™ (MOSS; Mogge, 1999) .......................................................... 100
Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument – Version 2 (MAYSI-2; Grisso & Barnum, 2000) ................ 101
Parents’ Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS & PEDS-DM; Glascoe, 1998) ................................. 102
Preschool and Kindergarten Behavior Scales-Second Edition (PKBS-2; Merrell, 2003)........................... 103
Preschool Behavior Questionnaire (PBQ; Behar, 1974) ........................................................................... 104
Problem Behavior Inventory (PBI; Silverton, 1991) .................................................................................. 105
Problem Experiences Checklist™-Adolescent Version (Silverton, 1991) ................................................. 106
Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF; Matson & Vollmer, 1995) ................................................ 107
Resiliency Scales for Children and Adolescents™ (RSCA; Prince-Embury, 2006) ..................................... 108
School Motivation and Learning Strategies Inventory™ (SMALSI; Stroud & Reynolds, 2006) ................ 109
School Social Behavior Scales – Second Edition and Home & Community Social Behavior Scales (SSBS-2;
Merrell, 2008) (HCSBS; Merrell & Caldarella, 2008) ................................................................................. 110
Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales™ (SEARS; Merrell, 2011)................................................. 111
Social-Emotional Dimension Scale—Second Edition (SEDS-2; Hutton & Roberts, 2004) ........................ 112

4
Social Skills Improvement System Rating System™ (SSIS; Gresham & Elliott, 2008) ............................... 113
Symptom Checklist-90-Revised® (SCL-90-R; Derogatis, 1994)................................................................. 114
Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders—2nd Edition (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 2014) ................ 115
Vineland Social-Emotional Early Childhood Scales (Vineland SEEC; Sparrow, Balla, & Cicchetti, 1998) . 116
Youth Self-Report© (YSR; Achenbach, 2001) .......................................................................................... 117
References ................................................................................................................................................ 118
Appendix ................................................................................................................................................... 132
Index.......................................................................................................................................................... 135

Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Agency
(SAMSHA) and the Ohio Department of Education for supporting the creation of this
compendium through Ohio’s Project AWARE. This second edition of the compendium was
written by Amity Noltemeyer, Allison Dimick, Marissa Smith-Millman, Kevin Shaw, and Katelyn
Palmer from Miami University, with assistance and feedback from staff and affiliates of the
Ohio Department of Education (ODE), Miami University’s Center for School-Based Mental
Health Programs (CSBMHP), Project AWARE Ohio, and the Ohio Mental Health Network for
School Success (OMHNSS). The contributions from individuals within these organizations –
including Emily Jordan, Cricket Meehan, Kathy Oberlin, and Michael Petrasek – were
instrumental in bringing this project to fruition.

Please note: This compendium was developed [in part] under grant number CFDA 93.243 from
the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS). The views, policies, and opinions expressed are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect those of SAMHSA or HHS.

5
 Introduction to the Compendium
Although up to 27% of youth experience externalizing behavior problems, depression, and anxiety,
only one-sixth to one-third receive mental health treatment (see Weist et al., 2007). Considering
that unaddressed mental health concerns can contribute to deleterious consequences, the New
Freedom Commission on Mental Health (2003) identified mental health screening as one of six
goals for transforming mental health care. Unfortunately, data suggest that only 2-3% of schools
engage in mental health screening, and even those that do may not use the data to inform effective
intervention (Vannest, 2012).

The purpose of this compendium is to provide a comprehensive source of information for

practitioners engaged in mental health work about both no-cost and at-cost mental health, social-
emotional, and behavioral screening tools for children and adolescents. The initial list of tools was
compiled through research database searches, internet searches, and input from field-based
practitioners. After the initial list was drafted, it was sent to multiple individuals to review and add
to, including Ohio Project AWARE staff and Ohio Mental Health Network for School Success
(OMHNSS) affiliates. After receiving additional instrument suggestions from multiple individuals,
there were 51 freely accessible no-cost screening tools as well as 39 at-cost screening tools on the
final list for which we gathered information. It is important to note that some of the screening tools
included in this compendium are intended to be used school-wide for population-based screening,
whereas others are intended to be used to screen individual children/adolescents for specified risk
factors or assets. Further, we would like to note that including a screening tool in this compendium
is not an endorsement of that tool for any specific purpose. We wanted to share a broad spectrum
of tools with you, and in doing so, some are better than others at serving particular functions.
Furthermore, several of these tools have not been studied in pediatric or inpatient settings rather
than school-based settings. Finally, readers should consult with their state, district, and professional
association guidelines, as well as instrument manual guidance, regarding procedures for screening
consent, user qualifications, and interpretive guidelines.

We hope this will be a helpful resource to practitioners looking for screening tools; however, we
also encourage individuals and schools utilizing this compendium to consult other sources for
additional information when selecting the most appropriate screening tool(s) for their needs. When
consulting this or other resources, any potential screening instrument should be evaluated on a
variety of dimensions, including: (1) its appropriateness for the intended use (e.g., content and
population fit); (2) its technical adequacy (e.g., reliability and validity); and (3) its usability (e.g., ease
of administration and acceptability) (Glover & Albers, 2007). Although we consulted multiple
sources of information about each assessment, it is nonetheless possible we overlooked an

6
instrument that could have been included or did not include all relevant details related to an
included instrument.

For more suggestions on how this compendium can be navigated and used, please see the example
scenarios located in the Appendix and the list of screening topics located in the index.

7
 NO-COST INSTRUMENTS
Comparison of Select No-Cost Screening and Evaluation Tools
Target
Instrument Author/Year Description Length Other
Population
Parent questionnaire that
A Safe Environment for screens for parental
Available in English,
Every Kid-Parent Dubowitz et al. behavior, hardships, and
0—5 years old 15-items Chinese, Spanish, &
Questionnaire (SEEK- (2012) other psychosocial problems
Vietnamese
PQ) that could put their children
at risk for maltreatment
Originally for 8th-9th
Brief assessment of attitudes Spanish version available
Acceptance of Couple Foshee, Fothergill graders, but has been
towards, and acceptance of, 11-items (but not through this
Violence & Stuart (1992) used with older
dating violence compendium)
adolescents
Bird, Canino, Assessment of interpersonal
23-items;
Brief Impairment Scale Davies, Ramirez, relations, school/work
Children & Adolescents 3—5
(BIS) Chavez, Duarte & functioning, and self-
minutes
Shen (2005) care/self-fulfillment
Short Form:
California School Student self-report
Furlong, Morrison 40-items;
Climate and Safety assessment of school Grades 6th-12th
& Boles (1991) Brief Form:
Survey (CSCSS) climate and safety issues
15-items

Car, Relax, Alone, Screen for high risk alcohol Children under 21 year
Forget, Friends, Knight et al. (1999) and other substance use olds; recommended 4—9 items
Trouble (CRAFFT) disorders for adolescents

8
 Center for
Modified version of the
Epidemiological Weissman, Brief self-report screen for
20-items; Center for Epidemiological
Studies Depression Orvaschel & Padian symptoms of depression in 6—17 year olds
5 minutes Studies Depression Scale
Scale for Children (CES- (1980) children and adolescents
(CES) for use with children
DC)
Screener for wide range of
Child/Adolescent mental health issues (e.g., 85-items;
Psychiatry Screen Bostic (2004) anxiety, OCD, PTSD, ADHD, 3—21 year olds 15—20
(CAPS) eating and learning minutes
disorders, etc.)
28- items;
Child and Youth Ungar & Assesses individual or global
15 minutes
Resilience Measure Liebenberg (2011; resilience in youth and 5 years and older Available in 7 languages
12- items;
(CYRM) 2013) adults across cultures
10 minutes
Screen for potential child
crises, including risk
behaviors,
Childhood Severity of
Praed Foundation behavioral/emotional
Psychiatric Illness Children & Adolescents 34-items
(2002) symptoms, functioning
(CSPI-3.1)
problems, juvenile justice
status, child protection, and
caregiver need/strengths
Cincinnati Parent and child self-report
Childhood Trust Events Children’s Hospital screener for traumatic 26—30 Available in English &
Children & Adolescents
Survey 2.0 (CTES 2.0) Medical Center experiences in childhood or items Spanish
(2006) adolescence

Maloney, McGuire, Brief assessment of eating Available in other

Children’s Eating
Daniels & Specker and dieting attitudes among 8—14 years old 26-items languages (but not through
Attitudes Test (ChEAT)
(1989) children and adolescents. this compendium)

9
 Target
Instrument Author/Year Description Length Other
Population
Brief self-report screening
Children’s Impact of Children and War tool for symptoms of post-
8+ year olds 8-items Available in 19 languages
Event Scale 8 (CRIES-8) Foundation (1998) traumatic stress disorder in
children
Multisite Violence
Prevention Project
Classroom Climate Measurement of school Students (11-14 years
(2004), modified 18-items
Scale climate old) and Teachers
from Vessels
(1998)
Global measure of
impairment across
Bird, Shaffer, interpersonal relations,
Columbia Impairment 13-items;
Fisher & Gould broad psychological Children & Adolescents
Scale (CIS) 3 minutes
(1993) domains, school/job
functioning, and use of
leisure time
The Research
Columbia-Suicide Brief rating scale that
Foundation for Children, Adolescents,
Severity Rating Scale measures for signs of 6-items
Mental Hygiene, & Adults
(C-SSRS) suicidality in patients
Inc. (2008)
Self-, teacher-, and parent- Total Items:
report instruments (four Elementary -
Community and Youth different measures) that 78
Anderson-Butcher, Children, Adolescents, Available in Spanish (via
Collaborative Institute examine school Middle/High
Ambrose, Iachini, Teachers/Staff, & email) and easily
– School Engagement climate/experiences, - 92
& Ball (2013) Parents adaptable.
Survey (CAYCI-SES) academic supports, and Teacher -
community and family 106
engagement. Parent - 63

10
 60-items;
Self-report instrument that Instrument can be
Carver, Scheier, & 15-20
indicates the coping translated to other
COPE Inventory Weintraub (1989) 14 years and older minutes
strategies and styles of languages. A Spanish
Carver (1997)
individuals version is readily available.
28-items
Depression, Anxiety, Assesses negative emotions
Lovibond & 47-items;
and Stress Scales associated with depression, Adolescents and adults Available in 39 languages
Lovibond (1995) 21-items
(DASS) anxiety and stress

Difficulties in Emotion Assesses emotional

Gratz & Roemer
Regulation Scale dysregulation in children, 11 years and older 36-items Available in 8 languages
(2004)
(DERS) adolescents and adults

DSM-IV based screening tool

that identifies symptoms of
Disruptive Behavior Pelham, Evans, attention-
Disorder Rating Scale Gnagy, & deficit/hyperactivity Children 45-items
(DBD) Greenslade (1992) disorder (ADHD), conduct
disorder, and oppositional
defiant disorder in children
Screen for
Early Childhood 40-items;
Gleason, Zeanah & emotional/behavioral Available in English,
Screening Assessment 1.5—5 year olds 5—10
Dickstein (2006) development as well as Spanish, & Romanian
(ECSA) minutes
maternal stress
Screening tool for Stage 1 & 2:
Early Screening Project Walker, Severson adjustment problems and/or 1 hour
3—5 year olds
(ESP) & Feil (1995) emotional and learning Stage 3: 20
disorders in preschoolers minutes

School-wide data collection

Heppen,
Early Warning System and analysis tool that
O’Cummings & 11—18 year olds Microsoft Excel-based tool
(EWS) screens for students at risk
Therriault (2008)
of dropping out

11
 Target
Instrument Author/Year Description Length Other
Population
10-items; 6-
Assesses perceived self-
General Self-Efficacy Schwarzer & item version Available in 30 additional
efficacy in adolescents and 12 years and older
Scale (GSE) Jerusalem (1995) also languages
adults
available
School-wide survey that
measures for indicators of
Georgia Student GESCS: 3rd-5th graders
La Salle & Meyers positive or negative school 11—121
Health Survey 2.0 GSHS 2.0: 6th-12th
(2014) climate, especially issues items
(GSHS 2.0) graders
related to student health
and safety
Parent
Form: 15-
items;
Younger
Rating scale to identify Adolescent
Guidelines for
American Medical adolescents at risk for Form: 72-
Adolescent Prevention 11—21 year olds
Association (1997) behavioral and lifestyle items;
Survey (GAPS)
concerns Middle-
Older
Adolescent
Form: 61-
items
Home, Education, Cappelli, Bragg,
Activities/peers,
Cloutier, Doucet, A quick mental health
Drugs/alcohol,
Glennie, Gray, screening tool originally Longer, in-depth version
Suicidality, Adolescents 7-items
designed to be used in available
Emotions/behaviors, Jabbour, Lyons & Emergency Departments
and Discharge Zemek (2011)
resources (HEADS-ED)

12
Interpersonal Support Cohen & Assessment of perceived 12—48 Available in 8 additional
Adolescents and adults
Evaluation List (ISEL) Hoberman (1983) social support items languages

12—46 Available in 27 languages.

KINDL-Questionnaire Ravens-Sieberer & Measurement of child and
4—17 years old items; 5-15 Disease specific modules
(KINDL) Bullinger (1998) adolescent quality of life
minutes are also available.

Kutcher Adolescent Brief self-report form that

Depression Scale Kutcher (2006) screens for signs and degree 12—17 year olds 6—16 items
(KADS-6 & KADS-11) of adolescent depression

Assesses psychological 38-items;

Mental Health Available in 14 different
Veit & Ware (1983) health of adolescents and 13 years and older 5-10
Inventory (MHI) languages
adults over the past month minutes

MHST 0-5: Originally developed for

California Institute Screen to determine need MHST 0-5: 0—5 year
Mental Health 4-items; children in out-of-home
for Mental Health and urgency for full mental olds;
Screening Tool (MHST) MHST: 13- placements, but can be
(2000) health assessment referral MHST: 5+ year olds
items used in other populations
Typically used with
Brief assessment of patients’
psychiatric populations
Modified Overt verbal aggression,
Kay, Wolkenfeld & or individuals with
Aggression Scale aggression against property, 4-items
Murrill (1988) intellectual disabilities
(MOAS) auto aggression, and
or autism spectrum
physical aggression
disorders
Measure for DSM-III-R
depression criteria in
Mood and Feelings
Angold & Costello children and adolescents School age-children, 13—34
Questionnaire (MFQ &
(1987) based on statements about adolescents & adults items
SMFQ)
their recent moods and
actions

13
 Target
Instrument Author/Year Description Length Other
Population
Patient Health Johnson (2002) Quick patient survey that
Translations are available
Questionnaire (PHQ- Kroenke, Spitzer & screens for signs of Adolescents 2—13 items
in many languages
9A & PHQ-2) Williams (2003) adolescent depression

Jellinek & Murphy 17—35 PSC-35: available in 19

Pediatric Symptom Brief screening tool for
(1988) items; languages
Checklist (PSC-35 & mental health disorders in 4—18 year olds
Gardner & Kelleher 5—10 PSC-17: available in 4
PSC-17) children and adolescents
(1999) minutes languages
There is a French adult
Assesses the quality of life of
Personal Wellbeing Cummins & Lau version as well as a version
children, adolescents, and Preschool and older 7-8 items
Index (PWI) (2002; 2005; 2006) for those with intellectual
adults
disabilities
Screener for 10 problem
areas, including substance
Problem Oriented 139-items;
use, mental/physical health, Available in English &
Screening Instrument Rahdert (1991) 12—19 year olds 20—25
family/peer relations, Spanish
for Teenagers (POSIT) minutes
vocation, & special
education

Profile of Mood States- Terry, Lane, Lane, Assesses distressed moods

11—18 years 24-items
Adolescents (POMS-A) & Keohane (1999) in adolescents

Connor-Smith,
Compas, Assesses how individuals Certain versions are
Responses to Stress
Wadsworth, cope with stress in specified 9 years and older 57-items available in Spanish and
Questionnaire (RSQ)
Thomsen, & domains Chinese
Saltzman (2000)

14
 Revised Children’s Chorpita, Yim, Youth Version: available in
Assesses anxiety and
Anxiety and Moffitt, Umemoto, 9 languages
depression according to Grades 3-12 14-47-items
Depression Scale & Francis (1998; Parent version: available in
DSM-IV criteria
(RCADS) 2003 for RCADS-P) 5 languages
Has been translated into
Rosenberg Self- Rosenberg (1965; Assesses self-esteem in 10-items; many languages.
12 years and older
Esteem Scale (RSES) 1989) adolescents and adults 1-2 minutes Translations not available
through this compendium.
DSM-IV based self-report
A 66-item version exists
screener for child anxiety
Birmaher, and measures specific
Screen for Child related disorders, such as
Khetarpal, Cully, 41-items; phobias, obsessive-
Anxiety Related social/school phobias, and 8—18 year olds
Brent & Mckenzie 10 minutes compulsive disorder, and
Disorders (SCARED) separation anxiety, panic
(1995) post-traumatic stress
and general anxiety
disorder
disorders
A score of 1-2 points
suggests low risk, 3-5
ADAPTED-SAD
Juhnke (1996) Screen for suicide risk Children & Adolescents 10-items points suggests moderate
PERSONS
risk, and 7-10 points
suggests high risk
DSM-IV based screening tool
SNAP-IV-C Rating Scale Swanson et al., 90-items; Other versions of the
for attention and other 6—18 years old
(SNAP-IV or SNAP-IV-R) 2001 10 minutes SNAP-IV are available
mental disorders

A short instrument that

Social, Academic, and Kilgus, Chafouleas,
screens students for signs of Scores can be classified as
Emotional Behavior Riley-Tillman & von 5—18 year olds 19-items
emotional or behavioral “at-risk” or “not at-risk”
Risk Screener (SAEBRS) der Embse (2013)
problems and risks
Screen for
Strengths and
internalizing/externalizing Available in over 50
Difficulties Goodman (1997) 2—16 year olds 25-items
problems and prosocial languages
Questionnaire (SDQ)
behavior

15
 Target
Instrument Author/Year Description Length Other
Population
10-15 Can also be used as a tool
Screening tool for signs of
Student Risk Screening minutes for for monitoring changes in
Drummond (1994) antisocial behavior in Students
Scale (SRSS) class of 25 student risk status over
students
students time
Teachers of
Student-Teacher Assesses the quality of
kindergarteners to— 15-items; Dutch and Greek versions
Relationship Scale Pianta (1991) individual student-teacher
3rd graders (3-12 years 28-items have been validated
(STRS) relationships
old)
Short screener that
Scoring guides are available
Survey of Wellbeing of Perrin & Sheldrick measures behavior,
0—5 year olds 15 minutes for individual scales within
Young Children (SWYC) (2014) development, and family risk
the SWYC
for young children

Vanderbilt ADHD Screener for symptoms of

43—55 2nd Edition (2011)
Diagnostic Rating Wolraich (1996) ADHD and other 6—12 years old
items available at-cost
Scales (VDRS) attention/mood problems

Note: These instruments appeared to be cost free to obtain at the time of our initial research for this project; however, that could
change so please check with the publisher or author to confirm.

16
 A Safe Environment for Every Kid-Parent
Questionnaire
(SEEK-PQ; Dubowitz et al., 2012)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Parent self-report questionnaire that screens for parental behavior, hardships, and other psychosocial
problems that could put their children at risk for maltreatment.

Target Population
Children ages 0-5 years old

Informants
Parent or Caregiver

Logistics/Use
Parents or caregivers fill out this form in the waiting room at their medical provider’s office before their
child’s scheduled check-up.

15-items

Sample Technical Properties

In a summary of the research on the instrument, Dubowitz, Feigelman, Lane, and Kim (2009, p. 860) state
that the instrument has “moderately good” sensitivity, selectivity, and predictive values.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
https://mmcp.dhmh.maryland.gov/epsdt/healthykids/Documents/Child%20Abuse%20Assessment%20(
Seek%20Questionnaire).pdf

Other
Available in English, Chinese, Spanish and Vietnamese

17
 Acceptance of Couple Violence
(Foshee, Fothergill & Stuart, 1992)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Brief assessment of attitudes towards, and acceptance of, dating violence.

Target Population
th th
Originally used for 8 -9 grade students, although has also been used with older adolescents.

Informants
Adolescents (self-report)

Logistics/Use
Three subscales are measured: (1) acceptance of male-to-female violence, (2) acceptance of female-to-
male violence, and (3) acceptance of general dating violence.

11-items

Sample Technical Properties

Internal consistencies have been reported to range from 0.71-0.74 for the original English version and 0.76
for the Spanish version (see Clarey, Hokoda, & Ulloa, 2010).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/sites/default/files/meas_attach/Acceptance_of_Couple_Vi
olence.pdf

Other
Spanish version is available (but not through this compendium).

18
 Brief Impairment Scale
(BIS; Bird, Canino, Davies, Ramirez, Chavez, Duarte &
Shen, 2005)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
The BIS is an instrument assessing three domains: interpersonal relations, school/work functioning, and
self-care/self-fulfillment.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents

Informants
Parent or caregiver

Logistics/Use
Clinicians conduct the interview with a parent or caregiver.

23-items
Completion Time: 3-5 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Bird, Canino, Davies, Ramirez, Chavez, Duarte, & Shen (2005) found high internal consistency for the total
scale (range = 0.81 to 0.88) although lower values emerged on the three subscales (range = 0.56 to 0.81).
Overall test-retest reliability was moderate (ICC = 0.70) but test-retest reliability on the individual items
ranged from slight agreement to substantial agreement. Convergent validity, concurrent validity, and face
validity were found to be good. Bird et al. concluded that the BIS, “…is psychometrically sound, useful in
assessments and as an outcome measure in clinical practice and research” (p. 699).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.heardalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Brief-Impairment-Scale-English.pdf

Other

19
 California School Climate and Safety Survey
(CSCSS; Furlong, Morrison, & Boles, 1991)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Student self-report assessment of school climate and safety issues.

Target Population
Students (Grades 6th-12th)
*10 years old at the youngest

Informants
Students (self-report)

Logistics/Use
CSCSS-SF (Short Form, 2005): 40-items

CSCSS-B (Brief Form, also known as CSCSS-PM for progress monitoring, 2013): 15-items
Brief/Progress Monitoring Form allows schools to gather data multiple times throughout the year in order
to monitor changes.

Sample Technical Properties

CSCSS-SF: Regarding internal consistency for the short form, alpha coefficients for the four subscales range
from 0.65—0.89 (see Furlong, 2012).

CSCSS-B/CSCSS-PM: Alpha coefficients for the brief/progress monitoring form have been found to range
from 0.61-0.82 for the four subscales (see Furlong, 2012). Regarding test-retest stability for this form, 7-
month stability coefficients range from 0.32—0.52 for the four scales (see Furlong, 2012).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
CSCSS-SF: http://www.michaelfurlong.info/CSCSS/cscss-sf-sample.pdf (Short Form)

CSCSS-B/CSCSS-PM: http://www.michaelfurlong.info/CSCSS/cscss-danger-climate-and.pdf
(Brief/Progress Monitoring Form)

Other

20
 Car, Relax, Alone, Forget, Friends, Trouble
(CRAFFT; Knight et al., 1999)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Tool used to screen children and adolescents for high risk of alcohol and other substance use disorders.

Target Population
Children under age 21 years old (Recommended for adolescents)

Informants
Clinician or Adolescent

Logistics/Use
Consists of three introductory questions and a series of six additional questions. If the adolescent answers
“No” to all three introductory questions, only ask the first of the additional six questions. If the adolescent
answers “Yes” to any of the introductory questions, ask all of the six additional questions.

Can be administered as a self-report survey or can be conducted as an interview by a clinician.

Sample Technical Properties

Knight, Sherritt, Shrier, Harris & Chang (2002) studied the validity of the CRAFFT among 534 adolescent
clinic patients. The researchers found acceptable sensitivity and specificity for identifying any disorder
(i.e., substance abuse or dependence) among all demographic groups. They also found acceptable internal
consistency.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.ceasar-boston.org/CRAFFT/pdf/CRAFFT_English.pdf (Clinician Interview Form)

http://www.ceasar-boston.org/CRAFFT/pdf/CRAFFT_SA_English.pdf (Adolescent Survey Form)

Other

21
 Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale for
Children
(CES-DC; Weissman, Orvaschel & Padian, 1980)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Brief self-report form to screen for symptoms of depression in children and adolescents.

Target Population
Children & Adolescents (ages 6-17 years old)

Informants
Youth

Logistics/Use
20-items
Completion time: 5 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Fendrich, Weissman, and Warner (1990) studied the CES-DC and found evidence of its reliability and
validity for identifying symptoms of depression, particularly in girls and children ages 12-18. However,
they also found it lacked diagnostic specificity, meaning that children with a variety of mental health
diagnoses were observed to score high on the scale. Based on their analyses, they also concluded that an
abbreviated scale using only 4 of the items may be a useful screener.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.brightfutures.org/mentalhealth/pdf/professionals/bridges/ces_dc.pdf

Other
Modified version of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES) designed to be
appropriate for use with children

22
 Child/Adolescent Psychiatry Screen
(CAPS; Bostic, 2004)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
The CAPS is designed to be used as a screening tool to determine if a child may be showing signs or risks of
a wide range of mental health issues. There are items examining symptoms related to anxiety, panic
disorder, phobias, obsessive-compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress, generalized anxiety disorder,
enuresis (bed-wetting)/encopresis (fecal soiling), tics, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder,
mania/bipolar disorder, depression, substance abuse/dependence, anorexia, bulimia, antisocial disorder,
oppositional defiant disorder, hallucinations/delusions, learning disability, and autistic spectrum.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 3-21 years old)

Informants
Parent

Logistics/Use
Items are rated as not occurring, mild, moderate, or severe over the past 6 months (the respondent can
also indicate if the behavior was problematic only prior to 6 months ago).

Any items that have clusters of “Moderate” or “Severe” should be discussed with a trained clinician.
Elevated scores suggest further diagnostic assessment may be needed, although symptoms of suicidal or
self-harm behaviors warrant immediate care.

85-items
Completion time: 15-20 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

No published data on the psychometrics of CAPS (Russell, Nair, Mammen & Shankar, 2012).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www2.massgeneral.org/schoolpsychiatry/ChildAdolescentPscychiatryScreenCAPS.pdf

Other

23
 Child and Youth Resilience Measure
(CYRM-28; Ungar & Liebenberg, 2011; 2013)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Self-report instrument that measures individual or global resilience in youth and adults across cultures.

Target Population
Children, adolescents, and adults (ages 5 years and older)

Informants
Self-report or someone who knows the participant well

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from Not at All (1) to A Lot (5). This measure can be hand
scored and interpreted without training. Higher scores suggest greater resilience factors.

CYRM-28: 28-items
Completion time: 15 minutes
Available in four versions: child (5-9 years); youth (10-23 years); adult (24years+); person most
knowledgeable (someone who knows the participant well)

CYRM-12: 12-items
Completion time: 10 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Liebenberg, Ungar and Van de Vijver (2012) report “the CYRM-28 as a reliable and valid self-report
instrument” (p. 219).

Liebenberg, Ungar and LeBlance (2013) concluded that “results show sufficient content validity of the
CYRM-12 to merit its use as a screener for resilience processes in the lives of adolescents” (p. 1).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.resilienceproject.org/research/resources/tools/33-the-child-and-youth-resilience-measure-
cyrm
Note: you must request the instrument from the authors using the web address above or by emailing
[email protected]

Other
Available in English, Spanish, Afrikaans, Albanian, Persian, Urdu, and Portuguese.

24
 Childhood Severity of Psychiatric Illness
(CSPI-3.1; Praed Foundation, 2002)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Tool to assess the needs of children experiencing a crisis and to inform intervention decisions regarding
risk behaviors, behavioral/emotional symptoms, functioning problems, juvenile justice status, child
protection, and caregiver needs/strengths.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents

Informants
Clinicians

Logistics/Use
Ratings should be based on the past 30 days.

Formal training is required prior to administration.

34-items

Sample Technical Properties

There is limited psychometric information available. However, Leon, Uziel-Miller, Lyons, and Tracy (1999)
found that inter-rater reliability for the CSPI during a 3-hour training on its use/implementation ranged
from .7 to .8 and remained .67 after the training.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
https://www.sasscares.org/CSPI3.1%20Manual%20Update%20June%202014%20Final.pdf

Other

25
 Childhood Trust Events Survey 2.0
(CTES; Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, 2006)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Screener for traumatic experiences in childhood or adolescence.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents

Informants
Children/Adolescents (child version) and Parent/Caregiver (caregiver version)

Logistics/Use
Short version: 26-items
Long version: 30-items

Items are answered in a yes/no format but there is space available to provide details about the adverse
experiences.

Sample Technical Properties

This tool is designed to capture historical information about adversities experienced, rather than serve as a
diagnostic tool (Holmes, Levy, Smith, Pinne & Neese, 2014). Therefore, no reliability or validity data could
be found.

Cost and Availability

Description available at: http://www.cincinnatichildrens.org/service/c/childhood-trust/events-survey/

Free and available at:

http://drjenna.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/trauma_events_survey_for.pdf (Child and Adolescent
Short Form--for those 8 years old and up). Also accessible by searching the Cincinnati Children’s website.

http://www.youthandfamilyservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/The-Childhood-Trust-Events-
Survey-A-Long-form.pdf (Child and Adolescent Long Form). Also available for download via Children’s.

http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/supplementary/1471-2431-13-208-S1.pdf (Parent/Caregiver
Short Form--for children under 8 years old)

Other
Available in English and Spanish.

26
 Children’s Eating Attitudes Test
(ChEAT; Maloney, McGuire, Daniels & Specker, 1989)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Brief assessment of eating and dieting attitudes among children and adolescents. Items assess
body/weight concern, dieting, food preoccupation, and oral control.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 8-14 years old)

Informants
Child/Adolescent (self-report)

Logistics/Use
Uses include screening for the need for further evaluation and assessing progress in during treatments.

26-items rated on a 6-point scale ranging from “Always” to “Never”

Sample Technical Properties

In a sample of 308 female middle school students, the instrument was found to have adequate internal
reliability (Smolak & Levine, 1994). Smolak & Levine (1994) concluded that “the ChEAT emerged as a
promising instrument for measuring disturbed eating attitudes and behaviors in middle school girls” (p.
275).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.1000livesplus.wales.nhs.uk/sitesplus/documents/1011/ChEAT.pdf

Other
Available in other languages (but not through this compendium).

27
 Children’s Impact of Event Scale 8
(CRIES-8; Children and War Foundation, 1998)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief self-report screening tool for symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder in children. This instrument
is based on the CRIES-13, but does not include 5 items from that instrument intended to measure arousal.

Target Population
Children aged 8 years and above who are able to read independently

Informants
Child

Logistics/Use
May be administered in groups.
8-items

Sample Technical Properties

Perrin, Meiser-Stedman & Smith (2005) found that in both clinic and emergency room samples, sensitivity
and specificity of the CRIES-8 were maximized at a cutoff score of 17, and 75-83% of the children across
the two samples could be accurately identified at that same cutoff score. Furthermore, their analyses
revealed that the CRIES-8, “…worked as efficiently as the CRIES-13…in correctly classifying children with
and without PTSD” (p. 487).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.childrenandwar.org/measures/children%E2%80%99s-revised-impact-of-event-scale-8-
%E2%80%93-cries-8/

Other
The CRIES is available in 24 additional languages at the above link.

A 13-item version of the CRIES exists in additional languages and in English and Dutch parent versions, but
the Foundation recommends use of the CRIES-8 as a screening tool.
http://www.childrenandwar.org/measures/children%E2%80%99s-revised-impact-of-event-scale-8-
%E2%80%93-cries-8/ies13/

28
 Classroom Climate Scale
(developed by Vessels, 1998; modified by the Multisite
Violence Prevention Project, 2004)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Self-report instrument that measures school climate through assessing peer and student-teacher
relationships, as well as awareness and reporting of violence in schools. It can also be used as a
comparison tool between different populations (e.g., classes, schools, etc.).

Target Population
Children and adolescents in 6th-8th grade (ages 11 to 14 years old) and teachers

Informants
Self-report

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale from Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (4). This measure can
be hand scored and no training is needed for scoring or interpretation.

18-items

Sample Technical Properties

Miller-Johnson, Sullivan, Simon, and the Multisite Violence Prevention Project (2004) report good internal
consistency, with a total score alpha coefficient of 0.77 for the student respondents and 0.85 for the
teacher respondents.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/sites/default/files/meas_attach/Classroom_Climate_Scale.
pdf

Other

29
 Columbia Impairment Scale
(CIS; Bird, Shaffer, Fisher & Gould, 1993)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
The CIS is an instrument designed to provide a global measure of impairment in children and adolescents
across four major areas of functioning: interpersonal relations, broad psychopathological domains,
functioning in one’s job or schoolwork, and use of leisure time.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents

Informants
Parent or Youth

Logistics/Use
13-items
Completion time: approximately 3 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Bird & Gould (1995, as cited in Essau, Muris, & Ederer, 2002, p.5) reported that the CIS has excellent
psychometric properties for children ages 9 to 17 years old.

Bird et al. (1996, as cited in Essau et al., 2002, p. 5) found high internal consistency and test-retest
reliability for the CIS, as well as reported that it correlated significantly with clinician’s ratings based on the
Children’s Global Assessment Scale.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.dhs.state.il.us/OneNetLibrary/27896/documents/By_Division/MentalHealth/Columbia/CIS
-Parent%20web%20system%20version%20w%20instructions_1.pdf (Parent Form)

http://www.dhs.state.il.us/OneNetLibrary/27896/documents/By_Division/MentalHealth/Columbia/CIS
-Y%20-youth%20web%20system%20version%20w%20instructions_1.pdf (Youth Form)

Other

30
 Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale
(C-SSRS; Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc.,
2008)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Brief rating scale that measures for signs of suicidality.

Target Population
Children, adolescents, and adults

Informants
Patient

Logistics/Use
Clinician conducts interview with patient, although no mental health training is required to administer it.

Sample Technical Properties

Posner et al. (2011) reported data from three multisite studies, revealing good convergent and divergent
validity as well as high sensitivity and specificity for suicidal behavior. The internal consistency of the scale
ranged from moderate to high. Overall, the authors concluded that the C-SSRS, “…is suitable for
assessment of suicidal ideation and behavior in clinical and research settings” (p. 1266).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.integration.samhsa.gov/clinical-practice/Columbia_Suicide_Severity_Rating_Scale.pdf

Other

31
 Community and Youth Collaborative Institute – School
Engagement Scale
(CAYCI-SES; Anderson-Butcher et al., 2013)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Four different scales (Elementary, Middle/High School, Parent/Caregiver, and Teachers/Staff) that indicate
the experiences and needs within the school building in order to improve the overall setting. The student
scales focus on academic and climate strengths/needs, whereas the staff scale focuses on their beliefs
about the student population’s needs, experiences, and families/communities. The parent scale gathers
information about school and community support of their student’s and family’s needs.

Target Population
Students (elementary, middle, or high) and teachers/school staff

Informants
Students, Parents, or Teachers/School Staff

Logistics/Use
Each specific survey is worded differently based on the informant (including a developmentally
appropriate option for elementary students), but all are in the form of Likert-based rating scales. The
measures can be hand-scored or can be assessed by the CAYCI for a small fee. The survey is in the public
domain and specific subscales/items can be selected or customized based on the school/community’s
needs. Directions for teachers to give student-informants are also included.

Elementary: 78-items; Middle/High: 92-items; Parent/Caregiver: 63-items; Teacher/School Staff: 106-items

Sample Technical Properties

Technical properties for each individual scale are provided at http://cayci.osu.edu/surveys/overview-and-
development/. Scales were developed through pilot programs and overall results support initial support
for the validity and reliability of each scale (Anderson-Butcher et al., 2013).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://cayci.osu.edu/surveys/overview-and-development/
The authors request that you email them for permission so they can track how the scales are used.

Other
These scales are also available in Spanish by email request.

The authors specifically recommend customizing these scales to the school’s needs and properties.
Therefore, the aforementioned number of items on each scale is considered an upper-limit and can be
significantly reduced or altered.

32
 COPE Inventory
(COPE, Carver, Scheier, & Weintraub, 1989; Brief COPE,
Carver, 1997)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Self-report instrument that indicates the coping strategies and styles of individuals.

Target Population
Adolescents and adults (ages 14 years and older)

Informants
Self-report

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale from Usually don’t do this at all (1) to I usually do this a lot (4).
This measure can be hand scored and no specific training is needed for scoring.

COPE: 60-items
Completion time: 15-20 minutes
Brief COPE: 28-items

Sample Technical Properties

Carver, Scheier, and Weintraub (1989) reported convergent and discriminant validity, test-retest reliability,
and sufficient Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for the COPE Inventory.

In a sample of 484 high school students, ages 14-18 years old, Phelps and Jarvis (1994) found high internal
consistency reliability, and concluded that the instrument, “…has sufficient reliability for use with an
adolescent population” (p. 368).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
COPE:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/sites/default/files/meas_attach/COPE_Inventory.pdf
Brief COPE:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/sites/default/files/meas_attach/Cope_Inventory_Brief.pdf

Other
Instrument may be translated to other languages. Spanish versions are available through this website:
http://www.psy.miami.edu/faculty/ccarver/sclCOPEF.html

33
 Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales
(DASS; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Self-report measure that assesses negative emotions associated with depression, anxiety and stress.

Target Population
Adolescents and adults (has also been used with caution in children ages 11 and up, but this is not
recommended)

Informants
Child, Adolescent or Adult (Self report)

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 4 point Likert scale ranging from Did not apply to me at all (0) to Applied to me very
much, or most of the time (3). Hand scored.

Long Form: 47-items

Short Form: 21-items

Interpretation requires training in psychology and assessment.

Sample Technical Properties

Antony, Bieling, Cox, Enns, & Swinson (1998) studied the DASS and DASS-21 psychometrics in clinical
groups and a non-clinical sample of adults. They found concurrent validity and internal consistency on
both measures ranged from acceptable to excellent, and the DASS distinguishes well between various
emotions associated with depression, anxiety, and stress.

Patrick, Dyck, and Bramston (2010) studied the use of the DASS-21 with children and adolescents and
found that rather than measuring three distinct constructs (i.e., depression, stress, and anxiety), the DASS-
21 measured a unidimensional construct of general distress. In other words, the scale did not distinguish
between anxiety, stress, and anxiety in their sample.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www2.psy.unsw.edu.au/groups/dass/down.htm

Other
Available in 39 different languages: Arabic, Bangla, Chinese, Danish, Dutch, English, Filipino, Finnish, French
(Canadian), German, Greek, Hebrew, Hindi, Hungarian, Icelandic, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Korean,
Malaysian, Norwegian, Persian, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Sinhala, Slovenian,
Spanish, Swedish, Taiwanese, Tamil, Thai, Turkish, Urdu, Vietnamese.

34
 Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale
(DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Self-report instrument for children, adolescents, and adults that measures levels of emotional
dysregulation. This measure contains six subscales: non-acceptance of emotional responses, difficulty
engaging in goal-directed behavior, impulse control difficulties, lack of emotional awareness, limited
access to emotion regulation strategies, and lack of emotional clarity.

Target Population
Children, adolescents, and adults (ages 11 years and older)

Informants
Self-report

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from Almost Never (1) to 5 (Almost Always). Can be hand-
scored and does not require any qualifications to interpret. Higher scores indicate increasing difficulty with
regulating emotions.

36-items

Sample Technical Properties

Gratz and Roemer (2004) report “high internal consistency, good test-retest reliability, and adequate
construct and predictive validity” (p. 41).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/sites/default/files/meas_attach/Difficulties_in_Emotion_Re
gulation_Scale_(DERS).pdf

Other
Available in Chinese, Dutch, English, German, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, and Turkish

35
 Disruptive Behavior Disorder Rating Scale
(DBD; Pelham, Evans, Gnagy, & Greenslade, 1992)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
DSM-IV based screening tool that identifies symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD),
conduct disorder (CD), and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) in children.

Target Population
Children

Informants
Parent or Teacher

Logistics/Use
45-items

Sample Technical Properties

Pelham, Gnagy, Greenslade, and Milich (1992) studied the functioning of the original DSM-III-R-based
version of the DBD in a sample of 364 boys (ages 5-19 years) attending special education classes.
Regarding internal consistency, coefficient alphas ranged from a low of .81 for the CD items to a high of .95
for the ADHD and ODD items. Notable overlap among the three disruptive behavior disorders was found.
Several key symptoms of ADHD were found to have poor positive predictive validity.

Additional psychometric data were found in the following poster presentation:

http://ccf.buffalo.edu/posters/Massetti_Situational%20_Variability_AABT2003.pdf

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://ccf.buffalo.edu/pdf/DBD_rating_scale.pdf

Other

36
 Early Childhood Screening Assessment
(ECSA; Gleason, Zeanah & Dickstein, 2006)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Instrument designed to screen for child emotional/behavioral development as well as maternal stress.

Target Population
Children age 18-60 months old

Informants
Parents or Child Care Provider

Logistics/Use
Answer the questions about your child as compared to other children of the same age.

There is one form for all age groups.

40-items
Completion time: 5-10 min

Sample Technical Properties

In a study of 309 mothers at two primary care clinics, Gleason, Zeanah & Dickstein (2010) found the
internal consistency of the ECSA was 0.91. Test-retest reliability at 10 days was excellent (Spearman’s rho =
0.81, p ≤ .01). Based on their research, Gleason et al. (2010) concluded that, “The ECSA…demonstrates
strong convergent validity, criterion validity, and test-retest reliability in the pediatric setting” (p.335).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.infantinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/ECSA-40-Child-Care1.pdf

Other
Available in English, Spanish and Romanian

37
 Early Screening Project
(ESP; Walker, Severson & Feil, 1995)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Screening tool for adjustment problems in preschoolers, specifically in the form of internalizing or
externalizing behaviors. Also screens for other possible problems, such as emotional and learning
disorders.

Target Population
Preschoolers (children ages 3-5 years old)

Informants
Stage 1 & 2: Teacher
Stage 3: Non-Teacher (Counselor, Psychologist, Special Consultant, or Others) Parent

Logistics/Use
Class-wide screening procedure. Consists of three stages:
Stage 1 & 2: total completion time for teacher rankings and ratings is about 1 hour
Stage 3: total completion time for observations is approximately 20 minutes (two 10 minute observations
of free play), along with a parent questionnaire

Stages 1 & 2 are required. Stage 3 should be conducted only if more screening seems to be needed.

Sample Technical Properties

Feil, Walker, and Severson (1995) concluded that the ESP, “…provides reliable, cost-effective, and accurate
screening of preschool-age children to facilitate early remediation of behavior problems” (p.194).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://esp.ori.org/materials.html
(Materials are free, but you must fill out an online form for the creators to send you them)

Other

38
 Early Warning System
(EWS; Heppen, O’Cummings, & Therriault, 2008)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
School-wide data collection and analysis tool that screens for students at risk of dropping out.

Target Population
Middle and High School Students (Grades 6th-12th)

Informants
School Administrators and Teachers

Logistics/Use
High School Tool: Enter data concerning absences, course failures, GPA, and credit attainment for each
student

Middle School Tool: Enter data concerning attendance, incoming indicators (locally determined/validated),
exam indicators, English course failure, mathematics course failure, and behavior for each student

Sample Technical Properties

Research in two suburban schools revealed that, with the exception of attendance data, the indicators
predicted drop-out in these settings (Johnson & Semmelroth, 2010). Of the individual indicators, GPA was
found to be the strongest predictor across both schools.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.earlywarningsystems.org/resources-tools/early-warning-system-high-school-tool (High
School Tool)

http://www.earlywarningsystems.org/resources-tools/early-warning-system-middle-grades-tool
(Middle School Tool)

Note: materials are free, but user must fill out an online form in order to download them

Other
Microsoft Excel-based tool

39
 General Self-Efficacy Scale
(GSE; Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Self-report instrument that assesses perceived self-efficacy in adults and adolescents.

Target Population
Adolescents and adults (ages 12 years and older)

Informants
Self-report

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale from Not at all true (1) to Exactly true (4). No training is required
to score and interpret.

GSE: 10-items
GSE-6: 6-items (Note: this compendium does not have access to this version)

Sample Technical Properties

In a summary of the research on GSE, Scholz, Doña, Sud & Schwarzer (2002) report that, across studies, the
GSE’s internal consistency has ranged from .75-.91, and stability over time has ranged from .47-.75.
Furthermore, Scholz et al. (2002) examined the GSE’s psychometrics in their own sample of 25 countries
and found that, “Internal consistencies, item-total correlations, factor loadings, and fit indices of the
confirmatory factor analysis indicate that the GSE scale is reliable, homogeneous, and unidimensional
across 25 nations” (p. 249).

Romppel et al. (2013) found the GSE-6 to be both reliable and valid. Cronbach’s alpha was between .79
and .88 while the instrument remained stable over 12 (r=.50) and 28 (r=.60) months.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
GSE: http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~health/engscal.htm

GSE-6: Items #2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 10 from the GSE

Other
Available in 30 additional languages: Arabic, Armenian, Bulgarian, Chinese, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Estonian,
French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hindi, Hungarian, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Norwegian,
Persian, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Slovakian, Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish, Turkish, and Urdu.
Translated versions are available here: http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/health/selfscal.htm

40
 Georgia Student Health Survey 2.0
(GSHS 2.0, La Salle & Meyers, 2014)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
School-wide survey that measures for indicators of positive or negative school climate, especially issues
related to student health and safety.

Target Population
Georgia Elementary School Climate Survey: 3rd-5th grade students

Georgia Student Health Survey 2.0: 6th-12th grade students

Informants
Student

Logistics/Use
Schools or districts administer the survey to all students.
In Georgia, the survey is administered each year between October and February.

Sample Technical Properties

No published peer-reviewed data were found.

Watson (n.d.) noted that validity check items are included in the survey.

The Georgia Department of Education (n.d.) reported that the GSHS was “developed by many divisions
within the [Georgia Department of Education]…in collaboration with the Georgia Department of Public
Health and Georgia State University.”

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Curriculum-and-Instruction/GSHS-
II/Documents/GSHS_Elementary.pdf (Georgia Elementary School Climate Survey)

http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Curriculum-and-Instruction/GSHS-
II/Documents/GSHS%202.0_GaDOE%20version.pdf (Georgia Student Health Survey 2.0)

Other
In Georgia, school climate data from this survey are used as a required part of their statewide
accountability system.

41
 Guidelines for Adolescent Prevention Survey
(GAPS; American Medical Association, 1997)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Rating scale developed to help healthcare providers identify adolescents who are at-risk for behavioral and
lifestyle concerns.

Target Population
Adolescents (ages 11-21 years old)

Informants
Parent and Adolescent

Logistics/Use
Both parents and adolescent should fill out the appropriate form separately and not share their answers
with each other.

Parent Form: 15-items

Younger Adolescent Form: 72-items
Middle-Older Adolescent Form: 61-items

Sample Technical Properties

Could not find any published data on the psychometrics of GAPS.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
https://www.lakeviewhealth.org/upload/docs/SMG%20Gaps%20Parent%2009.pdf (Parent Form)

http://www.uvpediatrics.com/Docs/GAPS11-14Eng.pdf (Younger Adolescent Form: Ages 11-14)

http://www.uvpediatrics.com/Docs/GAPS15-21Eng.pdf (Middle-Older Adolescent Form: Ages 15-21)

Other

42
 HEADS-ED
(Cappelli, Bragg, Cloutier, Doucet, Glennie, Gray, Jabbour,
Lyons & Zemek, 2011)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
A quick mental health screening tool originally designed to be used in Emergency Departments.

HEADS-ED stands for Home, Education, Activities/peers, Drugs/alcohol, Suicidality, Emotions/behaviors,

and Discharge resources.

Target Population
Adolescents

Informants
Patients (Adolescents)

Logistics/Use
HEADS-ED is an interview that should be conducted by the adolescent’s clinician.

7-items

There is a longer, in-depth version called HEEADSSS 3.0 (Klein, Goldenring & Adelman, 2014) that
clinician’s may also choose to use.

Sample Technical Properties

In a study of Emergency Room patients, Cappelli et al. (2012) found evidence of inter-rater reliability
(0.785, p < .001). In this study, the instrument was also found to correlate significantly with a depression
inventory and a comprehensive mental health inventory. Finally, the HEADS-ED also predicted psychiatric
consult and admission to inpatient psychiatry (sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 87%).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
HEADS-ED: http://www.heads-ed.com/en/headsed/HEADSED_Tool_p3751.html (online version) or
http://www.heads-ed.com/uploads/documents//HEADS_ED_Tool_CC_license_final.pdf (PDF)

HEEADSSS 3.0 Interview Manual for Clinicians:

http://contemporarypediatrics.modernmedicine.com/sites/default/files/images/ContemporaryPediatri
cs/cntped0114_Feature%201%20Hi-Res.pdf

Other

43
 Interpersonal Support Evaluation List
(ISEL; Cohen & Hoberman, 1983)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Self-report instrument that measures perceived levels of social support. Specific subscales include tangible
support, appraisal support, self-esteem support, and belonging support.

Target Population
Adolescents and adults

Informants
Self-report

Logistics/Use
These measures do not require training to score and interpret.

Three Versions: general population (40-items), college students (48-items), and brief version (12-items)
Scoring for the three versions can be found here: http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~scohen/ISELscore.html AND
http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~scohen/ISEL-Cscore.html AND
http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~scohen/ISEL12score.html

Sample Technical Properties

Cohen, Mermelstein, Kamarck, and Hoberman (1985) report that, "Adequate internal and test-retest
reliabilities have been found for both student and general population scales and subscales in several
samples.” (p. 78).

12-item: Merz et al. (2014) examined the psychometrics properties of the ISEL-12 in a large
Hispanic/Latino population. They found adequate internal consistency for both the English and Spanish
language versions for the total score but not the subscale scores. They also documented convergent
validity and concluded that the scale can be recommended for use with Hispanics/Latinos.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
General Population:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/sites/default/files/meas_attach/Interpersonal_Support_Ev
aluation_List_(ISEL).pdf
College Version: http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~scohen/ISEL-college.html
Brief Version: http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~scohen/ISEL12.html

Other
Available in 8 additional languages: European Spanish, Central & South American Spanish, Japanese,
Polish, Swedish, Danish, Dutch, and Greek.
Translations can be found here: http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~scohen/scales.html

44
 KINDL-Questionnaire
(KINDL; Ravens-Sieberer & Bullinger, 1998)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Instrument that measures child and adolescent quality of life through six domains: physical well-being,
emotional well-being, self-esteem, family, social contacts, and school.
This measure can be used as a screening tool.

Target Population
Children and adolescents (4 to 17 years old)

Informants
Children, Adolescents or Parents
*Younger children are interviewed, while older children and other informants complete self-reports

Logistics/Use
This measure can be hand scored and no training is needed for scoring or interpretation.

5 versions:
Completion time: 5-15 minutes
KiddyKINDL: Children ages 4-6 years old; 12-item interview
KiddyKINDL: Parents of 3-6 year olds; 46-items
KidKINDL: Children ages 7-13 years old; 24-items
Kid-KiddoKINDL: Parents of 7-17 year olds; 24-items
KiddoKINDL: Adolescents ages 14-17 years old; 24-items

Sample Technical Properties

Ravens-Sieberer and Bullinger (1998) report adequate internal consistency, with “all of the subscales
reach[ing] an alpha coefficient of over 0.75” (p. 403). They also report evidence of convergent validity
(Ravens-Sieberer and Bullinger, 1998).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.kindl.org/english/questionnaires/
KiddyKINDL (Children 4-6 years old)
KiddyKINDL (Parents of 3-6 year olds)
KidKINDL (Children 7-13 years old)
Kid-KiddoKINDL (Parents of 7-17 year olds)
KiddoKINDL (Adolescents ages 14-17 years old)

Other
There are disease specific modules available at: http://www.kindl.org/english/questionnaires/
Available in 27 different languages: Arabic, Chinese (Cantonese), Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French,
German, Greek (+ Manual), Iranian (Persian), Italian, Japanese, Korean, Nepalese, Norwegian, Polish,
Portuguese, Russian, Serbo-Croatian, Sinhala, Spanish, Spanish (Argentina), Spanish (Uruguay), Swedish,
Taiwanese, Turkish, and Vietnamese
Translated versions can be found at: http://www.kindl.org/english/language-versions/

45
 Kutcher Adolescent Depression Scale
(KADS-6 & KADS-11; Kutcher, 2006)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Brief self-report form that screens for signs and degree of adolescent depression.

Target Population
Adolescents (ages 12-17 years old)

Informants
Adolescent

Logistics/Use
Three different versions of the KADS exist: a 16-item, an 11-item, and a 6-item form.

16-item version available in paper format only (not available through this compendium).

11-item version is best for monitoring effects of treatment over time.

6-item version is a brief screen.

Sample Technical Properties

LeBlanc, Almudevar, Brooks, & Kutcher (2002) examined the KADS-6 in a sample of 7th-12th grade
students, finding that the KADS-6’s diagnostic accuracy was at least as good as the Beck Depression
Inventory and better than the full-length KADS. When using a cutoff score of 6, the KADS-6 had a
sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 71%. The authors concluded that the KADS-6 may, “...prove to be an
efficient and effective means of running out MDE (major depressive episodes) in adolescents” (p. 113).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.mdaap.org/Bi_Ped_KADS6.pdf (6-item)

http://teenmentalhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/CAPN_11Item_KADS.pdf (11-item: scroll

down to end of document to locate)

Other

46
 Mental Health Inventory
(MHI; Veit & Ware, 1983)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Self-report measure that assesses adolescent and adult mental health statuses over the past 30 days.
Identifies levels of anxiety, depression, behavioral/emotional control, general positive affect, and
emotional ties.

Target Population
Adolescents and adults (ages 13 years and older)

Informants
Self-report

Logistics/Use
Most items are scored on a 6-point Likert scale with anchors depending on the question. Items 9 and 28
use a 5-point Likert scale. This measure can be scored manually but should be interpreted by a mental
health clinician.

38-items

Sample Technical Properties

Veit and Ware (1983) report that the measure has strong internal consistency but questionable test-retest
reliability.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/sites/default/files/meas_attach/Mental_Health_Inventory_
(MHI).pdf

Other
Available in Arabic, Chinese, Croatian, English, Farsi, Filipino, Greek, Indonesian, Italian, Khmer, Samoan,
Serbian, Spanish, and Vietnamese.

47
 Mental Health Screening Tool
(MHST; California Institute for Mental Health, 2000)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
The MHST is an assessment used to quickly screen youth from birth to age 5 years old (MHST 0-5) and 5
years through adult (MHST) to determine whether a referral for a more complete mental health
assessment is appropriate and to prioritize how urgent a referral is.

Target Population
MHST 0-5: Children (ages 0-5 years old)
MHST: Children, Adolescents & Adults (ages 5 years and older)

Informants
It was intended to be used primarily by non-mental health professionals that are in frequent contact with a
child, although mental health professionals can also use it.

Logistics/Use
Items describe mental health risks and ask the informant to indicate “Yes,” “No,” or “Unknown” regarding
whether the child demonstrates that risk.

MHST 0-5: 4-items

MHST 5-Adult: 13-items

Sample Technical Properties

Limited investigation of psychometric properties is available. The California Institute for Mental Health
(n.d.) reported that six counties pre-tested the MHST and “…found that it can be completed quickly, is easy
to use and is helpful. They reported that it accurately identified children and youth meeting medical
necessity criteria who were in need of mental health services” (p. 1).

Sosna and Mastergeorge (2005) gave it a 0 out of 10 rating for psychometrics because no studies on
reliability or validity were reported.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.cibhs.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/screeningtool0-5_1.pdf (MHST 0-5)
http://www.cibhs.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/screeningtool5-adult_1.pdf (MHST 5-Adult)

Other
Although the MHST was originally developed to screen children being considered for out-of-home
placements, the California Institute of Mental Health (n.d.) said it can and has been used to identify need
for mental health referral in other populations.

48
 Modified Overt Aggression Scale
(MOAS; Kay, Wolkenfeld & Murrill, 1988)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Brief assessment of a patient’s aggressive behaviors in regards to four categories: verbal aggression,
aggression against property, auto aggression, and physical aggression.

Target Population
Typically used with psychiatric populations or individuals with intellectual disabilities or autism spectrum
disorders.

Informants
Clinician

Logistics/Use
Should be administered individually.

Informants should be some type of medical provider, but there are no specific qualifications required.

Sample Technical Properties

Kay, Wolkenfeld, & Murrill (1998) studied the psychometrics of the MOAS in a psychiatric population and
reported that the results supported the instrument’s discriminative validity, internal consistency,
interrater reliability, and retest reliability.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
https://depts.washington.edu/dbpeds/Screening%20Tools/Modified-Overt-Aggression-Scale-MOAS.pdf

Other

49
 Mood and Feelings Questionnaire
(MFQ & SMFQ; Angold & Costello, 1987)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Screening tool that measures for DSM-III-R depression criteria in children and adolescents based on
statements about their recent moods and actions.

Target Population
School-age children and adolescents

Informants
Child or Parent

Logistics/Use
Four versions are available for child/adolescent populations: child self-report and parent report on child,
each with a long and short version.
Short versions: 13-items
Long versions: 33-34 items

Sample Technical Properties

MFQ: In a study of the criterion validity of the MFQ child (MFQ-C) and MFQ parent (MFQ-P) long version,
Daviss et al. (2006) found that, particularly when used in combination, these scales are valid in identifying
major depressive episodes and other mood disorders in a population of demographically and clinically
diverse youth.
Short MFQ (SMFQ): Using a sample of sixth grade students attending public middle schools, Rhew et al.
(2010) studied the criterion validity of the SMFQ. They found that the combined child and parent score
showed the highest diagnostic accuracy (AUC=0.86); accuracy for the child only (AUC = 0.73) and parent
only (AUC = 0.74) scales were found to be lower (Rhew et al., 2010).
Using a sample of 7-11 year olds, Sharp, Goodyer, and Croudace (2006) found evidence of good internal
consistency and a unidimensional continuum of depressive symptoms. They also found that, “…SMFQ
items discriminated well at the more severe end of the depressive latent trait” (Sharp, Goodyer &
Croudace, 2006, p. 379).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://devepi.duhs.duke.edu/instruments/MFQ%20Child%20Self-Report%20-%20Short.pdf (Child Self-
Report Form-Short)
http://devepi.duhs.duke.edu/instruments/MFQ%20%20Child%20Self-Report%20-%20Long.pdf (Child
Self-Report Form-Long)
http://devepi.duhs.duke.edu/instruments/MFQ%20Parent%20Report%20on%20Child%20-%20Short.pdf
(Parent Report on Child Form-Short)
http://devepi.duhs.duke.edu/instruments/MFQ%20%20Parent%20Report%20on%20Child%20-
%20Long.pdf (Parent Report on Child Form-Long)

Other
Additional information about the MFQ can be found here:
http://devepi.duhs.duke.edu/mfq.html

50
 Patient Health Questionnaire
(PHQ-9A; Johnson, 2003 & PHQ-2; Kroenke, Spitzer, &
Williams, 1999)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
A patient questionnaire that assesses for signs of adolescent depression. The PHQ-9A is a version of the
adult PHQ that was modified for adolescents, and is designed to assess and monitor symptoms of
depression. The PHQ-2 is the first two items of the PHQ, which can be used to screen for depression.

Target Population
Adolescents

Informants
Patient (Adolescent)

Logistics/Use
PHQ-2 uses the first two questions from PHQ-9 to screen for depression. If a patient screens positive with
the PHQ-2 (score of 3 or higher), they should then be assessed with the PHQ-9.

PHQ-9A: 9-items, 4 additional items

PHQ-2: 2-items

Patients respond to items by indicating how often over the past two weeks they have been bothered by
various problems. Patient should return completed form to clinician.

Sample Technical Properties

Richardson et al. (2010a) examined the technical properties of the PHQ-9A with 442 youth, ages 13-17, in a
health-care delivery setting. They found that a PHQ-9 cutoff score of 11 was, “…optimal for maximizing
sensitivity without loss of specificity [and] increasing PHQ-9 scores were correlated with increasing levels
of functional impairment” (p. 1117). The authors concluded that the PHQ-9 is an excellent choice for
providers wanting to implement depression screening in primary care settings.

In a similar study on the PHQ-2 with 499 adolescents, Richardson et al. (2010b) found an optimal cut-point
of 3 on the PHQ-2 and good sensitivity/specificity for detecting major depression, concluding that it is
“…promising as a first step for screening in adolescent primary care” (p. 1097).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.cqaimh.org/pdf/tool_phq9.pdf (PHQ-9A)
http://www.cqaimh.org/pdf/tool_phq2.pdf (PHQ-2)

Other
Translations are available in many languages

51
 Pediatric Symptom Checklist
(PSC-35; Jellinek & Murphy, 1988 & PSC-17; Gardner &
Kelleher, 1999)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Brief screening tool for mental health disorders in children and adolescents. Subscales include internalizing
problems, conduct problems, and attention problems.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 4-18 years old)

Informants
Parents/Caregivers or Youth (age 11 years and older)

Logistics/Use
PSC-35: 35-items
PSC-17:17-items
Completion time: 5-10 minutes
Information on scoring/cutoffs can be found here:
http://www.massgeneral.org/psychiatry/services/psc_scoring.aspx
Children with an elevated score in the PSC should be referred to a qualified health or mental health
professional for further evaluation

Sample Technical Properties

There are many studies that have examined the psychometric properties of the PSC-35 and PSC-17. As
summarized by Reed-Knight, Hayutin, Lewis, and Blount (2011) good validity and reliability of the scale has
been demonstrated across multiple pediatric outpatient populations.
Stoppelbein, Greening, Moll, Jordan, and Suozzi (2012) also summarized research on the PSC-17, reporting
a range of .67 to .89 for its internal consistency and a significant correlation with other instruments
assessing psychosocial impairment.

Additional information on the PSC technical properties can be found here:

http://www.massgeneral.org/psychiatry/services/psc_scoring.aspx

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.massgeneral.org/psychiatry/services/psc_forms.aspx. The above website includes the full
35-item and 17-item versions for both parent- and student-report.

Other
PSC-35: available in 19 languages
PSC-17: available in 4 languages

52
 Personal Wellbeing Index
(PWI-SC & PWI-PS, Cummins & Lau, 2005; PWI-A,
International Wellbeing Group, 2013)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Self-report measure that assesses well-being in 8 different areas, including religion/spirituality,
community-connectedness, future security, safety, standard of living, achieving in life, health, and
relationships.

Target Population
Children, adolescents, and adults

Informants
Self report

Logistics/Use
This measure can be administered either as a self-report or as an interview. Items are rated on an 11-point
Likert scale ranging from Completely Dissatisfied (0) to Completely Satisfied (10). Scores can be calculated
by hand. The interpretive manual is freely accessible.
This measure can be used as a full measure or can be broken down into the 8 domains.

PWI-A: Adult – 8-items (Satisfaction)

PWI-SC: School Children -7-items (Happiness)
PWI-PS: Preschool Children – 7-item

Sample Technical Properties

Using data from 351 Australian students ages 12-20, Tomyn and Cummins (2011) found that the PWI-SC is
a reliable and valid instrument for assessing adolescent wellbeing.

Psychometric data on the PWI-A is summarized in the manual for that instruments
(http://www.acqol.com.au/iwbg/wellbeing-index/index.php)

Minimal information could be found regarding the psychometrics of the PWI-PS.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
Information: http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/resource-hub/measure-profile?id=407
PWI-A: http://www.acqol.com.au/iwbg/wellbeing-index/pwi-a-english.pdf (Adult Form)
PWI-SC: http://www.acqol.com.au/iwbg/wellbeing-index/pwi-sc-english.pdf (School Children)

Other
A version for individuals with Intellectual Disabilities is also available.
Adult version available in French.
The PWI is part of a larger tool called the Australian Unity Wellbeing Index.

53
 Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers
(POSIT; Rahdert, 1991)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief tool used to screen for problems in adolescents and the potential need for services in 10 areas
including substance use/abuse, mental and physical health, family and peer relations, vocation, and special
education.

Target Population
Adolescents (ages 12-19 years old)

Informants
Any school, juvenile/family court, medical, psychiatric, alcohol/drug treatment personnel
No qualifications necessary.

Logistics/Use
139-items
Completion time: 20-25 minutes

10 “scales” or problem areas

Sample Technical Properties

According to Shrier, Harris, Kurland, & Knight (2003), the reliability and validity of the POSIT has been
examined in several adolescent populations (e.g., high school students, youths in drug treatment
programs, arrested youths). Shrier et al. (2003) state that, “The internal consistency reliability of the
Substance Use/Abuse Scale is generally very good to excellent, ranging from 0.77 to 0.93, and the 1-week
test-retest reliability in 1 study of well adolescent clinic patients was 0.77” (p. e700).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/html.cfm/index4439EN.html

Other
Available in English and Spanish.

54
 Profile of Mood States - Adolescent
(POMS-A; Terry, Lane, Lane, & Keohane, 1999)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Self-report instrument that assesses adolescents for distressed moods and indicates those individuals who
should seek a more extensive evaluation. There are six general mood states measured, including
confusion, anger, depression, vigor, tension and fatigue.

Target Population
Children and adolescents (ages 11-18 years old)

Informants
Youth

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from Not at all (0) to Extremely (4).

24-items

Sample Technical Properties

Terry, Lane, Lane, & Keohane (1999) report that the measure shows factorial and criterion validity, as well
as strong internal consistency.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/sites/default/files/meas_attach/Profile_of_Mood_States-
Adolescents_(POMS-A).pdf

Other

55
 Responses to Stress Questionnaire
(RSQ; Connor-Smith, Compas, Wadsworth, Thomsen, &
Saltzman, 2000)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Self-report measure that assesses how individuals cope with stress related to specified domains. The
measure has been adapted to assess how individuals cope with problems ranging from physical health to
violence and natural disasters.

Target Population
Children, adolescents, and adults (age 9 years and older)

Informants
Self-report

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from Not at all (1) to 4 (A lot). Can be hand-scored.
Scorers can score each subscale individually and yield a total score from the measure.

57-items

Sample Technical Properties

Connors-Smith, Compas, Wadsworth, Thomsen, and Saltzman (2000) report strong internal consistency
and adequate test-retest reliability. They also report evidence of discriminative and convergent validity, as
well as “some support for the construct and criterion validity” (p. 988).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://vkc.mc.vanderbilt.edu/stressandcoping/rsq/

Other
Certain versions are available in Spanish, and Chinese.

56
 Revised Children’s Anxiety and Depression Scale
(RCADS; Chorpita, Yim, Moffitt, Umemoto & Francis,
1998; 2003 for RCADS-P)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Parent and child questionnaire that assesses symptoms of anxiety and depression according to the DSM-IV
criteria. Subscales assess symptoms of separation anxiety, social phobia, generalized anxiety, panic
disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, and major depressive disorder.

Target Population
School aged children and adolescents form grades 3 to 12.

Informants
Parent/Caregiver (RCADS-P) or Child self-report

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 4 point Likert scale ranging from Never (0) to Always (3). Scores are converted to T-
scores and scoring programs are located online at: http://www.childfirst.ucla.edu/Resources.html

47-items. There is also a short version that is 25-items, as well as the Penn State Worry Questionnaire for
Children (PSWQ-C) that is 14-items.

Sample Technical Properties

Chorpita, Moffitt, & Gray (2005) report that the measure shows high internal consistency and that it has
convergent and discriminative validity.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.childfirst.ucla.edu/Resources.html

Other
Available in English, Spanish, Chinese, Danish, Dutch, French, Korean, Polish (male and female), and Urdu
for children. English, Spanish, Danish, Dutch, and Korean for parents.

57
 Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
(RSES; Rosenberg, 1965; 1989)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Adolescent and adult self-report instrument that measures self-esteem.

Target Population
Adolescents and adults (ages 12 years and older)

Informants
Self-report

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale from Strongly Agree (1) to Strongly Disagree (4). This measure
does not require training to score and interpret.

10-items

Sample Technical Properties

In a sample from 53 nations, Schmitt and Allik (2005) found that the “mean reliability across all nations
was substantial (alpha = .81)” (p. 629). They also reported evidence of construct and discriminant validity.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/stories/pdf/selfmeasures/Self_Measures_for_Self-
Esteem_ROSENBERG_SELF-ESTEEM.pdf

Other
The RSES has been translated into many languages. However, this compendium does not have access to
these versions. Please review the literature on RSES to find the scale you are looking for.

58
 Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders
(SCARED; Birmaher, Khetarpal, Cully, Brent & Mckenzie,
1995)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
DSM-IV based self-report screener for child anxiety related disorders, such as social/school phobias,
separation anxiety, and panic and general anxiety disorders.

Target Population
Children (ages 8-18 years old)

Informants
Child or Parent

Logistics/Use
41-items
Completion time: 10 minutes

For children between 8 and 11 years old, it is recommended to have an adult/clinician available to answer
questions.

Sample Technical Properties

In a study of 341 youths ages 9-18 , Birmaher et al. (1997) found that a 38-item SCARED had strong internal
consistency (α = .90) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.86) for the total score; they also found evidence of
discriminant validity.

Using a community sample of African American high school students, Boyd, Ginsburg, Lambert, Cooley &
Campbell (2003) found good but somewhat lower internal consistency (α = .89) and test-retest reliability
(r = 0.47) for the total score, and also found that the total score was positively correlated with other
measures of anxiety and inattention.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
https://depts.washington.edu/dbpeds/Screening%20Tools/ScaredChild-final.pdf (Child Form)

https://depts.washington.edu/dbpeds/Screening%20Tools/ScaredParent-final.pdf (Parent Form)

Other
There is also a 66-item SCARED-R (Muris, Merckelbach, Schmidt, & Mayer, 1999) that includes additional
scales with items related to specific phobias, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-traumatic stress
disorder.

59
 Adapted-SAD PERSONS
(Juhnke, 1996)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Scale used to screen for suicide risk in children/adolescents.

ADAPTED-SAD PERSONS stands for Sex, Age, Depression or affective disorder, Previous attempt, Ethanol-
drug abuse, Rational thinking loss, Social supports lacking, Organized plan, Negligent parenting, Significant
family stressors, Suicidal modeling by parents or siblings, School problems.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents

Informants
Clinician may gather information from the child/adolescent and/or other sources of information to answer
the items.

Logistics/Use
10-items (yes/no format)

Sample Technical Properties

No published data were found on the adapted (children/adolescent) version. A recent systematic review
on the regular SAD PERSONS concluded that, “Available literature is of limited quality and quantity.
Insufficient evidence exists to support SPS use in assessment or prediction of suicidal behavior” (Warden,
Spiwak, Sareen & Bolton, 2014, p. 313).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.cscwv.org/pdf/suicideassessment.pdf

Other
A score of 1-2 points suggests low risk, 3-5 points suggests moderate risk, and 7-10 points suggests high
risk.

60
 SNAP-IV-C Rating Scale
(Swanson et al., 2001)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Originating from the original SNAP (Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham) Questionnaire (1983), the SNAP-IV-C
Rating Scale is a revised version that uses DSM-IV criteria to screen for attention and other mental
disorders. The rating scale screens for signs of ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, obsessive-compulsive
disorder, conduct disorder, stereotypic movement disorder, Tourette’s, intermittent explosive disorder,
narcolepsy, major depressive episode, generalized anxiety disorder, dysthymic disorder, and manic
episode.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 6-18 years old)

Informants
Parent/Caregiver or Teacher

Logistics/Use
90-items
Completion time: 10 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Bussing et al. (2008) found acceptable internal consistency, item selection, and factor structure. Although
results of the study suggest caution when using the SNAP-IV as a diagnostic tool, the authors concluded
the instrument performed adequately as a screening measure.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
https://depts.washington.edu/dbpeds/Screening%20Tools/SNAP.pdf

Other
There are other versions of the SNAP-IV available (e.g., a shortened 26-item version).

61
 Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener
(SAEBRS; Kilgus, Chafouleas, Riley-Tillman & von der
Embse, 2013)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
A short instrument that screens students for signs of emotional or behavioral problems and risks.

Target Population
Grades K-12 (5-18 years old)

Informants
Teacher

Logistics/Use
This is a universal screener so it should be completed on each student in a classroom.

19-items: Total Behavior (19 items), Social Behavior (6 items), Academic Behavior (6 items), and Emotional
Behavior (7 items)
Can be completed in 1-3 minutes per student.

Sample Technical Properties

Preliminary results demonstrate evidence of reliability and validity (e.g., Kilgus, Chafouleas, & Riley-
Tillman, 2013). Sensitivity and specificity have also been found to be strong (Kilgus, Riley-Tillman,
Chafouleas, Christ, & Welsh, 2014).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://ebi.missouri.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/SAEBRS-Teacher-Rating-Scale-3.3.14.pdf
(Teacher Form)

Other
Scores can be classified as “at-risk” or “not at-risk.”

62
 Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
(SDQ; Goodman, 1997)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
The SDQ is a brief rating scale used to screen for internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and
prosocial behavior.

Target Population
Parent/Teacher Report: ages 2-16 years old
Self-Report: ages 11-16 years old

Informants
Parent, Teacher, or Youth depending on the form(s) used

Logistics/Use
There are teacher, parent, and adolescent forms available.

25-items

“Impact Supplements” and “Follow-up Questions” are also available from the link below. Impact
supplements are extended versions of the SDQ. Follow-up questions are to be used after an intervention
has taken place.

Sample Technical Properties

Goodman (2001, p. 1337) found that, “Reliability was generally satisfactory” as evidenced by internal
consistency (mean: .73), cross-informant correlation (mean: 0.34), and test-retest reliability after 4-6
months (mean: 0.62).

Goodman, Ford, Corbin, & Meltzer (2004) found that when used by multiple informants, the SDQ has a
specificity of 80% and a sensitivity of 85% in identifying individuals with psychiatric diagnoses.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
http://www.sdqinfo.com/py/sdqinfo/b3.py?language=Englishqz(USA)

Note: to download materials, please follow the link and select the form that matches the
child/adolescent’s age group and the informant (ex: P2-4 is the parent form for children ages 2-4 years old)

Other
Available in over 50 languages

63
 Student Risk Screening Scale
(SRSS; Drummond, 1994)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Screening tool for signs of antisocial and externalizing behavior in students. The SRSS is used class-wide;
that is, teachers screen every student in their classroom.

Target Population
Students

Informants
Teacher

Logistics/Use
Teachers rate every student in their class at the same time. Screening should ideally take place three times
a year (once in October, December and April/May).

7-items
Completion time: 10-15 minutes for classrooms of 25 students

A total score is derived, which places students into low, moderate, and high risk categories.

Sample Technical Properties

The SRSS has been shown to have excellent accuracy predicting externalizing and internalizing behavior
problems (Lane et al., 2009). Specificity and sensitivity are excellent for externalizing behavior, and
specificity is excellent for internalizing behaviors; however, sensitivity has been shown to be weaker for
internalizing behaviors (Lane et al., 2009). Lane, Bruhn, Eisner, & Kalberg (2010) found strong internal
consistency, test-retest stability, predictive validity, and social validity.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
https://miblsi.org/evaluation/student-assessments/student-risk-screening-scale

Other
In addition to its use as a screening tool, the SRSS can also be used as a tool for monitoring changes in
student risk status over time.

64
 Student-Teacher Relationship Scale
(STRS; Pianta, 1991)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Teacher self-report instrument that measures the relationship quality between the teacher and an
individual student through assessing three domains: conflict, closeness and dependency.

Target Population
Teachers of kindergarteners to 3rd graders (ages 3-12 years old)

Informants
Teacher (self-report)

Logistics/Use
Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from Definitely does not apply (1) to Definitely applies (5).
Training in psychometric instruments is needed for scoring and interpretation. School psychologists are the
intended scorers.
Scoring guides can be found here: http://curry.virginia.edu/about/directory/robert-c.-pianta/measures

STRS: 28-items
STRS-SF (Short Form): 15-items

Sample Technical Properties

Pianta and Nimetz (1991) reported that “the total scale as well as subscales based on the factor analysis all
had alpha reliabilities exceeding .60” (p. 379).

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
STRS: http://curry.virginia.edu/about/directory/robert-c.-pianta/measures
STRS-SF (Short Form): http://curry.virginia.edu/uploads/resourceLibrary/STRS-SF.doc

Other
Greek and Dutch versions have been validated.
*This compendium does not have access to these versions.

65
 Survey of Wellbeing of Young Children
(SWYC; Perrin & Sheldrick, 2014)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Short screener that measures behavior, development, and family risk for young children. The SWYC
includes brief questionnaires to assess the following domains: (1) developmental domain (items assess
developmental milestones and include autism screening), (2) social/emotional domain (includes two
behavior questionnaires titled Baby Pediatric Symptoms Checklist and Preschool Pediatric Symptoms
Checklist), and (3) family context (items assess family risk factors).

Target Population
Infants and children (ages 0-5 years old)

Informants
Parent

Logistics/Use
Completion time: approximately 15 minutes

There is a specific form for each age group.

Sample Technical Properties

Although we could not locate studies examining the psychometrics of the entire SWYC battery, there were
studies examining several of the components within the SWYC. For example, Sheldrick et al. (2013) found
that the Baby Pediatric Symptoms Checklist (BPSC) has adequate retest reliability and internal consistency
across subscales, except for the “irritability” subscale’s internal consistency in a replication sample. As
another example, Sheldrick et al. (2012) studied the Preschool Pediatric Symptoms Checklist (PPSC) and
discovered strong internal and retest reliability for the total score, also finding that the total score
sensitivity and specificity are comparable to a similar but longer screener. Finally, they found that the
PPSC total score identified children in the clinical range on a longer well-validated parent completed
instrument.

Cost and Availability

Free and available at:
https://sites.google.com/site/swycscreen/parts-of-the-swyc/milestones

Other
Scoring guides are available for individual scales within the SWYC.

66
 Vanderbilt ADHD Diagnostic Rating Scales
(VDRS; Wolraich, 1996)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
Rating scale for symptoms of ADHD, including inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity, as well as other
attention and mood problems, such as anxiety, depression, and oppositional defiant and conduct
disorders. Both parent and teacher rating scale forms are available.

Target Population
Children ages 6-12 years old

Informants
Parents or Teachers

Logistics/Use
Completed forms should be turned into a mental health professional.

Parent Form: 55-items

Teacher Form: 43-items

Sample Technical Properties

Using a sample of elementary and middle school-aged students, Bard, Wolraich, Neas, Doffing, and Beck
(2013) found that the parent rating scale coefficient alpha values ranged from .91-.94, test-retest reliability
was greater than .8 for all scale scores, sensitivity was .8, specificity was .75, positive predictive value was
.19, and negative predictive value was .98 for ADHD. Wolraich, Bard, Neas, Doffing, and Beck (2013) found
that the teacher rating scale had high convergent validity with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire,
KR20 coefficients ranged from .85-.94, sensitivity was .69, specificity was .84, positive predictive value was
.32, and the negative predictive value was .96. In both studies, the authors concluded these findings
supported the utility of the instruments.

Cost and Availability

Free and available (1st Edition) at:
http://www.nichq.org/childrens-health/adhd/resources/vanderbilt-assessment-scales
Note: The “Download Now” link includes both the Parent and Teacher forms, as well as Follow-Up forms
for each. Please choose the form that suits your purposes.

Other
2nd Edition (2011) is available at-cost from the AAP Bookstore as a toolkit (http://shop.aap.org/Caring-for-
Children-with-ADHD-A-Resource-Toolkit-for-Clinicians/) for $94.95 (as of 6/6/2016).

67
 AT-COST INSTRUMENTS
Comparison of Select At-Cost Screening and Evaluation Tools
Author/Ye Target Relative
Instrument Description Length Other
ar Population Cost*
Complete
assessment of
adaptive behavior in
Adaptive
terms of three Spanish and software
Behavior
Harrison & domains (social, versions available. Can
Assessment Birth—89 years 15—20 minutes $250.00
Oakland (2003) practical, and be found in OCALI
System-Second
conceptual) as well lending library.
Edition (ABAS-II)
as 10 DSM-IV-
specified adaptive
skills.
Ages & Stages
Assessment of
Questionnaire: Squires, Bricker,
possible social and 1 month—6 30 items; 10—15 Spanish versions
Social Emotional- & Twombly $275.00
emotional problems years minutes available.
Second Edition (2015)
in young children.
(ASQ:SE-2)
Comprehensive
assessment of
Battelle developmental Screener: 10—30
Screener: $250.45
Developmental milestones Birth—7 years, minutes Spanish and electronic
Newborg (2004) Complete:
Inventory-Second according to five 11 months Complete: 60— versions available.
$1,333.30
Edition (BDI-20) domains: motor, 90 minutes
cognitive, personal-
social,

68
 communication, and
adaptive ability.
Comprehensive
assessment of infant
and child
development that
Bayley Scales for
screens for possible Screener: 15 – 25
Infant Screener: $236.00
delays in five minutes Software versions
Development- Bayley (2005) 1—42 months Complete:
domains: adaptive Complete: 30— available.
Third Edition $1,050.00
behavior, social- 90 minutes
(Bayley-III)
emotional,
language, cognitive,
and motor
development.
A collection of five
rating scales in
which teachers,
Behavior
parents, and youth
Assessment Spanish, web-based,
Reynolds & assess the youth’s 105—175 items;
System for 2—25 years $321.00-$614.00 and software-based
Kamphaus (2015) behavioral and 10—30 minutes
Children-Third versions available.
emotional patterns
Edition (BASC-3)
for signs of adaptive
and problem
behaviors.
A set of six
assessments that
measures the
Behavior Rating Brown & Hammill problem behaviors
6—18 years 20 minutes $244.00 -
Profile (BRP-2) (1990) of children and
adolescents in
different
environments.

69
 Author/Ye Target Relative
Instrument Description Length Other
ar Population Cost*
Behavioral and
A comprehensive
Emotional Spanish and software
screening system Preschool: $170.00
Screening System Kamphaus & Preschool—12th 25—30 items; 5— versions available. Can
designed to assess Child/Adolescent:
for Children-Third Reynolds (2015) Grade 10 minutes be found in the OCALI
behavioral and $198.00
Edition (BASC-3 lending library.
emotional issues.
BESS)
Brief progress
assessment of child
functioning and
response to
Brief Problem intervention in 18—19 items; 1—
Achenbach (2011) 6—18 years $230.00 -
Monitor (BPM) terms of four scales: 2 minutes
attention,
internalizing,
externalizing, and
total problems.
Brief questionnaire
that screens for
Brief Screen for
Screening for signs of depression Part of the SOS High
Adolescent
Mental Health, in adolescents and 14—18 years 7 items $50.00 School Suicide
Depression
Inc. (2009) identifies those in Prevention Program.
(BSAD)
need of additional
evaluation.
Assessment of
Short: 18 items; 4
psychological issues Spanish, French, web-
minutes
Brief Symptom used in clinical Short: $48.00 based, and software-
Derogatis (1993) 13+ years Complete: 53
Inventory (BSI) settings to inform Complete: $69.50 based versions
items; 8—10
staff during patient available.
minutes
intake.

70
 Assessment that
measures
development of
infants and children
Brigance
Curriculum through five
Inventory of Early Can be found in the
Associates, LLC domains: physical, Birth—7 years 30-60 minutes $349.00
Development III OCALI lending library.
(2013) language, literacy,
(IED-III)
math/science, daily
living, and social-
emotional
development.
Rating scale and
short-answer
questionnaire that
assesses preschool Often used in
children for five Report Forms: combination with the
Caregiver-Teacher
problems domains: $30.00 Child Behavior
Report Form (C- Achenbach (2000) 1½—5 years 99 items
attention Hand-scoring Checklist (CBCL).
TRF)
deficit/hyperactivity, profile: $30.00 Computer-based
autism spectrum, version available.
anxiety, depressive,
and oppositional
defiant problems.
Assessment tool
that screens for
Checklists: $30.00
Child Behavior possible behavior
Achenbach (2000) 1½—18 years 113+ items Hand-scoring -
Checklist (CBCL) and emotional
profile: $30.00
problems in children
and adolescents.
DSM-IV criteria-
Children’s based interview that
Interview for Weller, Weller, assesses children Discounted prices
Children and
Psychiatric Fristad, & Rooney and adolescents for - $89.00 available for APA
Adolescents
Syndromes (1999) potential mental members.
(ChIPS) health & behavioral
problems/disorders.

71
 Author/Ye Target Relative
Instrument Description Length Other
ar Population Cost*
Comprehensive
Short version: 41-
Conners Parent assessment of ADHD
45 items; 10
Teacher Rating and other comorbid Spanish and
minutes
Scale—Third Conners (2008) disorders, such as 6—18 years $279.00 computer-based
Full-length
Edition (Conners conduct and versions available.
version: 110-115
3) oppositional defiant
items; 20 minutes
disorders.
Ongoing
assessments that
measure social and
Devereux Early
emotional Spanish and web-
Childhood LeBuffe & Naglieri 1 month—5
development, 33—62 items $125.95--$209.95 based versions
Assessment (1999) years
screen for risks, and available.
(DECA)
provide strategies
for promoting
resilience.
Ongoing behavior
Devereux Student rating scales that
Strengths LeBuffe, Shapiro, assess social and Kindergarten— 32—72 items Web-based versions
$110-$120
Assessment & Naglieri (2009) emotional 8th grade Mini: 8-items available.
(DESSA) competencies in
school age children.
A behavior rating
Eyberg Child
scale made up of
Behavior
two combined
Inventory &
instruments that Spanish versions
Sutter-Eyberg Eyberg (1999) 2—16 years 10 minutes $220.00
screens for possible available.
Student Behavior
conduct problems in
Inventory-Revised
children and
(ECBI & SESBI-R)
adolescents.

72
 Six-phase procedure
Infant-Toddler Provence,
that assesses risk of
Developmental Erikson, Vater, Spanish version
developmental Birth—3 years Varies $559.00
Assessment (IDA- Pruett, Rosinia, & available.
problems in infants
2) Palmeri (2016)
and young children.
Instrument that
assess social-
emotional
development and
behaviors in young
Infant-Toddler ITSEA: 166 items;
children through
Social Emotional Carter & Briggs- 25—30 minutes Spanish versions
four domains: 1—3 years $122.00-$286.00
Assessment Gowan (2006) BITSEA: 42 items; available.
externalizing
(ITSEA & BITSEA) 7—10 minutes
behavior,
internalizing
behavior,
dysregulation, and
competence.
Comprehensive LAP-D Screens: 16
screening and items; 12—15
Learning assessment of child minutes
Accomplishment CHTOP, Inc. (1972 development that is Early LAP, LAP-3, Spanish and software
Birth—6 years $349.95--$799.95
Profile System & 1975) used to inform & LAP-D: 226— versions available.
(LAP System) future learning 414 items each;
activities and 60—90 minutes
interventions. each
Assessment of
emotional and
behavioral concerns
Manifestation of
often used with 124 items; 15— Computer-based
Symptomatology Mogge (1999) 11—18 years $118.00
adolescents in the 20 minutes versions available.
Scale (MOSS)
juvenile justice
system as an intake
tool.

73
 Author/Ye Target Relative
Instrument Description Length Other
ar Population Cost*
Available in Arabic,
Massachusetts Brief inventory that Catalan, Dutch,
Youth in the
Youth Screening screens for potential French, German,
Grisso & Barnum Juvenile Justice 52 items; 10—15
Instrument— mental health $125.00 Italian, Portuguese,
(2000) System; 12—17 minutes
Version 2 (MAYSI- problems in juvenile Russian, and Spanish,
years
2) adolescents. as well as in software
format.
A brief assessment
of parental concerns
Parents’ about a child’s
Online versions
Evaluation of potential for
Glascoe (1998) 6—10 items; 2 PEDS: $42.00 available. Can be
Developmental developmental, Birth—8 years
minutes PEDS-DM: $299.00 located in the OCALI
Status (PEDS & behavioral or
lending library.
PEDS-DM) mental health
problems or
disabilities.
Brief rating scale
Preschool and
that assesses
Kindergarten
problems with 76 items; 12 Spanish versions
Behavior Scales— Merrell (2003) 3—6 years $133.00
behavior or social minutes available.
Second Edition
skills in young
(PKBS-2)
children.
Available in Spanish.
Preschool A screening
Modified from the
Behavior instrument for
Behar (1974) 3—6 years 30 items $35.00 Children’s Behavior
Questionnaire emotional problems
Questionnaire (Rutter,
(PBQ) in preschoolers.
1967).
Brief patient intake
Problem Behavior
form that helps Adolescents and
Inventory Silverton (1991) 10—15 minutes $52.50 -
guide diagnostic Adults
Symptom
interviews.

74
 Screening Form
(PBI)

Patient intake form

that helps guide the
Problem
clinical interview by
Experiences
gathering
Checklist— Silverton (1991) Adolescents 10—15 minutes $35.50 -
information on the
Adolescent
difficulties that the
Version
patient is currently
struggling with.
Behavioral checklist
Questions About that examines
Matson & Spanish and Turkish
Behavioral functions of 9+ years 25 items $275.00
Vollmer, 1995 available.
Function (QABF) maladaptive
behavior.
Brief assessment
that measures
resiliency in children
Resiliency Scales
and adolescents
for Children and Prince-Embury 60—72 items; 15
through the profiling 9—18 years $125.75 -
Adolescents (2006) minutes
of personal
(RSCA)
attributes—
including strengths
and vulnerabilities.
Assessment of Danish, Japanese, and
School Motivation learning strategies, Romanian as well as
and Learning academic software versions
Stroud & 147—170 items;
Strategies motivation, and 8—18 years $295.00 available. Can be
Reynolds (2006) 20—30 minutes
Inventory study habits through located in the OCALI
(SMALSI) the measurement of lending library.
10 related areas.

75
 Author/Ye Target Relative
Instrument Description Length Other
ar Population Cost*
Two brief rating
scales that assess
School Social
the social-emotional
Behavior Scales—
development— User’s Guide:
Second Edition Merrell (2008)
including strengths Kindergarten— 128 items; 20 $49.95 for each Spanish versions
and Home & Merrell &
and risk behaviors— 12th grade minutes Rating Forms: available.
Community Social Caldarella (2008)
of children and $39.95
Behavior Scales
adolescents in the
(SSBS-2 & HCSBS)
school and home
contexts.
Brief strengths-
based assessment of
the social-emotional
development of
Social Emotional
children and Spanish versions and
Assets & 12—41 items; 20
Merrell (2011) adolescents in terms 5—18 years $318.00 computer-based
Resilience Scales minutes
of four domains: scoring available.
(SEARS)
self-regulation,
empathy,
responsibility, and
social competence.
Comprehensive
assessment or
optional screening
Social-Emotional instrument that uses 15 items
Dimension Hutton & Roberts a behavior rating (screener);
6—18 years $178.00 -
Scale—Second (2004) scale to identify 74 items (full);
Edition (SEDS-2) children and 15-30 minutes
adolescents at-risk
for problem
behaviors, as well as

76
 determine eligibility
for special
education.

Comprehensive
assessment of child Spanish versions and
Social Skills
and adolescent software-based
Improvement Gresham & Elliott
social skills, 3—18 years 10—25 minutes $365.15 scoring available. Can
System Rating (2008)
academic be located in the
Scales (SSIS)
competence, and OCALI lending library.
problem behaviors.
Clinical assessment
of psychological
Symptom problems and
Software-based and
Checklist-90- symptoms of 90 items; 12—15
Derogatis (1994) 13+ years $127.75 Spanish versions
Revised (SCL-90- psychopathology at minutes
available.
R) patient intake and
during patient
treatment.
School-based
universal screening
of students at risk $550.00 per school
Systematic
for externalizing and for a 12 month
Screening for
Walker & internalizing Kindergarten— subscription; Part of the SIMS
Behavior 1 hour
Severson (2014) behavior problems 9th grade Kit: $225.00 system.
Disorders—2nd
and identification of Screening Packet:
Edition (SSBD)
students in need of $10.00
tier 2 and 3
supports.
Brief assessment of
Vineland Social- social-emotional Software-based
Emotional Early Sparrow, Balla, & development in Birth—5 years, versions available. Can
15—25 minutes $108.00
Childhood Scales Cicchetti (1998) infants and children 11 months be located in the
(Vineland SEEC) using three scales: OCALI lending library.
interpersonal

77
 relationships,
play/leisure time,
and coping skills.

Spanish and software-

Assessment of
based versions
problem behaviors Self-Report pack:
available. The YSR is a
Youth Self-Report in terms of $30.00
Achenbach (2001) 11—18 years 112+ items parallel form to the
(YSR) internalizing and Hand-Scoring
Child Behavior
externalizing Profile: $30.00
Checklist and Teacher
behavior.
Report Form.
*Note: The relative cost of an instrument is an approximate cost obtained in the summer of 2016. Costs will vary by supplier, time, and ordering option.

78
 Adaptive Behavior Assessment System®-Second Edition
(ABAS-II; Harrison & Oakland, 2003)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Complete assessment of adaptive behavior in terms of three composite domains (social, practical, and
conceptual) and 10 adaptive skill areas (e.g., communication, functional academics, leisure, self-care).

Target Population
Infants, Children, Adolescents, and Adults (birth to 89 years)

Informants
Parents, Teachers/Day Care Workers, or Adults (can be self-report)

Logistics/Use
There are five forms used for different age groups and raters: (1) Parent Form: birth to 5 years old, (2)
Parent Form: 5 to 21 years old, (3) Teacher/Day Care Form: 2 to 5 years old, (4) Teacher Form: 5 to 21
years old, and (5) Adult Form: 16 to 89 years old
Completion time: 15-20 minutes per form
Items are responded to on a 4-point Likert-type scale, and standard scores are provided for the overall
General Adaptive Composite (GAC) as well as the three composite domains and 10 skill area domains.
*Pearson Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

Rust and Wallace (2004) report that reliability studies conducted during standardization revealed high
internal consistency and test-retest reliability (with most coefficients at or above 0.90). Factor analysis
results also support the structure of the instrument, and intercorrelational data (between the GAC,
domains, and skills) support the instrument’s construct validity (Rust & Wallace, 2004).

Based on their assessment review, Richardson and Burns (2005) concluded that, “The GAC is adequately
reliable to make eligibility and entitlement decisions, and domain scores are stable enough for clinical and
intervention utility. Skill area scores should be interpreted cautiously” (p. 34).

Cost and Availability

ABAS-II Examination Kit: $250.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/psychology/products/100000449/adaptive-behavior-assessment-
system-second-edition-abas-second-edition.html#tab-pricing

Other
Spanish and software versions available.
Note: As of June 2016, this instrument is available from the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
(OCALI) lending library:
http://library.ocali.org/4DACTION/web_Gen_2002_ShowWebDetails/002847/Lang=En/BookBag=T7G7L
S610PA2D1666

79
Ages & Stages Questionnaire: Social Emotional™--Second
Edition
(ASQ:SE-2; Squires, Bricker, & Twombly, 2015)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Assessment of possible social and emotional problems in young children, including difficulties with self-
regulation, communication, affect, interpersonal interaction, compliance, autonomy, and adaptive
behaviors.

Target Population
Infants and Children (1 month-6 year olds)

Informants
Parent or guardian

Logistics/Use
There are nine different age-appropriate questionnaires. These include questionnaires for infants and
children that are 2, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60 months old.

Approximately 30-items per questionnaire.

Completion time: 10-15 minutes
Scoring time: 1-3 minutes

Must be scored by a professional (i.e. educators, pediatricians, child specialists, etc.).

Sample Technical Properties

According to the publisher (Brookes Publishing Co., Inc., n.d.-a), the ASQ:SE-2 has been studied with over
14,000 diverse children and has been found to have test-retest reliability of 89%, internal consistency of
84%, and validity of 83%. The publisher also reports overall sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 83%, with
variation depending on age (Brookes Publishing Co., Inc., n.d.-b).

Cost and Availability

Starter Kit: $275.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at http://products.brookespublishing.com/ASQSE2-English-
Starter-Kit-P852.aspx

Other
Available in Spanish
Other ordering options available.

80
 Battelle Developmental Inventory™—Second Edition
(BDI-2; Newborg, 2004)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Comprehensive assessment of developmental milestones according to five domains: motor, cognitive,
personal-social, communication, and adaptive ability.

Target Population
Infants and Children (age 0 to 7 years, 11 months)

Informants
Infant & Youth (observation and play-based activities)
Parent, teacher, or caregiver (interview component)

Logistics/Use
Completion time:
Complete BDI-2: 60-90 minutes
Screening Test: 10-30 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Complete BDI-2: Newborg (2004) reported that reliabilities for the BDI-2 meet or exceed traditional
standards for excellence at the subdomain, domain and full test composite levels.” Full validity and
reliability information on the BDI-2 can be found in the Examiner's Manual.

Screening test: In a sample of 104 young children (ages 7-83 months), the Battelle Developmental
Inventory Screening Test (BDIST) showed moderate sensitivity and specificity (Glascoe & Byrne, 1993). The
overall specificity was slightly below the typically desired rate of 90%, but almost three fourths of children
with normal development were correctly identified by this test. Sensitivity was most questionable below
age 2, exemplary specificity was observed with children aged 2 to 4, and poor specificity was observed in
children age 4 or older, for which a more stringent cut off of 2.0 standard deviations is recommended
(Glascoe & Byrne, 1993). Practitioners may also need to be aware of the potential “birthday effects” as a
result of children with recent birthdays (<1 month) being compared to superior older children. With these
potential cautions in mind, this test appears “helpful in early detection” and the “high levels of sensitivity
in the receptive language subtest suggest that it could be used alone for routine prescreening” (Glascoe &
Byrne, 1993, p. 279).

Cost and Availability

BDI-2 Complete Kit with Manipulatives: $1,333.30 as of 6/6/2016
BDI-2 Screening Kit: $250.45 as of 6/6/2016
Both available at http://www.riversidepublishing.com/products/bdi2/pricing.html

Other
Available in Spanish and electronic versions. Other ordering options available.

81
 Bayley Scales for Infant Development®—Third Edition
(Bayley-III; Bayley, 2005)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Comprehensive assessment of infant and child development that screens for possible delays in five
domains: adaptive behavior, social-emotional, language, cognitive, and motor development.

Target Population
Infants and Children (ages 1 to 42 months old)

Informants
Youth & Parents

Logistics/Use
Completion time:
Complete Bayley-III: 30-90 minutes, depending on the age of the child
Bayley-III Screening Test – 15 – 25 minutes
Assessment includes both child interaction and parental questionnaires. Screening Kit includes select items
from full Bayley-III battery.
*Must be a trained professional to administer, score, and interpret this assessment (Pearson Qualification
Level C for complete and Level B for screening test—see website for details)

Sample Technical Properties

In a sample of 48 children, Connolly, McClune, & Gatlin (2012) found evidence of concurrent validity for
the Bayley-III. Furthermore, in a review of the psychometric evidence for the Bayley-III, Albers and Grieve
(2007) concluded that, “…all of the psychometric properties meet minimal criteria, with the majority of
scores being strong” (p. 188).

Cost and Availability

Bayley-III Complete Kit: $1,050.00 as of 6/6/2016
Bayley-III Screening Test Kit: $236.00 as of 6/6/2016
Both available at: http://www.pearsonclinical.com/childhood/products/100000123/bayley-scales-of-
infant-and-toddler-development-third-edition-bayley-iii.html

Other
Available in software format. Other ordering options available.

82
Behavior Assessment System for Children—Third Edition
(BASC-3; Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2015)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
A comprehensive set of rating scales in which teachers, parents, and youth assess the youth’s behavioral
and emotional patterns for signs of adaptive and problem behaviors.

Target Population
TRS and PRS: children, adolescents, and young adults (ages 2-21:11 years old)
SRP: children, adolescents, and young adults (ages 6 through college age)

Informants
Youth (self-report), Parents, and Teachers

Logistics/Use
Includes: Teacher Rating Scales (TRS), Parent Rating Scales (PRS), Self-Report of Personality (SRP), Student
Observation System (SOS), and Structured Developmental History (SDH)
TRS: Completion time: 10-20 minutes; 105-165 items
PRS: Completion time: 10-20 minutes; 139-175 items
SRP: Completion time: approximately 30 minutes
*Pearson Qualification Level B required to purchase—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

BASC-3 norms are based on a large, representative sample based on characteristics of the current U.S.
Census population and also include norms based on sex, as well as ADHD and General Clinical norms, all
presented by age level (Reynolds, 2015). Items were selected using SEM analyses in English and Spanish,
and results indicate acceptable reliability of primary scales:
TRS Reliabilities (α): P = .86, C = .89, A = .90
PRS Reliabilities (α): P = .84, C = .86, A = .89
SRP Reliabilities (α): C = .81, A = .84, College = .85
Additional validity and reliability information is provided in the BASC-3 manual.

Cost and Availability

A wide variety of purchasing options exist for the BASC-3, including the BASC-3 Q-global Comprehensive
Kit ($321.00), the Starter Kit with 1-year Q-global Online scoring subscription ($582.00), and the
BASC-3 Hand Scored Starter Set ($614.00). All prices are updated as of 6/6/2016, and these and other
options are available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/education/products/100001402/behavior-assessment-system-for-
children-third-edition-basc-3.html#tab-pricing

Other
Available in Spanish (child and adolescent forms only). Other administration options (e.g., web-based,
software-based) and ordering options available.

83
 Behavior Rating Profile
(BRP-2; Brown & Hammill, 1990)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
A set of six assessments that uses parent, teacher, and self-reports to measure the problem behaviors of
children and adolescents in different environments (i.e., school, home, and interpersonal relationships) to
screen for possible behavioral, personal, emotional, or social adjustment issues.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 6-18)

Informants
Student, Parent, & Teacher

Logistics/Use
Completion time: 20 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

The test publisher reports that internal consistency reliability of the BRP-2 components has been generally
found to exceed .80 (ProEd, n.d.). In a review of the instrument, Allen (1995) reported that the BRP-2 is
norm-referenced using large samples, has adequate internal consistency, and has adequate test-retest
reliability for the teacher and parent forms in grades 3-12 and for the teacher form in grades 1-2. Overall,
Allen (1995) concluded that the BRP-2 is easy and inexpensive, yet criticized the negative item wording and
failure to operationally define terms.

Cost and Availability

Complete Kit: $244.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at
http://www.proedinc.com/customer/ProductView.aspx?ID=1678

Other
Other ordering options available.

84
 BASC™-3 Behavioral and Emotional Screening System
(BASC-3 BESS; Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2015)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
A comprehensive universal screening system designed to assess behavioral and emotional strengths and
weaknesses, such as externalizing behavior, adaptive ability, and school difficulties.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (preschool-12th grade)

Informants
Youth (self-report; 8-18:11), Parent, and/or Teacher (3-18:11)

Logistics/Use
Teacher form (two levels): Preschool (age 3-5) and Child/Adolescent (K-12)
Parent form (two levels): Preschool (age 3-5) and Child/Adolescent (K-12)
Student self-report form: Child/Adolescent (Grades 3-12)
Each form: 25-30 items; 5-10 minutes, no formal training for raters
*Pearson Qualification Level B required for purchase—see website for details.

Sample Technical Properties

Normed on a representative sample that matches U.S. Census population characteristics, in conjunction
with the development of the BASC-3 (Kamphaus, 2015). Data on the previous version of the BESS indicated
that the TRS-P had high internal consistency and inter-rater reliability, as well as high predictive and
concurrent validity estimates in expected directions (Greer, DiStefano, Liu, & Cain, 2015). A factor analysis
of the BASC-2 BESS (previous version) found “the internal consistency estimates for each [parent form]
subscale are: Externalizing Problems, α = .84; Internalizing Problems, α = .82; Adaptive Skills, α = .90; and
Inattention, α = .78” (Dowdy, Chin, Twyford, & Dever, 2011, p.276). More information may be available in
the BESS manual.

Cost and Availability

BASC-3 BESS Preschool Kit with Unlimited Use Scoring: $170.00 as of 6/6/2016
BASC-3 BESS Child/Adolescent Kit with Unlimited Use Scoring: $198.00 as of 6/6/2016, both available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/education/products/100001482/basc3-behavioral-and-emotional-
screening-system--basc-3-bess.html

Other
Available in Spanish and software versions. Other ordering options available.

85
 Brief Problem Monitor™
(BPM; Achenbach, 2011)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief progress assessment of child functioning and response to intervention in terms of four scales:
attention, internalizing, externalizing, and total problems.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 6—18 years)

Informants
BPM-P: Parents
BPM-T: Teacher
BPM-Y: 11—18 year old youths

Logistics/Use
All relevant informants complete the BPM. All versions may be self-administered or administered by
interview. Scores are entered into BPM software program for each rating period. Rater comments can be
stored into the software.
18—19 items; 1—2 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Test-retest reliabilities were found to range from r= .81 to r= .85 for the four scales on the parent version,
from r= .86 to r= .93 for the four scales on the teacher version, and from r= .77 to r= .88 for the four scales
on the youth version (Achenbach, McConaughy, Ivanova, & Rescorla, 2011). Internal consistencies, as
measured by Chronbach’s alpha, were found to range from .80 to .92 for the four scales on the parent
version, from .80 to .90 for the four scales on the teacher version, and from .74 to .86 for the four scales
on the youth version (Achenbach et al., 2011). Cross-informant correlations ranged from r= .18
(correlation between teachers and youth on the Internalizing scale) to r= .42 (correlation between parents
and youth on the Total and Externalizing scales; Achenbach et al., 2011). As evidence of criterion-related
validity, all scale scores were found to be significantly higher in a sample of children referred for mental
health services than demographically comparable non-referred children (Achenbach et al., 2011).

Cost and Availability

BPM Starter Kit: $230.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at: http://store.aseba.org/BPM-Starter-
Kit/productinfo/133/

Other
Other ordering options available.
The BPM has parallel items to the CBCL, TRF, and YSR that allow users to link initial assessments to BPM
scores.

86
 Brief Screen for Adolescent Depression
(BSAD; Screening for Mental Health, Inc., 2009)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief questionnaire that screens for signs of depression in adolescents and identifies those in need of
additional evaluation.

Target Population
Adolescents (high school age – 14-18 years old)

Informants
Adolescent (self-report) and Parents

Logistics/Use
7-items

Sample Technical Properties

We were unable to locate psychometric data on the BSAD.

Cost and Availability

100-pack Student Screening Form: $50.00 as of 6/6/16, available at:
http://shop.mentalhealthscreening.org/products/brief-screening-for-adolescent-depression-bsad-
student-screening-form-100-pack

100-pack Parent Screening Form: $50.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:

http://shop.mentalhealthscreening.org/products/brief-screening-for-adolescent-depression-bsad-
parent-screening-form-100-pack

Other
The BSAD is a part of the SOS High School Suicide® Prevention Program.

87
 Brief Symptom Inventory®
(BSI; Derogatis, 1993)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Assessment of psychological issues used in clinical settings to inform staff during patient intake. Symptom
scales measure anxiety, depression, hostility, interpersonal sensitivity, obsessive-compulsiveness, paranoid
ideation, phobic anxiety, psychoticism, and somatization. Short form (published in 2001) includes
somatization, depression, and anxiety symptom scales and a Global Severity Index.

Target Population
Adolescents & Adults (age 13+ years for complete and 18+ years for short form)

Informants
Patient

Logistics/Use
Short: 18-items; Completion time: 4 minutes
Complete: 53-items; Completion time: 8-10 minutes
*Pearson Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

In a sample of 501 psychiatric patients, Boulet and Boss (1991) found “limited convergent validity and a
poor discriminant validity for the instrument” and concluded that “the BSI may hold some promise as a
general indicator of psychopathology but further research is need to justify its use as a clinical psychiatric
screening tool” (p. 433).

Cost and Availability

BSI Q-global Web-based Interpretive Report Starter Kit: $69.50 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/psychology/products/100000450/brief-symptom-inventory-bsi.html
Short form: BSI-18 Q-global Profile Report Starter Kit: $48.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/psychology/products/100000638/brief-symptom-inventory-18-
bsi18.html#tab-pricing

Other
Available in Spanish and French. Administration and scoring options include: Q-global Web-based, Q Local
Original version of the BSI was developed in 1975 by Derogatis.
Software-based, manual scoring, and mail-in scoring. Other ordering options are available.

88
 Brigance® Inventory of Early Development III
(IED-III; Curriculum Associates, LLC, 2013)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Assessment that measures development of infants and children through six domains: physical, language,
literacy, math/science, daily living, and social-emotional development.

Target Population
Infants and Children (birth-7 years)
*Note: IED III – birth through developmental age 7; IED III Standardized – birth through chronological age 7

Informants
Teacher

Logistics/Use
Two different forms:
IED III (criterion-referenced) and IED III Standardized (norm-referenced)
Administration time varies (depending on age and selected areas), but averages 30-60 minutes for full
battery (Curriculum Associates, 2013).

Sample Technical Properties

IED III: not included on website
IED III Standardized: http://www.curriculumassociates.com/lp/brigance-ied-iii-
infographic.aspx#.VR1Lc_nF-So (for more information see the instrument’s Standardization and Validation
Manual)

Cost and Availability

IED III: Classroom Kit: $349.00 as of 6/6/2016
IED III Standardized: Standardized Kit: $349.00 as of 6/6/2016
Both available at http://www.curriculumassociates.com/products/detail.aspx?Title=BrigSE-IED3-
sum#ordernow

Other
Other ordering options available.
Note: As of June 2016, this instrument is available from the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
(OCALI) lending library:
http://library.ocali.org/4DACTION/web_Gen_2002_ShowWebDetails/003246/Lang=En/BookBag=T7G5N
71105602B331

89
 Caregiver-Teacher Report Form©
(C-TRF; Achenbach, 2000)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Rating scale and short-answer questionnaire that assesses preschool children across five problem domains
(i.e. Affective Problems, Anxiety Problems, Pervasive Developmental Problems, Attention
Deficit/Hyperactivity Problems, and Oppositional Defiant Problems) and 6 syndromes (i.e. Emotionally
Reactive, Anxious/Depressed, Somatic Complaints, Withdrawn, Attention Problems, and Aggressive
Behavior).

Target Population
Preschoolers (ages 1½-5 years old)

Informants
Caregiver or Teacher

Logistics/Use
99-items (and some descriptions)

Sample Technical Properties

In a sample of 1,050 German children (3-6 years old), Denner and Schmeck (2005) found the internal
consistencies for the C-TRF ranged from .58 to .94.

Ivanova and colleagues (2011) examined whether C-TRF ratings of a broad range of emotional, behavioral,
and social problems in 14 different societies were consistent with ratings in the United States, essentially
determining whether this model is generalizable across different ethnic and cultural groups. Their results
indicated that the C-TRF findings generally were consistent with the U.S. sample and support the use of
the C-TRF with diverse backgrounds, as the C-TRF syndromes generally capture patterns of problem
behaviors, though their results include potential model-differences to consider depending on the society
being examined (Ivanova et al., 2011, p. 99). Further, initial studies demonstrate adequate technical data.
Specifically, test-retest reliability was found to be .84, and inter-rater reliability was found to be .66
(Achenbach, 1997).

Cost and Availability

Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (50 pack): $30.00 as of 6/6/2016
C-TRF Hand-Scoring Profile (50 pack): $30.00 as of 6/6/2016,
Both available at:
http://store.aseba.org/Caregiver-Teacher-Report-Form-l-5/products/23/2/0

Other
Often used in combination with the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). Also available as a computer version.
Other ordering options available.

90
 Child Behavior Checklist©
(CBCL; Achenbach, 2000)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Assessment tool that screens for possible behavior and emotional problems in children and adolescents
across 6 problem domains (i.e. attention deficit/hyperactivity, anxiety problems, somatic problems,
affective problems, conduct problems, and oppositional defiant problems) and 8 syndromes (i.e.
anxious/depressed, depressed, somatic complaints, social problems, thought problems, attention
problems, rule-breaking behavior, and aggressive behavior).

Target Population
CBCL/1½-5: Preschoolers (ages 1½-5 years old)
CBCL/6-18: Children and adolescents (ages 6-18 years old)

Informants
Parents

Logistics/Use
CBCL/1½-5: over 100 items (and some short-answer descriptions)
CBCL/6-18: 7 sections, over 113 items (and some short-answer descriptions)

Sample Technical Properties

In a clinical sample of 673 children, Nakamura, Ebesutani, Bernstein, and Chorpita (2009) found, “strong
evidence for the reliability, as well as convergent and discriminative validity, of these scales” (p. 178).

Cost and Availability

Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 1½-5 (50 pack) : $30.00 as of 6/6/2016
CBCL/1½-5 Hand-Scoring Profile (50 pack): $30.00 as of 6/6/2016, both available at:
http://store.aseba.org/Child-Behavior-Checklist-l-5/products/22/2/0
Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 6-18 (50 pack) : $30.00 as of 6/6/2016
CBCL/6-18 Hand-Scoring Profile (for Boys or Girls) (50 pack): $30.00 as of 6/6/2016, both available at:
http://store.aseba.org/Child-Behavior-Checklist-6-18/products/19/2/0

Other
Other formats and ordering options available.

91
 Children’s Interview for Psychiatric Syndromes
(P-ChIPS or ChIPS; Weller, Weller, Fristad, & Rooney,
1999)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
DSM-IV criteria-based interview that assesses children and adolescents for potential mental health and
behavioral problems and disorders, including: stress and anxiety disorders, mood disorders, eating
disorders, phobias, substance abuse, conduct disorder, schizophrenia, elimination disorders, attention-
deficit/hyperactivity disorder and others.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 6-18)

Informants
Child/Adolescent or Parent

Logistics/Use
Interview with clinician or parent-report versions.
ChIPS: child/adolescent interview
P-ChIPS: parent-report on child

Sample Technical Properties

In an analysis of five different studies on ChIPS and P-ChIPS, overall sensitivity was 0.66 for ChIPS and 0.93
for P-ChIPS. The overall specificity for ChIPS was 0.88 and 0.78 for P-ChIPS. The overall positive predictive
value and negative predictive value for ChIPS were 0.36 and 0.96, in contrast to 0.44 and 0.96 for P-ChIPS
(Weller, Weller, Fristad, Rooney, & Schecter, 2000, p. 82).

Cost and Availability

$89.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at https://www.appi.org/chips-
childrens_interview_for_psychiatric_syndromes

Other
Discounted prices available for APA members. Other ordering options available.

92
 Conners Parent Teacher Rating Scale—Third Edition™
(Conners 3; Conners, 2008)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Comprehensive assessment of ADHD and other comorbid disorders, such as conduct and oppositional
defiant disorders.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 6-18 years old)

Informants
Youth (self-report), Parent, or Teachers

Logistics/Use
3 versions (youth, parent, teacher) with full length and shortened versions
Youth self-report age requirement: 8 years or older
Full length: 110-115 items; 20 minutes
Shortened version: 41-45 items; 10 minutes
Content scales: Inattention, Hyperactivity/Impulsivity, Learning Problems/Executive Functioning,
Aggression, Peer Relations, and Family Relations
DSM-IV-TR symptom scales: ADHD Inattentive, ADHD Hyperactive-Impulsive, ADHD Combined, Conduct
Disorder, and Oppositional Defiant Disorder

*Pearson Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

Kao and Thomas (2010) summarized the Conners-3 technical properties in their review of the instrument.
They reported internal consistency values that ranged from a Chronbach’s alpha of .85 to .94 for the
parent, youth, and teacher versions on the Content and Symptoms scales (Kao & Thomas, 2010). Test-
retest correlation coefficients were also reported to range from .85 to .94, and moderate to strong levels
of inter-rater reliability have also been documented (Kao & Thomas, 2010). Tests of discriminative validity
have revealed that the Conners-3 accurately discriminates between clinical and non-clinical populations,
and scale scores were correlated with scores from similar scales in other measures of child
psychopathology (Kao & Thomas, 2010).

Cost and Availability

Conners 3 Short Form User’s Kit: $279.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/psychology/products/100000523/conners-3rd-edition-conners-
3.html#tab-pricing

Other
Available in software, online, hand-scored (manual), and Spanish forms. Other ordering options available.

93
 Devereux Early Childhood Assessment©
(DECA-I/T, DECA-P2 & DECA-C; LeBuffe & Naglieri, 1999)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Ongoing assessments that measure social and emotional development, screen for risks, and provide
strategies for promoting resilience.

Target Population
DECA-Infant/Toddler: 1-36 months
DECA-Preschool 2nd Edition: 3-5 years
DECA-Clinical: 2-5 year olds with social and emotional problems or behavioral concerns

Informants
Parents or Teachers

Logistics/Use
DECA-Infant/Toddler: 33-36 items
DECA-Preschool 2nd Edition: 38 items
DECA-Clinical: 62 items; 15 minutes

*Professional training needed to score and interpret results.

Sample Technical Properties

Jaberg, Dixon, & Weis (2009) found evidence indicating adequate psychometric data in the DECA including
internal consistency (.71 to .95) and parent-teacher interrater reliability (.20 to .38) consistent with DECA
developer data in a middle-class sample. Lien & Carson (2009) also found that in a Head Start sample,
internal consistencies were comparable (.71 to .91). Lastly, Crane et al. (2011) found that both English and
Spanish forms of the DECA were reliable in a sample of impoverished, ethnically diverse students.

Cost and Availability

DECA-I/T Kit: $199.95 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
https://www.kaplanco.com/store/trans/productDetailForm.asp?CatID=17|EA1000|0&PID=16139
DECA-P2: $209.95 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
https://www.kaplanco.com/store/trans/productDetailForm.asp?CatID=17|EA1000|0&PID=29026
DECA-C Kit: $125.95 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
https://www.kaplanco.com/product/98817/devereux-early-childhood-assessment-deca-c-clinical-
kit?c=17%7CEA1000

Other
DECA-Infant/Toddler: Spanish and web-based versions available
DECA-Preschool 2nd Edition: Spanish and web-based versions available
DECA-Clinical: web-based version available
Other ordering options available

94
 Devereux Student Strengths Assessment©
(DESSA & DESSA-Mini; LeBuffe, Shapiro, & Naglieri, 2009)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Ongoing behavior rating scales that assess social and emotional competencies in school age children.

Target Population
Children and adolescents (kindergarten-8th grade)

Informants
Parents, Teachers, or School/Child-Serving Staff

Logistics/Use
DESSA: 72 items
DESSA-Mini: 4 forms—8 items each

Sample Technical Properties

Nickerson & Fishman (2009) assessed validity of the DESSA in a sample of 227 raters and found evidence
for convergent and divergent validity in DESSA composite and subscale scores with other
standardized, psychometrically sound instruments measuring similar constructs (BASC-2; BERS-2)
and also found acceptable consistency among raters (parents and teachers). Naglieri, LeBuffe, &
Shapiro (2011) found that the DESSA-mini also had excellent reliability and validity when
compared to the DESSA and “is a viable tool for universal screening of social-emotional
competencies related to resilience” (p. 660).

Cost and Availability

DESSA Kit: $120 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://appersonsel.azurewebsites.net/product/dessa-assessment-kit/
DESSA-Mini Kit: $110 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://appersonsel.azurewebsites.net/product/dessa-mini-assessment-kit/

Other
Web-based versions and other ordering options available.

95
 Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory™ & Sutter-Eyberg
Student Behavior Inventory-Revised™
(ECBI & SESBI-R; Eyberg, 1999)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
A behavior rating scale made up of two combined instruments that screens for possible conduct problems
in children and adolescents.

Target Population
Children and adolescents (ages 2-16 years old)

Informants
ECBI: Parents
SESBI-R: Teacher

Logistics/Use
Completion time: 10 minutes (5 minutes to administer, 5 minutes to score)
Suitable for telephone or group administration.
*Par Inc. Qualification Level B required—see website for details.

Sample Technical Properties

Robinson, Eyberg, and Ross (1980) found high internal consistency and one-week test-retest stability on
the ECBI. Boggs, Eyberg, and Reynolds (1990) found concurrent validity of the ECBI with the Child Behavior
Checklist (CBCL), and Aragona and Eyberg (1981) found discriminant validity on the ECBI between
neglectful and behavior problem reports as compared to a control group, including observations. Eyberg
and Robinson (1983) found evidence indicating reliability and validity for use of the scale with adolescents,
including internal consistency coefficients of .98 for both Intensity and Problem Scores as well as high split-
half correlations (r > .90) for each. Finally, in a sample of 32 children, test-retest reliability was also found
to be .75 (Funderburk et al., 2003).

In a study of 123 children (ages 3-6 years old; 74 nonreferred, 49 referred), Querido and Eyberg (2003)
found that the SESBI-R “demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency, test-retest stability, and inter-
teacher agreement,” as well as “evidence of convergent, discriminant, incremental, and discriminative
validity” (p. 1).

Cost and Availability

Introductory Kit: $220.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www4.parinc.com/products/Product.aspx?ProductID=ECBI#

Other
Also available in Spanish. Other ordering options available.

96
 Infant-Toddler Developmental Assessment-2™
(IDA-2; Provence, Erikson, Vater, Pruett, Rosinia, &
Palmeri, 2016)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Six-phase procedure that assesses risk of developmental problems in infants and young children.
Development is measured through eight areas: gross motor, fine motor, relationship to inanimate objects,
language/communication, self-help, relationships to persons, emotions and feeling states, and coping
behavior. These eight areas create the criterion-referenced Provence Birth-to-Three Developmental
Profile.

Target Population
Infants and Children (birth-3 years old)

Informants
Parents & Primary Care Providers

Logistics/Use
Administration time varies.
Includes six phases: (1) referral & pre-interview data gathering, (2) initial parent interview, (3) health
review, (4) developmental observation and assessment, (5) integration and synthesis, and (6) share
findings, completion, and report.
*Tool must be administered and interpreted by a trained professional.

Sample Technical Properties

The authors (Provence et al., 2016) report that the reliability coefficients for the Provence Profile domain
scores are >.90 for ages 1 to 18 months and >.78 for 19 to 20 months. Inter-rater reliabilities range from
.91 to .95 for seven domains and .81 for the other domain. No outside reviews of the IDA-2 are available at
this time, but additional psychometric data may be available in the Administration Manual.

Cost and Availability

IDA-2 Complete Kit with Manipulatives and Carrying Case: $559.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at
http://www.proedinc.com/customer/productView.aspx?ID=7885

Other
Also available in Spanish. Other ordering options available.

97
 Infant-Toddler Social Emotional Assessment™
(ITSEA & BITSEA; Carter & Briggs-Gowan, 2006)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Instrument that assess social-emotional development and behaviors in young children through four
domains: externalizing behavior, internalizing behavior, dysregulation, and competence.

Target Population
Children (ages 12-36 months old)

Informants
Parents

Logistics/Use
ITSEA Completion Time: 25-30 minutes; 166-items
*Pearson Qualification Level C required—see website for details
(Brief) BITSEA Completion Time: 7-10 minutes; 42-items
*Pearson Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

ITSEA: In a sample of 93 families, test-retest coefficients for the domains after 44 days were between 0.82
and 0.90, whereas coefficients for the scales ranged from 0.69 to 0.85 (Carter, Briggs-Gowan, Jones, &
Little, 2003). The study also concluded that “associations between the ITSEA and independent evaluator
ratings and parental ratings…support the validity of the instrument” (Carter et al., 2003, p. 495).

BITSEA: In a study of 144 infants from low-income Hispanic families, Hungerford, Garcia, and Bagner
(2015) found evidence of discriminative and predictive validity for the BITSEA. They also found that
reliability for the problem scale was good (0.85), but that the reliability for the competence scale was low
(0.57).

Cost and Availability

ITSEA & BITSEA Combo Kit: $286.00 as of 6/6/2016
ITSEA Kit: $192.00 as of 6/6/2016
Both available at: http://www.pearsonclinical.com/childhood/products/100000652/infant-toddler-
social-emotional-assessment-itsea.html
BITSEA Kit: $122.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/childhood/products/100000150/brief-infant-toddler-social-emotional-
assessment-bitsea.html

Other
Also available in Spanish. Other ordering options available.

98
 Learning Accomplishment Profile System™
(LAP System; CHTOP, Inc., 1972, 1975, 1992, & 2005)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Comprehensive screening and assessment of child development that is used to inform future learning
activities and interventions. Measured domains vary depending on which specific version of the LAP
System that is being used (i.e. Early, LAP-3, LAP-D, LAP-D Screens), but all forms include cognitive,
language, fine motor, and gross motor domains, with the LAP-3 and early-LAP also adding self-help and
personal/social domains.

Target Population
Early LAP: birth-36 months
LAP-3: 36-72 months
LAP-D: 30-72 months
LAP-D Screens: 3-5 years

Informants
Child (observation)

Logistics/Use
Early LAP: 414 items; 60—90 minutes
LAP-3: 383 items; 90 minutes
LAP-D: 226 items; 60—90 minutes; diagnostic assessment
LAP-D Screens: 16 items; 12—15 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Barnett, Faust, and Sarmir (1988) initially found evidence for convergent validity among the LAP-D and
other similar scales, but did not find simultaneous discriminant validity. Thus, the authors recommend that
this scale may be best used as an indicator of general development, but may lead to unstable practice
decisions. Peisner-Feinberg and Hardin (2003) found that the Early LAP showed high internal consistency
for total sample (.96 to .99) and for individual age groups (.84 - .98) as well as test-retest reliability (.96 to
.99) and interrater reliability (.96 to .99). The publishers also reference a 2005 study examining the validity
and reliability of the LAP-D, a 2003 study of the LAP-3, and validity and reliability of the LAP-D Screens.
These reports are available in the technical manual but not accessible online, though the publisher website
summarizes these results as having good reliability and validity characteristics.

Cost and Availability

Early LAP Kit: $349.95 as of 6/6/2016
LAP-3 Kit: $474.95 as of 6/6/2016
LAP-D 3rd Edition: $799.95 as of 6/6/2016
LAP-D Screen Kits: $349.95 as of 6/6/2016
All available from https://www.kaplanco.com/shop/assessment-and-evaluation/learning-
accomplishment-profile-lap

Other
Early LAP, LAP-3, LAP-D: Software version available.
LAP-D Screens: Spanish and computer software versions available.

99
 Manifestation of Symptomatology Scale™
(MOSS; Mogge, 1999)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Assessment of emotional and behavioral concerns, designed specifically for adolescents who may lack the
reading or attention skills typically required for such assessments. Often used with adolescents in the
juvenile justice system as an intake tool. Assessment includes summary indexes of Affective State, Home,
and Acting Out. It also includes the following content areas: sexual abuse, alcohol/drugs, suspiciousness,
thought process, self-esteem, depression, anxiety, mother, father, home environment, impulsivity, school,
and compliance.

Target Population
Adolescents (ages 11-18 years old)

Informants
Youth (self-report)

Logistics/Use
124 true/false items
Completion time: 15-20 minutes
*WPS Qualification Level C required—see the WPS Qualification Guidelines at
http://www.wpspublish.com/store/Qualification_Guidelines%20V3.pdf for more information.

Sample Technical Properties

Sullivan, Moyer, and Gonzalez (2011) found that results from a sample of individuals (N=172) in a juvenile
justice alternative education program were generally comparable to MOSS manual data, but suggest that
reliability must be evaluated within the context of each sample and with other sources of information. The
authors suggest that the Content scales should not be used for screening or any important decisions in
these settings as they lack adequate internal consistency, but the Summary indexes appear to be adequate
for screening purposes or important decisions when identifying students in need of services (p. 7).

Cost and Availability

MOSS Kit: $118.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2868/manifestation-of-symptomatology-scale-moss#purchase-
product

Other
Available in software and manual forms. Other ordering options available.

100
 Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument – Version 2
(MAYSI-2; Grisso & Barnum, 2000)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief inventory that screens for potential mental health problems in juvenile adolescents.

Target Population
Youth in juvenile justice systems (ages 12-17 years old)

Informants
Youth (self-report)

Logistics/Use
52-items; Yes/No response options;
Completion time: 10-15 minutes
Scoring time: 3 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

In a sample of 704 juvenile adolescents, Archer, Strendy, Mason, and Arnau (2004) documented alpha
coefficients ranging from .65 on Traumatic Experiences to .87 on Alcohol/Drug Use and on Somatic
Complaints, as well as test-retest correlations ranging from .60 on Suicide Ideation to .82 on Thought.
According to the researchers, “These results show that these scales have the potential ability to effectively
discriminate between youths who have a life history relevant to the measurement issues. However, no
significant results were found for the Traumatic Experiences scale in regard to youths’ reports of physical
or sexual abuse” (p.300).

Cost and Availability

MAYSI-2 (2006) User’s Manual & Technical Report: $125.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at
http://www.prpress.com/MAYSI-2-2006-Massachusetts-Youth-Screening-Instrument-Users-Manual-
Technical-Report_p_170.html

Other
Available in Arabic, Catalan, Dutch, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish, as well as in
software form.
Other ordering options available.
*To use for unlimited cases, you must register your manual and facility with NYSAP through this link:
http://www.nysap.us/MAYSIWAREReg&Lic.html

101
 Parents’ Evaluation of Developmental Status
(PEDS & PEDS-DM; Glascoe, 1998)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
PEDS: A brief assessment of parental concerns about a child’s potential for developmental, behavioral, or
mental health problems or disabilities; also can be used as a surveillance tool
PEDS-Developmental Milestones (DM): Brief assessment of developmental status markers in children; can
be used as a surveillance tool. Assessment measures fine/gross motor skills, expressive/receptive
language, academics (for older children), social-emotional skills, and self-help. Supplemental screening for
various concerns, such as ADHD and Autism, are included.

Target Population
Children ages 0-8 years old (7 years-11 months)

Informants
PEDS: Parents
PEDS-DM: Parents or Children

Logistics/Use
Two forms:
PEDS: 10-items; completion and scoring time: 2 minutes
Can be self-report or interview
PEDS-DM: 6-8-items per age/encounter; completion and scoring time: 3-5 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

PEDS: Limbos and Joyce (2011) found that the PEDS had moderate sensitivity (74%) but low specificity
(64%), indicating that the PEDS can be supported as a tool for systematic developmental screening that
has been validated previously, but other tools such as the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) may be
more accurate screeners (sensitivity 82%, specificity 78%).
PEDS-DM: Brothers, Glascoe, and Robertshaw (2008) found that the PEDS-DM showed sensitivity and
specificity consistently above 70%, and also showed test-retest reliability above .98, interrater reliability
from .82 to .96, and readability below a second grade level.

Cost and Availability

PEDS: PEDS Complete Set: $42.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at http://www.pedstestshop.com/product-
category/peds-products/
PEDS-DM: PEDS-DM for Pediatric and Public Health Encounters: $299.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at
http://www.pedstestshop.com/product-category/peds-dm-packages/

Other
PEDS: Available online (trial and purchasable versions); Can order paper copies online or through printable
order form; Other ordering options available
PEDS-DM: Other ordering options available
Note: As of June 2016, this instrument is available from the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
(OCALI) lending library:
http://library.ocali.org/4DACTION/web_Gen_2002_ShowWebDetails/003023/Lang=En/BookBag=T7G6
O5QJ060KWJ061

102
 Preschool and Kindergarten Behavior Scales-Second
Edition
(PKBS-2; Merrell, 2003)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief rating scale that assesses problems with behavior or social skills in young children. Subscales include:
social cooperation, social interaction, social independence, externalizing behavior and internalizing
behavior.

Target Population
Children (ages 3-6 years old)

Informants
Parents or Teachers

Logistics/Use
76-items; 2 scales (Social Skills and Behavior Problems)
Completion time: 12 minutes

Sample Technical Properties

Fernández et al. (2010) found evidence that in their sample of Spanish preschool students across 27
schools (N=1509), the revised version of the scale (PKBS-2) retains much of the psychometric validity of the
original version, with results that “indicate that the scale is an adequate instrument in measuring these
variables], offering high validity and reliability” (p. 1242). Wang, Sandall, Davis, & Thomas (2011) also
found that the scale has adequate internal consistency, construct validity, convergent validity, and
criterion validity, but that the usefulness in judging progress in social skills or intervention outcomes over
time may not be satisfactory. Wang et al. suggest using this measure with confidence for assessing social
skills of high-functioning children with mild ASD characteristics, but using it with other measures (e.g.
criterion-referenced) for progress monitoring. Finally, in a recent review, Cordier and colleagues (2015)
found three of the social skills and behavior scales to have the strongest levels of psychometric evidence
for at least seven of the properties that they reviewed.

Cost and Availability

PKBS-2 Complete Kit: $133.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at
http://www.proedinc.com/customer/productView.aspx?ID=2285

Other
Available in Spanish. Other ordering options available.

103
 Preschool Behavior Questionnaire
(PBQ; Behar, 1974)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
A screening instrument for emotional problems in preschoolers.

Target Population
Preschoolers (ages 3-6 years old)

Informants
Parents, Teachers or Mental Health Professionals

Logistics/Use
30-items;
Can be administered and scored by teachers—guidelines for interpretation are available in the manual.

Sample Technical Properties

The PBQ was standardized on a sample of 496 students enrolled in typical preschools and 102 students
enrolled in special education programs and found to have adequate criterion validity and high interrater
and test-retest reliabilities. The three factor structure was found through a factor analysis and all three
factors were found to be reliable and valid. These results were replicated in a second sample, which again
supported the measure’s valid and reliable use as a screening tool for preschoolers (Behar & Stringfield,
1974). A more recent evaluation of the PBQ (Funderburk, Eyberg, Rich, & Behar, 2003) found that when
completed by parents and teachers, the PBQ had significant test-retest reliability, adequate internal
consistency when completed by parents (α = .81 for total scale, .63 < α < .74 for the subscales), and
concurrent and convergent validity compared to another measure for both parents and teachers.
However, this study was conducted on a middle class sample with little psychopathology and behavior
problems.

Cost and Availability

PBQ Kit: $35.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at http://www.lenorebehar.com/questionnaire.html

Other
Available in Spanish; Ordering must be done via mail, phone, or email.
Modified from the Children’s Behavior Questionnaire (Rutter, 1967)

104
 Problem Behavior Inventory
(PBI; Silverton, 1991)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief patient intake form that helps guide diagnostic interviews. Symptom areas include: phobias, cognitive
disorders, eating disorders, conduct problems, mood/anxiety disorders, substance abuse, post-traumatic
stress, oppositional behavior, psychosis, attention-deficit hyperactivity, and many more.

Target Population
Adolescents and Adults

Informants
Youth (self-report)

Logistics/Use
Completion time: 10-15 minutes
*WPS Qualification Level C required—see the WPS Qualification Guidelines at
http://www.wpspublish.com/store/Qualification_Guidelines%20V3.pdf for more information.

Sample Technical Properties

Psychometric data could not be found for this inventory.

Cost and Availability

Problem Behavior Inventory: Adolescent Symptom Screening Form Pack of 25: $52.50 as of 6/6/2016,
available at:
http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2922/problem-behavior-inventory-symptom-screening-form

Other

105
 Problem Experiences Checklist™-Adolescent Version
(Silverton, 1991)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Patient intake form that helps guide the clinical interview by gathering information on the difficulties that
the patient is currently struggling with. Checklist includes over 250 potential problems and life events.

Target Population
Adolescents

Informants
Youth (self-report)

Logistics/Use
Completion time: 10-15 minutes
*WPS Qualification Level B required— see the WPS Qualification Guidelines at
http://www.wpspublish.com/store/Qualification_Guidelines%20V3.pdf for more information.

Sample Technical Properties

Psychometric data could not be found for this instrument. However, in a review of this instrument, Dr.
Daniel (1995) concluded that as this checklist does not attempt to make any psychometric claims, it can be
validly used as a “complement, rather than substitute for, more clinical assessment devices.” Dr.
Sporakowski (1995) concluded similarly, that the checklist could be a valuable part of an intake screening,
but users must create their own norms for any comparisons made.

Cost and Availability

Problem Experiences Checklist—Adult Version: $35.50 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2923/problem-experiences-checklist

Other

106
 Questions About Behavioral Function
(QABF; Matson & Vollmer, 1995)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index

Description
The Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF) is a behavioral checklist that examines the functions of
maladaptive behavior in individuals with disabilities. Behaviors are scored on five subscales: Attention,
Escape, Nonsocial, Physical, and Tangible.

Target Population
Children, adolescents, and adults (age 9 years and older)

Informants
Teacher- or caregiver-report

Logistics/Use
25-items
Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from Never (0) to 3 (Often). Scorers can also choose a
response indicating that the item does not apply to the behavior being rated. Responses can be hand-
scored at the bottom of the rating sheet.

Sample Technical Properties

Matson, Bamburg, Cherry, & Paclawskyj (1999) found that the QABF was able to successfully identify
functions for 84% of participants and allowed for more successful intervention when compared to control.
Paclawskyj, Matson, Rush, Smalls, and Vollmer (2000) found high test-retest reliability and total
agreement, as well as acceptable inter-rater reliability for each subscale and the total score (r = .79-.987).
The authors (2000) also found very high internal consistency for each subscale (α >. 90) and lower for the
whole test (α=.601), as expected with the 5 unrelated variables. A factor analysis also identified five factors
(i.e. each subscale) as hypothesized and originally found in Matson’s development work (Paclawskyi et al.,
2000). A replication study (Shogren & Rojahn, 2003) also found good to excellent test-retest reliability,
good internal consistency, and fair to good interrater reliability. Later work with a child sample (N=91)
showed fair to good internal consistency and good convergent validity, but a high correlation between
Escape and Tangible, indicating a potential difficulty with sensitivity in distinguishing between the two
(Freeman, Walker, & Kaufman, 2007). Wallace, Vega, and Hernandez (2015) also developed a Spanish-
language version that was internally consistent and able to identify the correct behavioral function (valid).

Cost and Availability

The complete kit (including manual and 50 measures with scoring) is available for $275.00 from:
http://www.disabilityconsultants.org/OrderForm.pdf

Other
Versions available in Spanish and Turkish from the link above.

107
 Resiliency Scales for Children and Adolescents™
(RSCA; Prince-Embury, 2006)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief assessment that measures resiliency in children and adolescents through the profiling of personal
attributes—including strengths and vulnerabilities. Profiles are created through the use of three scales
(sense of mastery, sense of relatedness, and emotional reactivity) and ten subscales (optimism, self-
efficacy, adaptability, trust, support, comfort, tolerance, sensitivity, recovery, and impairment).

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 9-18 years old)

Informants
Youth

Logistics/Use
Three scales: 20-24 items each; 5 minutes each
Written at a third grade reading level.
*Pearson Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

Prince-Embury (2010) examined the psychometric properties of the RSCA in both clinical child and clinical
adolescent samples. They found that the RSCA has adequate levels of variability, an apparent normal
distribution, and good-to-excellent internal consistency of global scales (.82 to .90 in child; >.90 in
adolescent) and index scores (.86 to .91 in child; .94 to .96 in adolescent). These results support its use for
examining normal development in both clinical and normative samples, though specific results of
psychometric validity vary by scale, and not all subscales showed adequate internal consistency. Prince-
Embury (2011) outlines how this tool can be used in a school setting for preventative screening using the
index and global scales, and provides additional information about psychometric validity and reliability.

Cost and Availability

RSCA Complete Kit: $125.75 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/psychology/products/100000655/resiliency-scales-for-children-
adolescents-a-profile-of-personal-strengths-rsca.html

Other
Other ordering options available.

108
 School Motivation and Learning Strategies Inventory™
(SMALSI; Stroud & Reynolds, 2006)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Assessment of learning strategies, academic motivation, and study habits through the measurement of 10
related areas: test anxiety, study strategies, concentration/attention, note-taking and listening skills,
academic motivation, reading/comprehension strategies, writing/research skills, time management, test-
taking strategies, and organizational techniques.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 8-18 years old)

Informants
Youth (self-report)

Logistics/Use
Two forms:
Child Form: 147 items, for ages 8-12
Teen Form: 170 items, for ages 13-18
Completion time: 20-30 minutes
Can be administered individually or in groups.
*WPS Qualification Level B required— see the WPS Qualification Guidelines at
http://www.wpspublish.com/store/Qualification_Guidelines%20V3.pdf for more information.

Sample Technical Properties

This measure has reported good initial psychometric properties, including internal consistency (Cronbach’s
alpha ranging from .75 to .80) and moderate to high correlations with similar measures, showing
acceptable concurrent validity (as outlined by Janzen, Cormier, Hetherington, Mrazik, & Mousavi, 2015).
Jenzen et al. (2015) also found convergent evidence supporting these psychometric properties (internal
consistency between .76 and .92) and relationship to achievement outcomes in a Canadian sample of 6th
graders (N=404), but listed concerns with the model’s overall poor fit and a few potential areas of
modification in future revisions of the scale.

Cost and Availability

SMALSI Combined Child and Teen Kit (Ages 8 through 18 years): $295.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2975/school-motivation-and-learning-strategies-inventory-smalsi

Other
Danish, Japanese, and Romanian versions available. Software versions and other ordering options also
available.
Note: As of June 2016, this instrument is available from the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
(OCALI) lending library:
http://library.ocali.org/4DACTION/web_Gen_2002_ShowWebDetails/003579/Lang=En/BookBag=T7G7J
CB10WZBFC470

109
School Social Behavior Scales – Second Edition and Home
& Community Social Behavior Scales (SSBS-2; Merrell,
2008) (HCSBS; Merrell & Caldarella, 2008)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Two brief rating scales that assess the social-emotional development—including strengths and risk
behaviors—of children and adolescents in the school and home contexts.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (Kindergarten-12th grade)

Informants
SSBS-2: Teacher or School Personnel
HCSBS: Parent or Family Member

Logistics/Use
SSBS-2: 64 items; 10 minutes; measures social competence and antisocial behavior
HCSBS: 64 items; 10 minutes
Scales can also be used to monitor progress.
*Scales should be scored and interpreted by a professional—see website (below) for details

Sample Technical Properties

Hill & Merrell (2004) stated that “psychometric properties of the SSBS-2 and the HCSBS are adequate to
very strong, with internal consistency reliability coefficients in the .96 to .99 range for total scale scores,
and test-retest and interrater reliability coefficients in the expected range. Numerous validity studies have
shown both instruments to be very effective in differentiating groups of children and adolescents based on
group membership” (p. 501). A systematic review conducted by Cordier and colleagues (2015) found that
these two scales had the strongest level of psychometric evidence in the properties they appraised
(internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, content validity, structural validity, hypothesis
testing, cross-cultural validity and criterion validity) of thirteen social skills measures they reviewed. They
recommended using these scales for the context in which they have been developed.

Cost and Availability

SSBS-2 User’s Guide: $49.95; SSBS-2 Rating Form (25 pack): 39.95
HCSBS User’s guide: $49.95; HCSBS Rating Form (25 pack): $39.95
All prices as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.brookespublishing.com/resource-center/screening-and-assessment/ssbs-2-hcsbs/

Other
Spanish versions of the HCSBS are available.

110
 Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales™
(SEARS; Merrell, 2011)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief strengths-based assessment of the social-emotional development of children and adolescents in
terms of four domains: self-regulation, empathy, responsibility, and social competence.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (5-18 years old)

Informants
SEARS-C: Children ages 8-12 years old (grades 3-6)
SEARS-A: Adolescents ages 13-18 (grades 7-12)
SEARS-T: Teacher
SEARS-P: Parent

Logistics/Use
SEARS-C: 35 items; self-report
SEARS-A: 35 items; self-report
SEARS-T: 41 items
SEARS-P: 39 items
Short forms (SEARS-SF) are also available: 12 items
Completion time: 20 minutes for administration, 20 minutes for scoring
Can be administered individually or in groups. Can also be used for progress monitoring.
*PAR Inc. Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

SEARS-C & SEARS-A: A preliminary analysis conducted by Cohn, Merrell, Felver-Grant, Tom, and Endrulat
(2009) found strong internal consistency and found the scale’s factors to measure interpersonal skills,
emotion regulation, empathy, perceptions of self, and social responsibility. However, this sample was not
ethnically representative, found gender differences, and did not examine other types of reliability/validity.
SEARS-T: Merrell, Cohn, and Tom (2011) found that the SEARS-T showed strong internal consistency,
convergent construct validity, and construct validity in a large, diverse sample of teachers (N=1673).
SEARS-P: Merrell, Felver-Gant, and Tom (2010) found that the SEARS-P also showed strong internal
consistency reliability and strong interrater reliability among pairs of parents, and also established
convergent construct validity and further strengthened construct validity.

Cost and Availability

SEARS Long Form/Short Form Introductory Kit: $318.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www4.parinc.com/Products/Product.aspx?ProductID=SEARS#Items

Other
Spanish version of the SEARS-P, computer-based scoring systems and other ordering options available.

111
 Social-Emotional Dimension Scale—Second Edition
(SEDS-2; Hutton & Roberts, 2004)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Comprehensive assessment or optional screening instrument that uses a behavior rating scale to identify
children and adolescents at-risk for problem behaviors, as well as inform decisions about eligibility for
special education.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 6-18 years old)

Informants
Teacher or School Personnel

Logistics/Use
Comprehensive Form: 74 items; 20-30 minutes
Screener Form: 15 items

Sample Technical Properties

A review of the SEDS-2 by Shriver (2005) stated that the standardization sample (N=1700) found gender
but not age differences, thus recommending use of the gender norms provided by the authors. This
sample also underrepresented certain ethnic populations. The coefficient alpha reliability for the screener
form is .88 for both male and female students and is also reliable (high .80s and .90s) for the
comprehensive form subscales. The test-retest reliability of the SEDS-2 was high for both screener and
comprehensive. Interrater reliability was also good for the screener (.91) and comprehensive (.95).
Validity evidence is not provided for content validity of the screener. The Screener’s relationship to the
comprehensive form (Social-Emotional Disturbance Score) was assessed and found sensitivity was .80,
specificity was .99, and positive predictive value was .95. This overall score was less able to predict if a
student was to eventually need a behavior management plan (sensitivity 1.00 but specificity .56), and thus
must be part of a comprehensive assessment. The reviewer recommends the CBCL and BASC over this
measure, as they are more established.

Cost and Availability

SEDS-2 Kit: $178.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.proedinc.com/customer/productView.aspx?ID=1809

Other
Other ordering options available.

112
 Social Skills Improvement System Rating Scales™
(SSIS; Gresham & Elliott, 2008)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Comprehensive assessment of child and adolescent social skills, academic competence, and problem
behaviors. Measures include: self-control, communication, cooperation, engagement, assertion, empathy,
responsibility, bullying, externalizing/internalizing behavior, Autism spectrum, hyperactivity/inattention,
math/reading achievement, and motivation to learn.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (ages 3-18 years old)

Informants
Youth (self-report), Parent and Teacher

Logistics/Use
Completion time: 10-25 minutes
Can be administered individually or in small groups.
*Pearson Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

Crosby (2011) found that this assessment had high median alpha values for reliability on the scales and
subscales within, as well as satisfactory test-retest reliability, in all forms of this assessment (parent,
teacher, student). Interrater reliability indicated that most subscale coefficients for parent and teacher
forms were in the upper .50s to .60s. Results of other studies also support concurrent validity of the SSIS
and it is recommended by Crosby as an “excellent tool for eliciting information on social skills functioning
and problem behaviors” as part of an assessment battery with utility for a multi-tiered system of
intervention (as mentioned in Crosby, 2011, p. 294-296). Gresham, Elliott, Vance, and Cook (2011) also
report high internal consistency estimates and moderately high validity indices for total scores for both
social skills and problem behavior scales.

Cost and Availability

Hand-Scored Starter Sets—English/Spanish: $365.15 as of 6/6/2016, available at
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/education/products/100000322/social-skills-improvement-system-
ssis-rating-scales.html

Other
Note: the SSIS is a replacement for the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS). Parent and student forms
available in Spanish. Software-based scoring system and other ordering options available.
Note: As of June 2016, this instrument is available from the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
(OCALI) lending library:
http://library.ocali.org/4DACTION/web_Gen_2002_ShowWebDetails/003062/Lang=En/BookBag=T7G7K
9AJ0BE67F896

113
 Symptom Checklist-90-Revised®
(SCL-90-R; Derogatis, 1994)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Clinical assessment of psychological problems and symptoms of psychopathology at patient intake and
during patient treatment. Nine symptom dimensions are measured and include: somatization,
psychoticism, obsessive-compulsive, paranoid ideation, interpersonal sensitivity, phobic anxiety,
depression, hostility, and anxiety.

Target Population
Adolescents (ages 13 years and older)

Informants
Adolescents (self-report)

Logistics/Use
90 items; 12-15 minutes; 6th grade reading level
Can be used to monitor progress.
*Pearson Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

The SCL-90-R is a very frequently used instrument that shows satisfactory internal consistency and test-
retest results, but potentially questionable factor-structures (Prinz, Nutzinger, Schulz, Petermann,
Braukhaus, & Andreas, 2013). This instrument has been validated and modified for use in many different
countries and situations (e.g. German: Schmitz, Hartkamp, Kiuse, Franke, Reister, & Tress, 2000; Italian:
Prunas, Sarno, Preti, Madeddu, Perugini, 2012), and the general conclusion discussed is that results of the
clinical profile may be unstable and not valid for clinical use or as a screener, but use of the instrument is
acceptable and useful as a general indicator of distress and psychopathological symptoms or as a measure
of change over time (Schmitz et al., 2000). Prinz and colleagues (2013) also found evidence that short
versions of the scale (e.g. BSI, SCL-27) may have more valid psychometric data than the original form.

Cost and Availability

SCL-90-R Hand-Scoring Starter Kit: $127.75 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/psychology/products/100000645/symptom-checklist-90-revised-scl-
90-r.html#tab-pricing

Other
Software-based and Spanish versions available. Other ordering options available.

114
Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders—2nd Edition
(SSBD; Walker & Severson, 2014)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
School-based universal screening of students at risk for externalizing and internalizing behavior problems
and identification of students in need of tier 2 and 3 supports.

Target Population
Children and Adolescents (kindergarten through 9th grade)

Informants
Teachers

Logistics/Use
Online screening system with automated reporting. SSBD is administered in groups (i.e., classrooms) and
used to monitor progress.
2 Stages: (1) universal screening; (2) critical events checklist
Screening time for one classroom: 1 hour

Sample Technical Properties

Walker, Severson, and Feil (2014) include an extensive amount of literature supporting the reliability and
validity of the SSBD in their technical manual, including research conducted by the authors as well as
outside researchers, all of which indicates adequate psychometric qualities for use in schools.

“This Technical Manual has described the research and development process the SSBD authors and their
colleagues conducted to establish the psychometric integrity, efficacy and social validity of the
SSBD procedure and the instruments comprising each of its screening stages. The resulting
outcomes of this five-year development and testing process are impressive in establishing the
SSBD's accuracy, validity and reliability” (Walker et al., 2014, p. 71).

Cost and Availability

SSBD 2nd Edition: $550.00 per school for 12-month subscription
SSBD Portfolio (Guide, Technical Manual, ten Grade 1-9 and two PreK-K classroom packets): $225.00
SSBD Classroom Screening Packet: $10.00
All prices as of 6/6/16 and available at: https://pacificnwpublish.com/products/SSBD-Online.html

Other
Part of the Screening, Identification, and Monitoring System (SIMS).

115
 Vineland Social-Emotional Early Childhood Scales
(Vineland SEEC; Sparrow, Balla, & Cicchetti, 1998)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Brief assessment of social-emotional development in infants and children using three scales: interpersonal
relationships, play/leisure time, and coping skills. Assessment outcomes can be used to guide interventions
and monitor progress.

Target Population
Infants and Children (birth-5 years and 11 months)

Informants
Parent or Caregiver (Interview)

Logistics/Use
Completion time: 15-25 minutes
Can be used to monitor progress.
*Pearson Qualification Level B required—see website for details

Sample Technical Properties

In a systematic review of the instrument, Gokiert and colleagues (2014) reported internal consistencies
ranging from .80-.93, test-retest reliabilities ranging from .71-.79, inter-rater reliabilities ranging from .47-
.60, and convergent validities ranging from .63-.65. Inter-rater and convergent validity did not meet the
authors’ criteria; test-retest reliability partially met their criterion; and internal consistency reliability as
well as three types of validity (content, criterion, and construct) did meet their criterion (Gokiert et al.,
2014).

Cost and Availability

Vineland SEEC Kit: $108.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at:
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/psychology/products/100000283/vineland-social-emotional-early-
childhood-scales-vineland-seec.html#tab-pricing

Other
Software-based versions and other ordering options available.
Note: As of June 2016, this instrument is available from the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
(OCALI) lending library:
http://library.ocali.org/4DACTION/web_Gen_2002_ShowWebDetails/003067/Lang=En/BookBag=T7G7L
3GJ09U5BA681

116
 Youth Self-Report©
(YSR; Achenbach, 2001)
Jump to: Comparison Chart or Index
Description
Assessment of problem behaviors in terms of internalizing and externalizing behavior. Contains both
syndrome and DSM-oriented subscales, including those such as: obsessive-compulsive problems, stress
problems, social problems, depressive problems, anxiety problems, somatic problems, attention
deficit/hyperactivity problems, oppositional defiant problems, and conduct problems.

Target Population
Adolescents (11—18 years)

Informants
Youth

Logistics/Use
112+ items
Can be administered through interviewing. Profile is required for hand-scoring.

Sample Technical Properties

The YSR has been found to have substantial internal consistency (>.81 for US samples), test-retest
reliability, and long-term stability in both US and other societies (e.g. Hong Kong). Studies have also found
that the YSR has supported content validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity in both
American and other samples (Achenbach et al., 2008).

Cost and Availability

Youth Self Report (50 pack): $30.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at: http://store.aseba.org/YOUTH-SELF-
REPORT_11-18/productinfo/501/
YSR Hand-Scoring Profile (50 pack): $30.00 as of 6/6/2016, available at: http://store.aseba.org/YSR-
HANDSCORING-PROFILE/productinfo/502/

Other
Spanish and software-based versions are available, as well as other ordering options. The YSR is a parallel
form to the Child Behavior Checklist and Teacher Report Form.

117
 References
Achenbach, T. M. (1997). Caregiver-Teacher Report Form.
Achenbach, T. M., Becker, A., Döpfner, M., Heiervang, E., Roessner, V., Steinhausen, H. C., &
Rothenberger, A. (2008). Multicultural assessment of child and adolescent
psychopathology with ASEBA and SDQ instruments: research findings, applications, and
future directions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(3), 251-275.
Achenbach, T. M., McConaughy, S. H., Ivanova, M. Y., & Rescorla, L. A. (2011). Manual for the
ASEBA Brief Problem Monitor™ (BPM). Retrieved from
http://www.aseba.org/ASEBA%20Brief%20Problem%20Monitor%20Manual.pdf
Albers, C. A., & Grieve, A. J. (2007). Test reviews. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment,
25(2), 180-198. doi:10.1177/0734282906297199
Anderson-Butcher, D., Amorose, A.J., Iachini, A., & Ball, A. (2013). Community and Youth
Collaborative Institute School Experience Surveys. Columbus, OH: College of Social
Work, The Ohio State University.
Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Swinson, R. P. (1998). Psychometric
properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the depression anxiety stress scales in
clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological Assessment, 10(2), 176-181.
doi:10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176
Aragona, J. A., & Eyberg, S. M. (1981). Neglected children: Mothers' report of child behavior
problems and observed verbal behavior. Child Development, 596-602.
Archer, R. P., Stredny, R. V., Mason, J. A., & Arnau, R. C. (2004). An examination and replication
of the psychometric properties of the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument—
Second Edition (MAYSI-2) among adolescents in detention settings. Assessment, 11(4),
290-302. doi:10.1177/1073191104269863
Bard, D. E., Wolraich, M. L., Neas, B., Doffing, M., & Beck, L. (2013). The psychometric
properties of the Vanderbilt attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder diagnostic parent
rating scale in a community population. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral
Pediatrics, 34(2), 72-82. doi:10.1097/DBP.0b013e31827a3a22
Barnett, D. W., Faust, J., & Sarmir, M. A. (1988). A validity study of two preschool screening
instruments: The LAP-D and DIAL-R. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13(1), 26-32.
Bird, H. R., Andrews, H., Schwab-Stone, M., Goodman, S., Dulcan, M., Richters, J.,…Gould, M. S.
(1996). Global measures of impairment for epidemiologic and clinical use with children
and adolescents. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 6(4), 295–
307.
Bird, H. R., Canino, G. J., Davies, M., Ramírez, R., Chávez, L., & Duarte, C. (2005). The Brief

118
 Impairment scale (BIS): A multidimensional scale of functional impairment for children
and adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
44(7), 699-707. doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000163281.41383.94
Bird, H. R., & Gould, M. S. (1995). The use of diagnostic instruments and global measures of
functioning in child psychiatry epidemiological studies. In F. C. Verhulst, & H. M. Koot
(Eds.), The epidemiology of child and adolescent psychopathology (pp. 86–103). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Birmaher, B., Khetarpal, S., Brent, D., Cully, M., Balach, L., Kaufman, J., & Neer, S. M. (1997). The
screen for child anxiety related emotional disorders (scared): Scale construction and
psychometric characteristics. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry, 36(4), 545–553. doi:10.1097/00004583-199704000-00018
Behar, L. & Stringfield, S. (1974). A behavior rating scale for the preschool child. Developmental
Psychology, 10(5), 601.
Boulet, J., & Boss, M. W. (1991). Reliability and validity of the Brief Symptom Inventory.
Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3(3), 433-437.
doi:1040-3590/91/$3,00
Boyd, R. C., Ginsburg, G. S., Lambert, S. F., Cooley, M. R., & Campbell, K. D. M. (2003). Screen for
child anxiety related emotional disorders (SCARED): Psychometric properties in an
African-American parochial high school sample. Journal of the American Academy of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(10), 1188-1196. doi:10.1097/00004583-200310000-
00009
Brookes Publishing Co., Inc. (n.d.-a). ASQ:SE-2. Retrieved from
http://www.brookespublishing.com/resource-center/screening-and-
assessment/asq/asq-se-2/.
Brookes Publishing Co., Inc. (n.d.-b). ASQ:SE-2: A technical snapshot. Retrieved from
http://agesandstages.com/products-services/asqse-2/#silk-tabs-0-4.
Brothers, K. B., Glascoe, F. P., & Robertshaw, N. S. (2008). PEDS: developmental milestones—an
accurate brief tool for surveillance and screening. Clinical Pediatrics, 47(3), 271-279.
Bussing, R., Fernandez, M., Harwood, M., Hou, W., Garvan, C. W., Swanson, J. M., & Eyberg, S.
M. (2008). Parent and teacher SNAP-IV ratings of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder
symptoms: Psychometric properties and normative ratings from a school district
sample. Assessment, 15(3), 317-328. doi:10.1177/1073191107313888
California Institute for Mental Health. (n.d.). Mental health screening tool (MHST): 5 years to
adult. Retrieved from
http://www.cibhs.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/screeningtool5-adult_1.pdf

119
Cappelli, M., Gray, C., Zemek, R., Cloutier, P., Kennedy, A., Glennie, E.,…Lyons, J. S. (2012). The
heads-ed: A rapid mental health screening tool for pediatric patients in the emergency
department. Pediatrics, 130(2), e321-327. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-3798
Carter, A. S., Briggs-Gowan, M. J., Jones, S. M., & Little, T. D. (2003). The Infant-Toddler Social
and Emotional Assessment (ITSEA): Factor structure, reliability, and validity. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology, 31(5), 495-514.
Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A
theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 267-
283. Retrieved from
http://www.psy.miami.edu/faculty/ccarver/documents/p89COPE.pdf
Chorpita, B. F., Moffitt, C. E. & Gray, J. (2005). Psychometric properties of the Revised Child
Anxiety and Depression Scale in a clinical sample. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 43,
309-322. Retrieved from
http://www.childfirst.ucla.edu/2005%20RCADS%20Clinical%20(Chorpita,%20Moffitt,%2
0Gray).pdf
Clarey, A., Hokoda, A., & Ulloa, E. C. (2010). Anger control and acceptance of violence as
mediators in the relationship between exposure to interparental conflict and dating
violence perpetration in Mexican adolescents. Journal of Family Violence, 25(7), 619-
625. doi:10.1007/s10896-010-9315-7
Cohen, S., Mermelstein, R., Kamarck, T., & Hoberman, H. M. (1985). Measuring the functional
components of social support. In I. G. Sarason, & B. R. Sarason (Eds.), Social support:
Theory, research and applications (pp. 73-94). The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus
Nijhoff. Retrieved from http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~scohen/function85chap.pdf
Cohn, B., Merrell, K. W., Felver-Grant, J., Tom, K., & Endrulat, N. R. (2009). Strength-based
assessment of social and emotional functioning: Sears-c and sears-a. In meeting of the
National Association of School Psychologists Boston, MA.
Connolly, B. H., McClune, N. O., & Gatlin, R. (2012). Concurrent validity of the Bayley-III and the
Peabody Developmental Motor Scale-2. Pediatric Physical Therapy, 24(4), 345-352.
doi:10.1097/PEP.0b013e318267c5cf
Connor-Smith, J. K., Compas, B. E., Wadsworth, M. E., Thomsen, A. H., & Saltzman, H. (2000).
Responses to stress in adolescence: Measurement of coping and involuntary stress
responses. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(6), 976-992.
doi:10.1037/0022-006X.68.6.976

120
Cordier, R., Speyer, R., Chen, Y. W., Wilkes-Gillan, S., Brown, T., Bourke-Taylor, H., ... & Leicht, A.
(2015). Evaluating the psychometric quality of social skills measures: A Systematic
review. PloS one, 10(7).
Crane, J., Mincic, M. S., & Winsler, A. (2011). Parent–teacher agreement and reliability on the
Devereux Early Childhood Assessment (DECA) in English and Spanish for ethnically
diverse children living in poverty. Early Education & Development, 22(3), 520-547.
doi:10.1080/10409289.2011.565722
Crosby, J. W. (2011). Test Review: FM Gresham & SN Elliott” Social Skills Improvement System
Rating Scales.” Minneapolis, Minnesota--NCS Pearson, 2008. Journal of
Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(3), 292-296.
Curriculum Associates (2013). Brigance inventory of early development III. Retrieved from
http://casamples.com/downloads/14288s.pdf
Daniel, M.H. (1995). Test review of the Problem Experiences Checklist. In J.C. Conoley & J.C.
Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 309) [electronic
version]. Retrieved from the Burros Institute’s Mental Measurements Yearbook online
database.
Daviss, W. B., Birmaher, B., Melhem, N. A., Axelson, D. A., Michaels, S. M., & Brent, D. A. (2006).
Criterion validity of the mood and feelings questionnaire for depressive episodes in
clinic and non-clinic subjects. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(9), 927-934.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01646.x
Denner, S., & Schmeck, K. (2005). Emotional and behavioral disorders at preschool age- results
of a study in kindergarten children in Dortmund using the Caregiver-Teacher Report
Form C-TRF/1 1/2-5. Zeitschrift fur Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie,
33(4), 307-317. doi:10.1024/1422-4917.33.4.307
Dowdy, E., Chin, J. K., Twyford, J. M., & Dever, B. V. (2011). A factor analytic investigation of the
BASC-2 Behavioral and Emotional Screening System parent form: Psychometric
properties, practical implications, and future directions. Journal of School Psychology,
49, 265-280. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2011.03.005
Dubowitz, H., Feigelman, S., Lane, W., & Kim, J. (2009). Pediatric primary care to help prevent
child maltreatment: The safe environment for every kid (seek) model. Pediatrics, 123(3),
858-864. doi:10.1542/peds.2008-1376
Essau, C. A., Muris, P., & Ederer, E. M. (2002). Reliability and validity of the Spence children’s
anxiety scale and the screen for child anxiety related emotional disorders in German
children. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 33(1), 1-18.
doi:10.1016/S0005-7916(02)00005-8

121
Eyberg, S. M., & Robinson, E. A. (1983). Conduct problem behavior: Standardization of a
behavioral rating. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 12(3), 347-354.
Feil, E. G., Walker, H. M., & Severson, H. H. (1995). The early screening project for young
children with behavior problems. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 3(4),
194-202. doi:10.1177/106342669500300401
Fendrich, M., Weissman, M. M., & Warner, V. (1990). Screening for depressive disorder in
children and adolescents: Validating the center for epidemiologic studies depression
scale for children. American Journal of Epidemiology, 131(3), 538-551.
Fernández, M., Benítez, J. L., Pichardo, M. C., Fernández, E., Justicia, F., García, T., ... & Alba, G.
(2010). Confirmatory factor analysis of the PKBS-2 subscales for assessing social skills
and behavioral problems in preschool education. Electronic Journal of Research in
Educational Psychology, 22(8), 3.
Freeman, K. A., Walker, M., & Kaufman, J. (2007). Psychometric properties of the Questions
About Behavioral Function Scale in a child sample. American Journal on Mental
Retardation, 112(2), 122-129.
Funderburk, B. W., Eyberg, S. M., Rich, B. A., & Behar, L. (2003). Further psychometric
evaluation of the Eyberg and Behar rating scales for parents and teachers of
preschoolers. Early Education & Development, 14(1), 67- 80.
Furlong, M. (2012). Psychometric properties. In California school climate and safety survey.
Retrieved from http://www.michaelfurlong.info/CSCSS/research/psychometric-
properties/
Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE). (n.d.). Georgia student health survey 2.0. Retrieved
from http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Curriculum-and-
Instruction/GSHS-II/Pages/Georgia-Student-Health-Survey-II.aspx
Glascoe, F. P., & Byrne, K. E. (1993). The usefulness of the Battelle Developmental Inventory
Screening Test. Clinical Pediatrics, 32(5), 273-280.
Gleason, M. M., Zeanah, C. H., & Dickstein, S. (2010). Recognizing young children in need of
mental health assessment: Development and preliminary validity of the early childhood
screening assessment. Infant Mental Health Journal, 31(3), 335-357.
doi:10.1002/imhj.20259
Glover, T. A. & Albers, C. A. (2007). Considerations for evaluating universal screening
assessments. Journal of School Psychology, 45(2), 117-135.
doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.05.005
Gokiert, R. J., Georgis, R., Tremblay, M., Krishnan, V., Vandenberghe, C., & Lee, C. (2014).

122
 Evaluating the adequacy of social-emotional measures in early childhood. Journal of
Psychoeducational Assessment, 32(5), 441-454. doi:10.1177/0734282913516718
Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire.
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337-1345.
doi:10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015
Goodman, R., Ford, T., Corbin, T., & Metzler, H. (2004). Using the strengths and difficulties
questionnaire (SDQ) multi-informant algorithm to screen looked after children for
psychiatric disorders. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13(2), 25-31.
doi:10.1007/s00787-004-2005-3
Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and
dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Difficulties in
Emotion Regulation Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment,
26(1), 41-54. doi:10.1007/s10862-008-9102-4
Greer, F. W., DiStefano, C. A., Liu, J., & Cain, L. K. (2015). Preliminary psychometric evidence of
the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System Teacher Rating Scale–
Preschool. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 40(4), 240-246.
Gresham, F. M., Elliott, S. N., Vance, M. J., & Cook, C. R. (2011). Comparability of the Social Skills
Rating System to the Social Skills Improvement System: Content and psychometric
comparisons across elementary and secondary age levels. School Psychology Quarterly,
26(1), 27.
Hill, D. K., & Merrell, K. W. (2004). Characteristics of “controversial” children: An exploration of
teacher and parent social behavior rating scale datasets. Psychology in the
Schools, 41(5), 497-507.
Holmes, C., Levy, M., Smith, A., Pinne, S., & Neese, P. (2014). A model for creating a supportive
trauma-informed culture for children in preschool settings. Journal of Child and Family
Studies. doi:10.1007/s10826-014-9968-6
Hungerford, G. M., Garcia, D., & Bagner, D. M. (2015). Psychometric evaluation of the Brief
Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA) in a predominately Hispanic,
low-income sample. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment.
doi:10.1007/s10862-015-9478-x
Ivanova, M. Y., Achenbach, T. M., Rescorla, L. A., Bilenberg, N., Bjarnadottir, G., Denner, S., & ...
Verhulst, F. C. (2011). Syndromes of preschool psychopathology reported by teachers
and caregivers in 14 societies using the Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (C-TRF). Journal
of Early Childhood And Infant Psychology, 787-103.

123
Jaberg, P. E., Dixon, D. J., & Weis, G. M. (2009). Replication evidence in support of the
psychometric properties of the Devereux Early Childhood Assessment. Canadian Journal
of School Psychology, 24(2), 158-166.
Janzen, T., Cormier, D. C., Hetherington, J., Mrazik, M., & Mousavi, A. (2015). A Canadian
investigation of the psychometric properties of the Student Motivation and Learning
Strategies Inventory. Canadian Journal of School Psychology.
doi:10.1177/0829573515593711.
Johnson, E., & Semmelroth, C. (2010). The predictive validity of the early warning system tool.
NASSP Bulletin, 94(2), 120-134. doi:10.1177/0192636510380789
Kamphaus, R. W. (2015, August 30). BASC-3 BESS [Webinar]. In Pearson Clinical Pre-recorded
Webinars. Retrieved from
https://www.brainshark.com/pearsonassessments/BASC3_Oview?&r3f1
Kao, G. S., & Thomas, H. M. (2010). Test review. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment,
28(6), 598-602. doi:10.1177/0734282909360011
Kay, S. R., Wolkenfeld, F., & Murrill, L. M. (1988). Profiles of aggression among psychiatric
patients. I. Nature and prevalence. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 176(9),
539-546. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3418327
Kilgus, S. P., Chafouleas, S. M., & Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2013). Development and initial validation
of the social and academic behavior risk screener for elementary grades. School
Psychology Quarterly, 28, 210-226. doi:10.1037/spq0000024
Kilgus, S. P., Riley-Tillman, T. C., Chafouleas, S. M., Christ, T. J., & Welsh, M. E. (2014). Direct
behavior rating as a school-based behavior universal screener: Replication across sites.
Journal of School Psychology, 52, 63-82. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2013.11.002
Klein, D. A., Goldenring, J. M., & Adelman, W. P. (2014). HEEADSSS 3.0: The psychological
interview for adolescents updated for a new century fueled by media. Contemporary
Pediatrics. Retrieved from
http://contemporarypediatrics.modernmedicine.com/sites/default/files/images/Conte
mporaryPediatrics/cntped0114_Feature%201%20Hi-Res.pdf
Knight, J. R., Sherritt, L., Shrier, L. A., Harris, S. K., & Chang, G. (2002). Validity of the CRAFFT
substance abuse screening test among adolescent clinic patients. Archives of Pediatrics
and Adolescent Medicine, 156(6), 607-614. Retrieved from
http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=203511
Lane, K. L., Bruhn, A. L., Eisner, S. L., & Kalberg, J. R. (2010). Score reliability and validity of the
Student Risk Screening Scale: A psychometrically sound, feasible tool for use in urban
middle schools. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 18(4), 211-224.

124
 doi:10.1177/1063426609349733
Lane, K. L., Little, M. A., Casey, A. M., Lambert, W., Wehby, J., Weisenbach, J. L., & Phillips, A.
(2009). A comparison of systematic screening tools for emotional and behavioral
disorders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 17(2), 93-105.
LeBlanc, J. C., Almudevar, A., Brooks, S. J., & Kutcher, S. (2002). Screening for adolescent
depression: Comparison of the Kutcher adolescent depression scale with the Beck
depression inventory. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, 12(2), 113-
126. doi:10.1089/104454602760219153
Leon, S. C., Uziel-Miller, N. D., Lyons, J. S., & Tracy, P. (1999). Psychiatric hospital service
utilization of children and adolescents in state custody. Journal of the American
Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 38, 305–310.
Liebenberg, L., Ungar, M., & LeBlanc, J. C. (2013). The CYRM-12: A brief measure of resilience.
Canadian Journal of Public Health, 104(2), e131-e135. Retrieved from
http://journal.cpha.ca/index.php/cjph/article/viewFile/3657/2766
Liebenberg, L., Ungar, M., & Van de Vijver, F. (2012). Validation of the child and youth resilience
measure-28 (CYRM-28) among Canadian youth. Research on Social Work Practice, 22(2),
219-226. doi:10.1177/1049731511428619
Lien, M. T., & Carlson, J. S. (2009). Psychometric properties of the Devereux early childhood
assessment in a head start sample. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27(5),
386-396. doi:10.1177/0734282909331754.
Limbos, M. M., & Joyce, D. P. (2011). Comparison of the ASQ and PEDS in screening for
developmental delay in children presenting for primary care. Journal of Developmental
& Behavioral Pediatrics, 32(7), 499-511.
Matson, J. L., Bamburg, J. W., Cherry, K. E., & Paclawskyj, T. R. (1999). A validity study on the
questions about behavioral function (QABF) scale: Predicting treatment success for self-
injury, aggression, and stereotypies. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 20(2), 163-
175.
Merrell, K. W., Cohn, B. P., & Tom, K. M. (2011). Development and validation of a teacher report
measure for assessing social-emotional strengths of children and adolescents. School
Psychology Review, 40(2), 226.
Merrell, K. W., Felver-Gant, J. C., & Tom, K. M. (2011). Development and validation of a parent
report measure for assessing social-emotional competencies of children and
adolescents. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 20(4), 529-540.
Merz, E. L., Roesch, S. C., Malcarne, V. L., Penedo, F. J., Llabre, M. M., Weitzman, O. B.,…Gallo, L.

125
 C. (2014). Validation of interpersonal support evaluation list-12 (ISEL-12) scores among
English- and Spanish-speaking Hispanics/Latinos from the HCHS/SOL sociocultural
ancillary study. Psychological Assessment, 26(2), 384-394. doi:10.1037/a0035248
Miller-Johnson, S., Sullivan, T. N., Simon, T. R., & Multisite Violence Prevention Project (2004).
Evaluating the impact of interventions in the Multisite Violence Prevention Study:
Samples, procedures, and measures. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 26(Supp.
1), 48-61. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2755208/pdf/nihms146240.pdf
Muris, P., Merckelbach, H., Schmidt, H., & Mayer, B. (1999). The revised version of the screen
for child anxiety related emotional disorders (scared-r): Factor structure in normal
children. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(1), 99–112. doi:10.1016/S0191-
8869(98)00130-5
Naglieri, J. A., LeBuffe, P., & Shapiro, V. B. (2011). Universal screening for social–emotional
competencies: A study of the reliability and validity of the DESSA‐mini. Psychology in the
Schools, 48(7), 660-671. doi:10.1002/pits.20586
Nakamura, B. J., Ebesutani, C., Bernstein, A., & Chorpita, B. F. (2009). A psychometric analysis of
the Child Behavior Checklist DSM-oriented scales. Journal of Psychopathology and
Behavioral Assessment, 31, 178-189. doi:10.1007/s10862-008-9119-8
Newborg, J. (2004). Battelle developmental inventory, second edition. Nelson Education.
Retrieved rom http://www.assess.nelson.com/test-ind/bdi.html
New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. (2003). Achieving the promise: Transforming
mental health care in America. Final report. DHHS Pub. No. SMA-03-3832. Rockville, MD:
Department of Health and Human Services.
Nickerson, A. B., & Fishman, C. (2009). Convergent and divergent validity of the Devereux
Student Strengths Assessment. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(1), 48.
doi:10.1037/a0015147
Paclawskyi, T. R., Matson, J. L., Rush, K. S., Smalls, Y., & Vollmer, T. R. (2000). Questions about
Behavioral Function (QABF): A behavioral checklist for functional assessment of aberrant
behavior. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 21(3), 223-229.
Patrick, J., Dyck, M., & Bramston, P. (2010). Depression Anxiety Stress Scale: Is it valid for
children and adolescents? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 66, 996-1007.
Pelham, W. E. Jr., Gnagy, E. M., Greenslade, K. E., & Milich, R. (1992). Teacher ratings of DSM-
III-R symptoms for the disruptive behavior disorders. Journal of the American Academy
of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 31(2), 210-218. doi:10.1097/00004583-199203000-
00006

126
Perrin, S., Meiser-Stedman, R., & Smith, P. (2005). The children’s revised impact of event scale
(CRIES): Validity as a screening instrument for PTSD. Behavioural and Cognitive
Psychotherapy, 33, 487-498. doi:10.1017/S1352465805002419
Phelps, S. B., & Jarvis, P. A. (1994). Coping in adolescence: Empirical evidence for a theoretically
based approach to assessing coping. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23(3), 359-371.
doi:10.1007/BF01536724
Pianta, R. C., & Nimetz, S. L. (1991). Relationships between children and teachers: Associations
with classroom and home behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 12(3),
379-393. doi:10.1016/0193-3973(91)90007-Q
Posner, K., Brown, G. K., Stanley, B., Brent, D. A., Yershova, K. V., Oquendo, M. A.,…Mann, J. J.
(2011). The Columbia-suicide severity rating scale: Initial validity and internal
consistency findings from three multisite studies with adolescents and adults. The
American Journal of Psychiatry, 168(12), 1266-1277.
doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.10111704
Prince-Embury, S. (2010). Psychometric properties of the Resiliency Scales for Children and
Adolescents and use for youth with psychiatric disorders. Journal of Psychoeducational
Assessment, 28(4), 291-302.
Prince‐Embury, S. (2011). Assessing personal resiliency in the context of school settings: Using
the resiliency scales for children and adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 48(7), 672-
685.
Prinz, U., Nutzinger, D. O., Schulz, H., Petermann, F., Braukhaus, C., & Andreas, S. (2013).
Comparative psychometric analyses of the SCL-90-R and its short versions in patients
with affective disorders. BMC Psychiatry, 13(1), 104.
ProEd. (n.d.). Behavior Rating Profile (BRP-2). Retrieved from
http://www.proedinc.com/customer/ProductView.aspx?ID=1678.
ProEd. (n.d.). Infant-Toddler Developmental Assessment – Second Edition (IDA-2) Complete Kit
WITH Manipulatives and Carrying Case. Retrieved from
http://www.proedinc.com/customer/productView.aspx?ID=7885
Prunas, A., Sarno, I., Preti, E., Madeddu, F., & Perugini, M. (2012). Psychometric properties of
the Italian version of the SCL-90-R: A study on a large community sample. European
Psychiatry, 27(8), 591-597.
Querido, J. G., & Eyberg, S. M. (2003). Psychometric properties of the Sutter-Eyberg Student
Behavior Inventory—Revised with preschool children. Behavior Therapy, 34, 1-15.
Ravens-Sieberer, U., & Bullinger, M. (1998). Assessing health-related quality of life in chronically

127
 ill children with the German KINDL: First psychometric and content analytical results.
Quality of Life Research, 7(5), 399-407. doi:10.1023/A:1008853819715
Reed-Knight, B., Hayutin, L. G., Lewis, J. D., & Blount, R. L. (2011). Factor structure of the
pediatric symptom checklist with a pediatric gastroenterology sample. Journal of Clinical
Psychology in Medical Settings, 18(3), 299-306. doi:10.1007/s10880-011-9242-7
Reynolds, C. R. (2015, December 8). BASC-3 Overview [Webinar]. In Pearson Clinical Pre-
recorded Webinars. Retrieved from
http://www.pearsonclinical.com/education/products/100001402/behavior-
assessment-system-for-children-third-edition-basc-3.html?cmpid=300219-PPC-
BASC3&gclid=CMKutISTlM0CFZaEaQodWqIMIQ#tab-training
Rhew, I. C., Simpson, K., Tracy, M., Lymp, J., McCauley, E., Tsuang, D., & Stoep, A. V. (2010).
Criterion validity of the short mood and feelings questionnaire and one- and two-item
depression screens in young adolescents. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental
Health, 4(8), 1-11. doi:10.1186/1753-2000-4-8
Richardson, L. P., McCauley, E., Grossman, D. C., McCarty, C. A., Richards, J., Russo, J. E.,…Katon,
W. (2010a). Evaluation of the patient health questionnaire-9 item for detecting major
depression among adolescents. Pediatrics, 126(6), 1117-1123. doi:10.1542/peds.2010-
0852
Richardson, L. P., Rockhill, C., Russo, J. E., Grossman, D. C., Richards, J., McCarty, C.,…Katon, W.
(2010b). Evaluation of the phq-2 as a brief screen for detecting major depression among
adolescents. Pediatrics, 125(5), e1097-e1103. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-2712
Richardson, R. D., & Burns, M. K. (2005). Adaptive behavior assessment system (2nd edition) by
Harrison, P. L., & Oakland, T. (2002). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30(4), 51-54.
Robinson, E. A., Eyberg, S. M., & Ross, A. W. (1980). The standardization of an inventory of child
conduct problem behaviors. Journal Of Clinical Child Psychology, 9(1), 22.
Romppel, M., Herrmann-Lingen, C., Wachter, R., Edelmann, F., Düngen, H. D., Pieske, B., &
Grande, G. (2013). A short form of the general self-efficacy scale (GSE-6): Development,
psychometric properties and validity in an intercultural non-clinical sample and a sample
of patients at risk for heart failure. GMS Psycho-Social-Medicine, 10.
doi:10.3205/psm000091
Russell, P. S., Nair, M. K. C., Mammen, P., & Shankar, S. R. (2012). Priority mental health
disorders of children and adolescents in primary-care pediatric settings in India 2:
Diagnosis, pharmacological treatment and referral. Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 79(1),
s27-s32. doi:10.1007/s12098-011-0427-8

128
Rust, J. O., & Wallace, M. A. (2004). Test review. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 22,
367-373.
Schmitt, D. P., & Allik, J. (2005). Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg self-esteem
scale in 53 nations: Exploring the universal and culture-specific features of global self-
esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(4), 623-642. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.89.4.623
Schmitz, N., Hartkamp, N., Kiuse, J., Franke, G. H., Reister, G., & Tress, W. (2000). The Symptom
Check-List-90-R (SCL-90-R): A German validation study. Quality of Life Research, 9(2),
185-193.
Scholz, U., Doña, B. G., Sud, S., & Schwarzer, R. (2002). Is general self-efficacy a universal
construct? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(3), 242-251.
doi:10.1027//1015-5759.18.3.242
Sharp, C., Goodyer, I. M., & Croudace, T. J. (2006). The short mood and feelings questionnaire
(SMFQ): A unidimensional item response theory and categorical data factor analysis of
self-report ratings from a community sample of 7-through 11-year-old children. Journal
of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34(3), 379-391. doi:10.1007/s10802-006-9027-x
Sheldrick, R. C., Henson, B. S., Merchant, S., Neger, E. N., Murphy, J. M., & Perrin, E. C. (2012).
The Preschool Pediatric Symptom Checklist (PPSC): Development and initial validation of
a new social/emotional screening instrument. Academic Pediatrics, 12(5), 456-467.
doi:10.1016/j.acap.2012.06.008
Sheldrick, R. C., Henson, B. S., Neger, E. N., Merchant, S., Murphy, J. M., & Perrin, E. C. (2013).
The Baby Pediatric Symptom Checklist: Development and initial validation of a new
social/emotional screening instrument for very young children. Academic Pediatrics,
13(1), 72-80. doi:10.1016/j.acap.2012.08.003
Sherbow, A., Kettler, R. J., Elliott, S. N., Davies, M., & Dembitzer, L. (2015). Using the SSIS
assessments with Australian students: A comparative analysis of test psychometrics to
the US normative sample. School Psychology International. doi:0143034315574767
Shogren, K. A., & Rojahn, J. (2003). Convergent reliability and validity of the Questions About
Behavioral Function and the Motivation Assessment Scale: A replication study. Journal
of Developmental and Physical Disabilities,15(4), 367-375.
Shrier, L. A., Harris, S. K., Kurland, M., & Knight, J. R. (2003). Substance use problems and
associated psychiatric symptoms among adolescents in primary care. Pediatrics, 111(6),
e699-e705. Retrieved from
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/111/6/e699.full.pdf

129
Shriver, M. (2005). Test review of the Social-Emotional Dimension Scale – Second Edition. In
R.A. Spies & B.S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 226)
[electronic version]. Retrieved from the Burros Institute’s Mental Measurements
Yearbook online database.
Smolak, L., & Levine, M. P. (1994). Psychometric properties of the Children’s Eating Attitudes
Test. The International Journal of Eating Disorders, 16(3), 275-282. doi:10.1002/1098-
108X(199411)16:33.0.CO;2-U
Sosna T. & Mastergeorge, A. (2005, December). The infant, preschool, family, mental health
initiative: Compendium of screening tools for early childhood social-emotional
development. Retrieved from
http://www.cimharchive.trilogyir.com/downloads/The%20Infant,%20Preschool,%20F
amily,%20Mental%20Health%20Initiative%20Compendium%20of%20Screening%20To
ols%20for%20Early%20Childhood%20Social-Emotional%20Deve.pdf
Sporakowski, M. (1995). Test review of the Problem Experiences Checklist. In J.C. Conoley & J.C.
Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 309) [electronic
version]. Retrieved from the Burros Institute’s Mental Measurements Yearbook online
database.
Stoppelbein, L., Greening, L., Moll, G., Jordan, S., & Suozzi, A. (2012). Factor analyses of the
pediatric symptom checklist-17 with African-American and Caucasian pediatric
populations. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 37(3), 348-357. doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsr103
Sullivan, J. R., Moyer, M. S., & Gonzalez, G. E. (2011). Reliability of scores on the Manifestation
of Symptomatology Scale: A study with adolescent students in an alternative school
setting. Assessment for Effective Intervention. doi:1534508411411175
Terry, P. C., Lane, A. M., Lane, H. J., & Keohane, L. (1999). Development and validation of a
mood measure for adolescents. Journal of Sports Sciences, 17(11), 861-872.
doi:10.1080/026404199365425
Tomyn, A. J., & Cummins, R. A. (2011). The subjective wellbeing of high-school students:
Validating the personal wellbeing index-school children. Social Indicators Research,
101(3), 405-418. doi:10.1007/s11205-010-9668-6
Vannest, K. J. (2012). Implementing interventions and progress monitoring subsequent to
universal screening. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 6(4), 119-136.
Veit, C. T., & Ware, J. E. (1983). The structure of psychological distress and well-being in general
populations. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(5), 730-742.
doi:10.1037/0022-006X.51.5.730

130
Walker, H. M., Severson, H. H., & Feil, E. G. (2014). Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders
(SSBD) technical manual: Universal screening for PreK-9. Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest
Publishing Co. Retrieved from
https://pacificnwpublish.com/content/ssbd-technical-manual.pdf.
Wallace, M. D., Vega, C. M., & Hernandez, A. (2015). Translating the QABF to Spanish with an
eye toward reliability and validity. Behavioral Interventions, 30(1), 65-72.
Wang, H. T., Sandall, S. R., Davis, C. A., & Thomas, C. J. (2011). Social skills assessment in young
children with autism: A comparison evaluation of the SSRS and PKBS. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 41(11), 1487-1495.
Warden, S., Spiwak, R., Sareen, J., & Bolton, J. M. (2014). The SAD PERSONS Scale for suicide risk
assessment: A systematic review. Archives of Suicide Research, 18, 313-326.
doi:10.1080/13811118.2013.824829
Watson, M. (n.d.). Georgia student health survey II [PDF document]. Retrieved from
https://www.sedl.org/blueprint/files/watson_blueprintforum_pres.pdf
Weist, M. D., Rubin, M., Moore, E., Adelsheim, S., & Wrobel, G. (2007). Mental health screening
in schools. Journal of Health, 77(2), 53-58.
Weller, E. B., Weller, R. A., Fristad, M. A., Rooney, M. T., & Schecter, J. (2000). Children’s
Interview for Psychiatric Syndromes (ChIPS). Journal of the American Academy of Child
and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39(1), 76-84.
Wolraich, M. L., Bard, D. E., Neas, B., Doffing, M., & Beck, L. (2013). The psychometric
properties of the Vanderbilt Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Diagnostic Teacher
Rating Scale in a community population. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral
Pediatrics, 34(2), 83-93. doi:10.1097/DBP.0b013e31827d55c3

131
 Appendix
The purpose of this appendix is to give our readers a better understanding of the different ways
in which this compendium can be used. The following scenarios depict three different
applications of the compendium, including universal screening, program evaluation, and
individual screening. Please note that these scenarios are not exhaustive and that this
compendium may be used by a wide range of people for a wide range of purposes.

Scenario 1: Universal Screening

Jefferson High School has seen a major increase in aggressive behavior and conduct problems
this year. This increase has led to a negative school climate in which students feel unsafe,
cannot concentrate in class, and are missing valuable instructional time due to high rates of
exclusionary discipline. The principal of Jefferson High, Ms. Burnham, decides that the school
must take action, and she establishes a team of school staff to plan for a systematic screening
and intervention program.

The team begins by working to identify an instrument to screen students for antisocial and
externalizing behaviors so that they can identify students who may be at-risk and intervene
appropriately. Along with a few other resources, Ms. Burnham (as the leader of the team)
refers to the Project AWARE Ohio Screening and Evaluation Compendium to look for a free and
available instrument. Using the index, she finds four page numbers that correspond to four
possible screeners that assess externalizing and antisocial behaviors. The first page number
takes her to the Child/Adolescent Psychiatry Screen. She reads the description of the
instrument and finds out that it measures for much more than just antisocial and conduct
disorders. She then reads on and discovers that in order to use the screener, someone will have
to administer it to every parent for 15-20 minutes. There is also no published data on the
instrument. She decides against using this tool for these reasons and moves on to the next one,
the Early Screening Project. Right away, Ms. Burnham sees that the instrument is intended for
use with 3-5 year olds. She tries the third screener, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire,
and sees that it does not screen for antisocial behavior. Finally, she looks at the last option, the
Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS), and discovers that it screens for both antisocial and
externalizing behavior, can be used class-wide, and only takes teachers about 10-15 minutes to
evaluate a class of 25 students. Ms. Burnham presents this information to the team, and the
team members think that the SRSS may be what the school needs; however, they verify its
appropriateness by reading information on the SRSS website, consulting with colleagues who
have used the instrument, and reading peer-reviewed research articles on the SRSS.

132
After confirming it is appropriate to use, the team works on a detailed plan for (a)
implementation and administration (including obtaining appropriate parental consent), (b)
using the data to inform evidence-based intervention, and (c) evaluating of the effectiveness of
the tool for its intended purpose.

Scenario 2: Program Evaluation

Mr. Green is a school counselor at Rolling Hills Middle School and is about to begin
implementing a small group intervention program for students with anxiety. Mr. Green is
looking for a way to evaluate how effective the intervention is at improving students’ anxiety.
Mr. Green refers to the Project AWARE Ohio Screening and Evaluation Compendium and
searches the index for anxiety-related screeners. He finds seven page numbers and finds the
names of those seven screeners by using the table of contents. He briefly skims the description
of each screener in the comparison chart and decides that the Mental Health Inventory (MHI)
and Revised Children’s Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS) hold the most potential. He reads
the page descriptions of the MHI and the RCADS. He finds out that the RCADS is appropriate for
the age of his students, can be used with parents and students, and comes with an online
program that can convert the raw scores to t-scores. He reviews additional peer-reviewed
research on the RCADS available through Google Scholar and verifies that it would be a reliable
and valid instrument for this purpose and population. He obtains appropriate parental consent
and student assent for conducting the assessment and the intervention group. He then uses
the web-link provided in the compendium to access the user manual, assessment forms, and
scoring program. After obtaining appropriate consent/assent, Mr. Green gives the assessment
as a pre-test, again four weeks into the group, and again at the conclusion of the 8 week group.

Scenario 3: Individual Screening

Mrs. Smith is a school psychologist at Great Oaks Junior High. She attended a recent
Intervention Assistance Team (IAT) meeting with the parents and teacher of a 6th grade boy
named Daniel, who are concerned that his difficulties with inattention and hyperactivity are
impacting him in the classroom. Most of the meeting was spent reviewing existing data,
identifying goals, and planning preliminary intervention supports for Daniel that would be
implemented in the classroom setting. The parents also mentioned that they recently talked to
Daniel’s pediatrician about whether he might have ADHD, and the pediatrician asked for
additional information from the school regarding his symptoms before he made a definitive
medical diagnosis or prescribed medication. The parents asked Mrs. Smith if she could conduct
some initial assessment and write up a report that they could provide to the pediatrician. Mrs.

133
Smith made sure they understood the purposes of the assessment were to inform intervention
and provide the pediatrician with data. She specifically noted that she would not be making a
diagnosis or evaluating Daniel for special education eligibility (due to the team’s prior
consensus on this issue). After everything was made clear, she obtained appropriate consent.

Mrs. Smith has frequently used purchasable instruments to assess symptoms of ADHD, but she
is now interested in exploring new options using the Project AWARE Ohio Screening and
Evaluation Compendium in conjunction with other sources of information. She looks up the
word ‘Attention’ in the index and finds several page numbers listed under ‘Attention
Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.’ The first page number brings her to the Child/Adolescent
Psychiatry Screen. She sees right away that the instrument screens for much more than
attentional problems and decides that she would like to find a more targeted instrument. The
next number leads her to the Disruptive Behavior Disorder Rating Scale. The instrument seems
to have everything she needs, but she reads in the sample technical properties section that
several key symptoms of ADHD were found to have poor positive predictive validity. She
conducts more research on the instrument through library databases and decides against using
the instrument. Mrs. Smith decides to look at two other options, the Vanderbilt ADHD
Diagnostic Rating Scale and the Conners- 3™. She finds that both instruments are also age-
appropriate, relatively narrow in scope, have promising sample technical properties, and have
versions with a reasonable number of items. However, Mrs. Smith really appreciates how the
Conners allows her to gather information from a variety of sources as it has three different
versions for the student, parent, and teacher to complete. Thus, Mrs. Smith conducts more
research on the Conners psychometric properties and eventually decides that it is appropriate
for use in this situation based.

Mrs. Smith administers the Conners- 3™ to Daniel’s parents, teachers, and Daniel himself. Due
to her professional training, she is able to interpret the scores. She informs the parents that
although she is not making a diagnosis, results suggest that Daniels exhibits symptoms
consistent with ADHD and therefore may warrant further diagnostic assessment and/or
intervention. She writes up a report for the parents that describes the assessment findings and
implications for instruction and intervention in the school setting, and the parents take it to the
pediatrician as another source of information he can consider when assessing Daniel’s
functioning.

134
 Index
Adaptive Ability/Behaviors…79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86, 108
Aggression/Hostility…49, 88, 114
Antisocial…23, 64, 110, 114
Anxiety…23, 34, 47, 57, 59, 61, 67, 88, 90, 91, 92, 100, 105, 109, 114, 117
Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder…23, 36, 61, 67, 86, 90, 91, 92, 93, 102, 105, 113, 117,
Autism…23, 66, 90, 91, 102, 113
Behavioral Problems…25, 37, 43, 47, 62, 66, 83, 84, 85, 86, 92, 96, 100, 102, 103, 112, 113, 115,
117
Bullying…113
Cognitive Development…81, 82, 99, 102, 105
Conduct Disorder…36, 61, 67, 91, 92, 93, 96, 105, 117
Coping Skills/Strategies…33, 56, 116
Dating Violence…18
Depression/Depressive Problems…22, 23, 34, 46, 47, 50, 51, 55, 57, 61, 67, 87, 88, 90, 91, 100,
114, 117
Dysthymic Disorder…61
Eating Disorders…23, 27, 92, 105
Elimination Disorders…23, 92
Emotional Dysregulation…35, 38
Hallucinations/Delusions…23
Home/Family Risk Factors, Conflict, & Dysfunction…17, 43, 54, 66, 100
Impulse Control…35
Intermittent Explosive Disorder…61
Internalizing/Externalizing Behaviors…38, 63, 64, 85, 86, 98, 103, 113, 115, 117
Interpersonal Relations/Interaction…19, 30, 47, 53, 54, 66, 80, 81, 84, 88, 113, 114, 116
Language Development…82, 89, 97, 99, 102
Learning Disability…23, 38, 54
Mood Disorders…23, 61, 92, 105
Mental Health (General)…23, 43, 47, 48, 52, 54, 61, 92, 101, 102
Motivation…107, 109
Motor Development…81, 82, 89, 97, 99, 102
Narcolepsy…61
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder…23, 57, 61, 88, 114, 117
Oppositional Defiant Disorder…23, 36, 61, 67, 90, 91, 93, 105, 117

135
Panic Disorder…23, 57, 59
Paranoia…88, 114
Peer Relationships…29, 43, 54
Phobias…23, 57, 59, 88, 92, 105, 114
Psychoticism…88, 105, 114
Resilience…24, 94, 108
Risk Behaviors…25, 42, 62
Schizophrenia…92
School Climate…20, 29, 41
School Drop-Out…39, 43
School/Work Functioning…19, 30, 43, 84, 85, 100, 102, 109, 112, 113
Self-Efficacy…40, 108
Sexual Abuse…100
Social-Emotional Development/Problems…25, 37, 43, 47, 62, 66, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 89, 94, 95,
97, 98, 99, 100, 102, 103, 108, 110, 111, 113, 116, 117
Social Support…44, 45, 108
Somatization…88, 91, 114, 117
Stereotypic Movement Disorder…61
Student-Teacher Relationships…29, 65
Substance Abuse/Dependence…21, 23, 43, 54, 92, 100, 105
Suicide…31, 43, 60
Tics…23, 61
Trauma…23, 26, 28, 105
Wellbeing/Quality of Life…41, 45, 53, 54, 58, 66

136