Check In/Check Out¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 4 studies (3 causal, 1 review), q3 · 0 of 4 report an effect size

Description¶

Check In/Check Out (CICO) is a targeted behavior-support strategy in which a student meets briefly with a designated adult each morning to review behavioral goals and receive a point card, then meets again at day's end to total points, receive feedback, and take the card home for family review. It combines daily adult mentoring, explicit behavioral expectations, frequent positive feedback, and home–school communication into a single low-cost routine.

Design Implications¶

CICO operationalizes Behaviorism — clear expectations, immediate feedback, and contingent reinforcement — while adding a relational component that behaviorist token systems typically lack. The daily adult contact functions as a brief mentoring relationship, and the point card makes abstract expectations concrete and trackable. Because the routine is standardized, it can be implemented school-wide for many students simultaneously at low cost.

Context¶

Requirements¶

• A designated, consistent adult mentor (not necessarily the classroom teacher) for morning and afternoon check-ins
• A simple point card with 2–3 positively stated behavioral expectations aligned to school-wide rules
• A rating system teachers can complete quickly (e.g., points per class period)
• A system for communicating results to families daily
• A data-collection routine so the team can evaluate response within 6–8 weeks
• A designated CICO coordinator with 5–10 minutes available at the start and end of each day
• A simple Daily Progress Report (point card) with 2–3 positively stated, observable behavioral goals (e.g., "worked with teacher's directions," "kept hands to self")
• Teacher buy-in: classroom staff must rate the card consistently and deliver feedback non-punitively
• A data system for daily point totals so the team can judge response within 4–6 weeks
• A home component: card goes home daily so caregivers can reinforce
• A consistent, non-stigmatizing mentor who is not the student's classroom teacher
• A simple daily report card with 2–3 positively stated expectations aligned to school-wide rules
• Brief (2–5 minute) morning and afternoon check-ins run the same way every day
• A system for taking the card home and returning it, with parent signature or comment
• Data entry so point-card trends can be reviewed weekly and used to fade or intensify support

Constraints¶

• Ineffective for students whose behavior is maintained by escape from academic demands or by peer attention rather than adult attention [~M] — CICO's adult-mentoring structure can inadvertently reinforce exactly the behavior it targets if attention is the maintaining function
• Requires consistent implementation; when teachers fail to complete ratings or feedback becomes perfunctory, effects collapse [~M]
• Not sufficient for students with intense or multiple problem behaviors — non-responders need individualized (Tier 3) supports rather than a longer run of CICO
• Gains often fade after the intervention is withdrawn unless faded deliberately or paired with self-monitoring
• Ineffective for students whose behavior is maintained primarily by escape from academic demands rather than adult attention — CICO's reinforcement structure assumes attention-seeking motivation [~S]; function-based matching matters more than intervention fidelity alone
• Fails when teachers rate inconsistently or use the card as a threat ("you'll lose points"), converting a positive feedback system into a punishment cue [-M]
• Not sufficient for students with intensive, multi-setting needs; non-response should trigger escalation to Tier 3 supports rather than repeating CICO [-S]
• Gains often fade after withdrawal unless supports are systematically faded and classroom contingencies take over Fading support promotes transfer of responsibility. [+M]
• Ineffective for students whose behavior is maintained by escape from academic demands rather than adult attention [~M] — CICO's attention-based reinforcement does not address avoidance-motivated behavior
• Fails when teachers award points inconsistently or treat the card as punishment, converting a positive feedback routine into public negative marking [-M]
• Gains often fade when the intervention is withdrawn abruptly; support must be faded gradually (e.g., self-managed point cards, reduced check-in frequency) [~M]
• Less effective for students with internalizing needs or those who find daily adult attention aversive rather than reinforcing [-W]

Implementation Variability¶

• CICO with individualized goals — point card items tailored to the student's function of behavior rather than generic school rules
• Self-monitoring CICO — the student rates their own behavior before the teacher confirms, building self-regulation and easing the transition out of the intervention
• Check & Connect variant — a longer-term mentor relationship ("Check & Connect," University of Minnesota) aimed at dropout prevention rather than daily behavior
• Social-academic CICO — adds academic goal-setting and organizational checks for students whose disengagement is academic rather than behavioral
• CICO with individualized goals — point card items tailored to the student's specific function of behavior
• CICO with self-monitoring — students rate themselves before the teacher rates, comparing scores to build self-regulation Self-regulated-learning
• Check and Connect-style mentoring — adds a persistent mentor relationship across years for disengaged students
• Digital variants — platforms such as Schoolrunner or Hero by SchoolMint automate point tracking and family communication
• CICO with individualized goals — point card criteria tailored to the student's function of behavior
• Self-monitored CICO — the student scores themselves before the teacher confirms, shifting toward self-regulation as an exit path
• CICO with social skills instruction — pairing the point card with a small-group skills component for students who lack the target behaviors
• Check & Connect-style mentoring — a longer-term variant emphasizing relationship persistence across school transitions

Target Learners¶

• Students with mild, consistent, adult-attention-maintained problem behaviors who do not require intensive individual supports
• Students who benefit from a positive adult connection and daily structure; the relational component supports engagement in ways that overlap with belonging effects Belonging interventions improve student outcomes. [+M]
• Less appropriate for students with externalizing behaviors driven by skill deficits (e.g., academic frustration) without an added academic component
• Students in grades K–8 with mild, attention-maintained problem behavior who respond to adult praise and structure [+S]
• Students who are not dangerous or severely disruptive but are at risk of escalation without support
• Students with mild, attention-maintained problem behavior who respond to adult mentoring [+S]
• Students at risk of escalation to intensive (Tier 3) supports; CICO is designed as the standard Tier 2 entry point in PBIS systems
• Roughly 60–70% of referred students respond; non-responders need function-based individualized supports [~S]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Behavioral self-regulation: meeting daily behavioral expectations consistently
• Habit formation: internalizing routines through repeated cue–behavior–feedback cycles
• Home–school partnership: shared monitoring and reinforcement across settings
• Behavioral self-regulation: meeting explicit expectations across settings
• Goal-setting and self-monitoring habits
• School connectedness and positive adult relationships
• Behavioral self-regulation: meeting explicit daily expectations
• Self-monitoring and goal tracking as transferable executive routines

Instructions¶

1. Identify students through a data-based decision rule (e.g., office discipline referrals) and confirm adult attention is a plausible maintaining function.
2. Assign a mentor and hold a brief orientation with the student explaining the point card and daily routine (Check-In).
3. Morning check-in (2–3 min): greet the student, review goals, provide materials, set a positive tone.
4. Teachers award points each period against the 2–3 expectations; brief verbal feedback accompanies each rating.
5. Afternoon check-out: total points, compare against the daily goal, deliver praise or brief problem-solving, and send the card home for parent signature.
6. Review point data weekly; fade the intervention (self-monitoring, fewer check-ins) once goals are met consistently, or escalate to individualized supports if the student is a non-responder after 6–8 weeks.

Related Strategies¶

• Daily Behavior Report Cards — the point card is essentially a DBRC embedded in a mentoring routine
• Positive Reinforcement — the contingent feedback and rewards at check-out enact this mechanism
• Mentoring — the adult relationship component that distinguishes CICO from a bare token system
• Self-Monitoring — the standard fade path for students exiting CICO
• Advance community-based lifelong learning through mentoring relationships connecting local expertise with desired learners
• Use behavior ratings to provide feedback to students
• Check-ins — the broader family of brief adult–student contact routines; CICO is its most structured, data-driven form
• Positive behavior supports — CICO is a Tier 2 application of reinforcement contingencies
• Check-Ins — the brief structured meeting that anchors each end of the daily cycle
• Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports — the multi-tiered framework in which CICO is the standard Tier 2 support
• Self-Regulated Learning — the self-monitoring exit path that CICO gradually shifts toward

Examples¶

• Tier 2 within PBIS — CICO is the most widely implemented Tier 2 practice in Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports schools; pbis.org provides free point-card templates and fidelity checklists.
• Check & Connect (University of Minnesota, https://checkandconnect.umn.edu) — an extended mentoring variant with a consistent monitor over multiple years, used for dropout prevention.
• Elementary CICO with individualized goals — a student whose behavior is escape-maintained has "asked for a break appropriately" added to the card, aligning reinforcement with the actual function.
• A middle school runs CICO from its PBIS framework: 40 students check in with the front-office counselor each morning; students earning 80% of points for a week earn a brief preferred activity, and point data drives the student-support team's Tier 3 referrals.
• Check & Connect (University of Minnesota, ICI) — an extended mentoring variant with a "monitor" who maintains contact with disengaged students over multiple years.
• PBIS CICO — The national PBIS Technical Assistance Center publishes standard CICO point-card templates, fidelity checklists, and fading guidance used across thousands of US schools.
• Check & Connect — A University of Minnesota–developed mentoring model (https://checkandconnect.umn.edu) that extends the check-in/check-out structure into long-term dropout prevention with a persistent mentor.
• Elementary Tier 2 rollout — A school identifies students with 2+ office referrals per month, assigns them to a counselor-led CICO cycle with a 3-item card ("Be safe, be respectful, be ready"), and reviews graphed daily points in weekly grade-team meetings.

Key Sources¶

• Hawken, L. S., MacLeod, K. S., & Rawlings, L. (2007). Effects of the Behavior Education Program (BEP) on office discipline referrals of elementary school students. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9(2), 94–101. doi:10.1177/10983007070090020601
• Crone, D. A., Hawken, L. S., & Horner, R. H. (2010). Responding to problem behavior in schools: The Behavior Education Program (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
• Drevon, D. D., Hixson, M. D., Wyse, R. D., & Rigney, A. M. (2019). A meta-analytic review of the evidence for Check-In Check-Out. Psychology in the Schools, 56(3), 393–412. doi:10.1002/pits.22195
• Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., & Lehr, C. A. (2004). Check & Connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school. Journal of School Psychology, 42(2), 95–113. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2004.01.002
• Drevon, D. D., Hixson, M. D., Wyse, R. D., & Rigney, A. M. (2019). A meta-analytic review of the evidence for Check In Check Out. Psychology in the Schools, 56(3), 393–412. doi:10.1002/pits.22195
• Hawken, L. S., Bundock, K., Kladis, K., O'Keeffe, B., & Barrett, C. A. (2014). Systematic review of the Check-in, Check-out intervention for students at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 37(4), 635–658. doi:10.1353/etc.2014.0030
• Hawken, L. S., MacLeod, K. S., & Rawlings, L. (2007). Effects of the Behavior Education Program (BEP) on office discipline referrals of elementary school students. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9(2), 94-101. doi:10.1177/10983007070090020601
• Drevon, D., Hixson, M. D., Wyse, R. D., & Rigney, A. M. (2019). A meta-analytic review of the evidence for Check In Check Out. Psychology in the Schools, 56(3), 393–412. doi:10.1002/pits.22195
• Wolfe, K., Pyle, D., Charlton, C. T., Sabey, C. V., Lund, E. M., & Ross, S. W. (2016). A systematic review of the empirical support for Check-In Check-Out. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(2), 74–88. doi:10.1177/1098300715595957