Behavior Rating Scale Guide — OHI, ED, AU Selection Matrix

Evaluation Scenario	Conners-4 OHI primary	ADDES-5 OHI alternative	BASC-3/4 Broadband	BRIEF-2 EF only	SRS-2 AU	SAED-3 ED specific	ASRS AU	Vanderbilt
OHI / ADHD Evaluation
Inattentive ADHD presentation — primary referral	✅Inattention/ED subscale most sensitive	✅Inattentive scale; simpler structure	◑Attention Problems scale; not ADHD-specific	🔷Initiate, WM, Organization subscales	—	—	—	◑Inattention subscale; free screening
Hyperactive-Impulsive ADHD presentation	✅Hyperactivity + Impulsivity subscales separate	✅Hyperactive-Impulsive scale	◑Hyperactivity scale; Externalizing composite	🔷Inhibit, Shift, EC subscales	—	—	—	◑H/I subscale; free screening
Need explicit DSM-5 symptom count output	✅Only scale with DSM-5 symptom count per rater	—No symptom count output	—	—	—	—	—	◑Symptom count listed but not normed T-scores
Need student self-report (ages 8+)	✅Self-Report form available ages 8+	—No self-report version	✅Self-Report of Personality (SRP), ages 8+	✅Self-Report form ages 11+	✅Adult Self-Report ages 19+; school-age forms are other-report	—	✅Self-report available	—
Emotional dysregulation is prominent OHI feature	✅Emotional Dysregulation subscale — unique to Conners-4	—No emotional dysregulation subscale	◑Externalizing composite; Emotional Self-Control	🔷Emotional Control — most relevant BRIEF-2 scale	—	—	—	—
Free / no budget for commercial normed scale	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	✅Free; parent + teacher forms; screening only — supplement with normed scale for eligibility
Emotional Disability (ED) Evaluation
Internalizing profile — anxiety, depression, withdrawal	—	—	✅Internalizing Composite; Anxiety, Depression, Withdrawal subscales	🔷Emotional Control, Shift — supplemental only	—	✅Characteristics 3 (depression/dysphoria) and 5 (fears)	—	—
Externalizing profile — aggression, conduct, dysregulation	◑Emotional Dysregulation subscale; not an ED-specific tool	—	✅Externalizing Composite; Aggression, Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity	🔷Emotional Control most relevant	—	✅Characteristics 1 (learning) and 2 (interpersonal relationships)	—	—
Need to document all five ED characteristics explicitly	—	—	◑Covers most; not mapped 1:1 to ED criteria	—	—	✅Six subscales map directly to ED characteristics — strongest eligibility documentation tool	—	—
Social maladjustment exclusion — ruling out	—	—	◑Conduct Problems subscale — pattern analysis with psych needed	—	—	✅Social Maladjustment subscale explicitly designed for this exclusion	—	—
Co-occurring OHI + ED — complex presentation	✅Emotional Dysregulation + ADHD subscales; strong for OHI side	—	✅Best broadband coverage of both OHI and ED dimensions	🔷EF differentiation across both eligibilities	—	◑ED documentation; add Conners-4 for OHI side	—	—
Autism (AU) Evaluation — Diagnostician Role
Social communication — DSM-5 Criterion A documentation	—	—	◑Social Skills scale; Withdrawal; not AU-specific	—	✅Social Communication, Social Motivation subscales primary	—	✅Social/Communication subscale; peer comparison	—
Restricted/repetitive behaviors — DSM-5 Criterion B documentation	—	—	◑Atypicality subscale; not RRB-specific	—	✅Restricted/Repetitive Behavior subscale	—	✅Unusual Behaviors subscale	—
Co-occurring ADHD + AU — dual presentation	✅ADHD documentation alongside AU rating scales	◑ADHD side only; no AU subscales	✅Covers both ADHD and AU dimensions in one scale	🔷EF impairment common in AU + ADHD	✅AU side — pair with Conners-4 for ADHD	—	✅AU side documentation	—
Executive Function & Cross-Cutting
EF profile — OHI vs. ED differentiation	◑School Problems scale captures some EF impact	—	◑Attention, Hyperactivity, Executive Functioning scales	🔷In ADHD: global EF deficit. In ED: Emotional Control + Shift elevated disproportionately — key differentiator	—	—	—	—
Broadband screen — multiple concerns, unclear referral	—ADHD-specific; not designed for screening	—	✅Best choice for complex or ambiguous referrals — covers internalizing, externalizing, and adaptive dimensions	🔷Add after BASC-3/4 for EF depth	—	—	—	—
Reeval — prior eligibility established, monitoring profile	◑If prior OHI; repeat administration appropriate	◑If prior OHI with district standard	✅Broadband; captures any profile drift across eligibilities	🔷EF changes over time — useful longitudinal data	◑If prior AU; tracks social responsiveness over time	◑If prior ED; documents persistence of characteristics	◑If prior AU	—Not appropriate for eligibility documentation

✅ Primary / strong fit 🔷 Supplemental only — never standalone for eligibility ◑ Conditional — see note — Not applicable

⚡

Conners-4

Conners, 4th Edition — Multi-Informant ADHD Rating Scale

Ages 6–22

T-scores M=50, SD=10

Parent · Teacher · Self-Report

When to Choose Conners-4

Need explicit DSM-5 symptom count; student emotional dysregulation is a key feature; student is 8+ and self-report adds value; need subscale depth beyond basic inattention/hyperactivity split.

Key Subscales

ADHD Index Inattention/EF Hyperactivity Impulsivity Emotional Dysregulation School Problems

Unique Feature

Only scale with a per-rater DSM-5 symptom count — reports exact number of clinically significant inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms endorsed by each informant. Essential for OHI documentation that grounds T-scores in observable frequency.

📋

ADDES-5

Attention Deficit Disorders Evaluation Scale, 5th Ed.

Ages 4–18 (Home) · 4–18 (School)

T-scores M=50, SD=10

Parent · Teacher only

When to Choose ADDES-5

Standard district ADHD scale; simpler two-scale structure (Inattentive + Hyperactive-Impulsive) is sufficient; student does not need emotional dysregulation documentation; self-report is not indicated.

Key Scales

Inattentive Hyperactive-Impulsive

Limitation

No self-report form. No DSM-5 symptom count output. No emotional dysregulation subscale. If any of these are needed, use Conners-4 instead or in addition.

📊

BASC-3/4

Behavior Assessment System for Children, 3rd/4th Ed.

Ages 2–21

T-scores M=50, SD=10

Parent · Teacher · Self-Report

When to Choose BASC

Complex or unclear referral; ED evaluation; co-occurring OHI + ED; broadband coverage needed across internalizing, externalizing, and adaptive skill dimensions simultaneously.

Key Composites & Scales

Internalizing Problems Externalizing Problems Behavioral Symptoms Index Adaptive Skills Anxiety · Depression · Withdrawal Atypicality

Limitation

Broadband = less ADHD-specific than Conners-4 or ADDES-5. Attention Problems scale exists but lacks DSM-5 alignment and subscale depth for OHI-only evaluations.

🧩

BRIEF-2

Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, 2nd Ed.

Ages 5–18

T-scores M=50, SD=10

Parent · Teacher · Self-Report (11+)

Critical Rule

BRIEF-2 is always supplemental — never primary for any eligibility. It provides EF depth but cannot document ADHD, ED, or AU criteria on its own. Use it to strengthen and contextualize findings from a primary scale.

Key Differentiator Value

In OHI/ADHD: global EF deficit (Inhibit, Shift, WM, Plan/Organize all elevated). In ED: Emotional Control and Shift elevated disproportionately with relatively intact Initiate and Working Memory — this pattern distinction supports eligibility differentiation.

Key Indexes & Scales

Behavioral Regulation Index Cognitive Regulation Index Emotional Control Shift · Inhibit · WM

♾️

SRS-2

Social Responsiveness Scale, 2nd Ed.

Ages 2.5–adult

T-scores M=50, SD=10

Parent · Teacher forms

AU Documentation Role

Quantifies social impairment severity on a continuous scale — administered by the school psychologist in the AU battery alongside ADOS-2. Diagnostician interprets cross-informant SRS-2 findings as part of the adaptive and behavioral data contribution.

Key Subscales

Social Communication Social Motivation Social Awareness Social Cognition Restricted/Repetitive Behavior

Cross-Informant Pattern

High Social Communication + high Restricted/Repetitive Behavior with lower Social Motivation is a common AU profile. Parent-Teacher discrepancies are common for high-masking students — higher Parent elevations often reflect home context where masking is reduced.

💙

SAED-3

Scales for Assessing Emotional Disturbance, 3rd Ed.

Ages 5–18

T-scores M=50, SD=10

Parent · Teacher forms

Unique Strength

The only normed rating scale explicitly designed around the five IDEA/Texas ED eligibility characteristics. Each subscale maps directly to one characteristic — the most legally defensible documentation tool for ED eligibility determinations.

Subscales — ED Characteristics

1. Inability to Learn 2. Relationship Problems 3. Inappropriate Behavior 4. Unhappiness / Depression 5. Physical Symptoms / Fears Social Maladjustment

Social Maladjustment Exclusion

The Social Maladjustment subscale is designed to help document the legally required exclusion — elevated Social Maladjustment with lower ED characteristic scores weakens the ED case; the opposite pattern strengthens it.

🌟

ASRS

Autism Spectrum Rating Scales

Ages 2–18

T-scores M=50, SD=10

Parent · Teacher forms

AU Documentation Role

Administered as part of the AU battery — typically school psych led. Provides subscale quantification of social communication and unusual behavior patterns across home and school settings. Useful for students where ADOS-2 alone may not capture the full cross-context picture.

Key Scales

Social / Communication Unusual Behaviors Self-Regulation Total Score

vs. SRS-2

SRS-2 is more widely used and has stronger research base. ASRS covers a slightly broader age range (to 2:0) and includes a Self-Regulation scale. Some AU teams use both; consult your school psych on your campus protocol.

📝

Vanderbilt

Vanderbilt Assessment Scales — Parent & Teacher

Ages 6–12

Free — not commercially normed

Parent · Teacher forms

Role in Evaluation

Screening and supplemental only. The Vanderbilt is free, widely used by physicians in ADHD diagnosis, and often part of the medical record you receive. It can inform the referral picture but should not be the sole or primary rating scale for OHI eligibility documentation.

What It Provides

Inattention subscale H-I subscale DSM-5 symptom list Performance ratings

Limitation

Raw scores only — no T-scores, no normative comparison, no clinical cut-scores with percent-ile-based interpretation. Cannot substitute for a commercially normed scale in the FIE for eligibility determination.

📊

T-Score Classification Bands — All Scales

All scales on this page use T-scores (M=50, SD=10). Higher = more concerns endorsed.

≥70Very Elevated≥2 SD above mean. Clinically significant — document cross-informant pattern and educational impact.

65–69ElevatedMeaningful elevation. Consistent with concerns — interpret alongside other data sources.

60–64High AverageModerate — note for cross-informant analysis; not independently significant.

40–59AverageWithin normal range. Does not support eligibility concerns from this informant.

<40LowFewer concerns endorsed than peers. Note for adaptive skills scales (where higher is better).

👥

Cross-Informant Analysis

Convergent pattern (both elevated): Strongest support for eligibility. Behaviors are consistent across settings and raters.

Divergent pattern (one elevated, one not): Requires explanation — not disqualifying. Document possible setting-specific, relationship-specific, or masking explanations. Classroom observation data becomes especially important.

Parent elevated, Teacher not: Common in internalizing profiles (anxiety, depression) where students mask at school. Common in high-masking AU students. Common when school provides significant structure that compensates.

Teacher elevated, Parent not: Common in academic-demand-triggered presentations. Consider situational ADHD-like behavior from SLD or EF demands vs. true ADHD.

"While parent and teacher ratings were divergent — with the parent endorsing significantly more inattentive behaviors than the classroom teacher — this pattern is not unusual given the lower degree of structure in the home environment. Classroom observation confirmed [specific attention behaviors] consistent with the parent's report, suggesting that environmental scaffolding may be compensating for underlying attention difficulties in the school setting."

📝

FIE Documentation Rules

Score ≠ Diagnosis. Elevated T-scores document that raters observe significantly more of a behavior type than same-age peers. They do not diagnose ADHD, ED, or AU.

OHI: Medical documentation of the health impairment is required. Rating scale data supports the educational impact piece — it is not the medical diagnosis.

ED: Document which of the five characteristics is supported and by which scale/rater. Duration ("long period of time") and degree ("marked degree") must be explicitly addressed — T-scores ≥65–70 on relevant scales support the "marked degree" threshold.

AU: Rating scale data supports DSM-5 Criterion A and B documentation but is never sufficient alone — must be combined with direct observation (ADOS-2) and developmental history.

BRIEF-2 in reports: Always frame as "Executive function data from the BRIEF-2 provides supplemental context..." — never as primary eligibility evidence.

🎯 Referral Question Clarity

Clear ADHD referral → Conners-4 or ADDES-5; add BRIEF-2 if EF context is needed

Clear ED referral → BASC-3/4 + SAED-3; add CDI-2 or RCMAS-2 for internalizing depth

Clear AU referral → SRS-2 and/or ASRS (school psych led); BASC-3/4 for broadband context

Unclear or complex referral → BASC-3/4 first; add scale from the most likely eligibility once pattern emerges

👥 Informant Availability

Always collect parent AND teacher — minimum for any normed scale; single-informant data is insufficient for eligibility

Student age 8+: consider self-report (Conners-4, BASC-3/4 SRP) — especially valuable in ED and late-identified AU

Multiple teachers: collect from the teacher with most daily contact; second teacher adds cross-context data for ED and AU

Parent unavailable or declining: document attempts; do not substitute a second teacher form for the parent form

⚖️ Eligibility Being Considered

OHI only → one ADHD-specific scale is sufficient; Vanderbilt from physician provides supplemental context

ED only → BASC-3/4 broadband + SAED-3 for explicit characteristic documentation

AU only → SRS-2 or ASRS (psych led); BASC-3/4 optional for broadband profile

Co-occurring eligibilities → BASC-3/4 as shared broadband base; add eligibility-specific scales as needed

🔄 Reeval Considerations

Use the same scale family as the initial eval when possible — allows longitudinal comparison of T-scores

Switching from BASC-3 to BASC-4 (late summer 2026): scores not directly comparable — document version change; do not interpret as improvement or regression

If prior eval used Vanderbilt only: upgrade to a normed scale (Conners-4 or ADDES-5) for the reeval

ED reevals: SAED-3 repeat is especially valuable for documenting persistence of characteristics over time

📋 FIE Defensibility

Never use Vanderbilt as the sole rating scale for OHI eligibility — not commercially normed; not T-score based

BRIEF-2 alone does not support OHI, ED, or AU eligibility — always pair with a primary scale

Single informant elevation alone is not sufficient — cross-informant convergence or documented setting-specific explanation is required

Document which version of BASC was used (BASC-3 vs. BASC-4) as versions transition — scores are not directly comparable

🌐 CLD / EB Considerations

All scales on this page are normed on English-speaking U.S. populations — interpret with caution for students with limited English proficiency

For Spanish-dominant EB students: BASC-3/4 has Spanish-language parent forms — check availability; Conners-4 also has Spanish parent form

Elevated Vanderbilt or behavior scale scores in a recent immigrant or refugee student may reflect cultural adjustment, trauma, or language barrier — not behavioral disorder; document this in the FIE

For AU in EB students: SRS-2 should be interpreted cautiously across cultural contexts — social communication norms vary; cross-cultural history is essential context

BES-4:L SV — Behavior Evaluation Scale, Fourth Edition: Long, School Version ED · AU · School Psychologist Administered

Overview

Full Name

Behavior Evaluation Scale–Fourth Edition: Long, School Version (BES-4:L SV)

Authors

Stephen B. McCarney & Samm N. House; Hawthorne Educational Services

Age Range

4–18 years

Items

76 items (Long form); Short form = 54 items

Rater

Teacher or any educational personnel with consistent observational access to the student; multiple raters recommended (especially 3rd grade and above)

Admin Time

~20 minutes per rater; ratings based on observed behavior — no student performance required

Standardization

2,446 students ages 4–18 from 16 states; approximates U.S. Census demographics

When to Use

ED eligibility evaluation; AU behavioral documentation; any referral where teacher-observed behavior across IDEA's five ED characteristics needs quantification

Score Structure

Score Types

Five subscale standard scores (mean=10, SD=3) + overall Quotient (mean=100, SD=15) + percentile

Subscale SS Interpretation

SS Range	Interpretation
13+	Above Average
7–13	Within Average Range
5–6	Significant Concern (≥1 SD below mean)
≤4	Very Serious Concern (≥2 SD below mean)

Quotient Interpretation

85–115 = Average Range; <85 = Intervention Indicated; the manual explicitly notes that a Quotient of 80, 75, 70, etc. should NOT be viewed as borderline — each represents a significant behavior problem requiring attention

Multi-Rater

Raters complete the scale independently; standard scores are plotted on the same Profile Sheet with color coding. Convergent ratings across raters strengthen documentation of "long period of time" and "marked degree" IDEA criteria

Five Subscales — IDEA ED Characteristic Map

Learning Problems (LP) — 12 items
Behaviors disrupting academic engagement: task refusal, incomplete work, poor study habits, comprehension difficulty, inability to follow directions
→ IDEA Characteristic A: Inability to Learn

Interpersonal Difficulties (ID) — 14 items
Peer conflicts, teacher conflicts, social withdrawal, aggression, inability to make or maintain relationships
→ IDEA Characteristic B: Relationship Problems

Inappropriate Behavior (IB) — 19 items
Contextually atypical behavior: impulse control, attendance, rule violations, unpredictability, cheating, irresponsibility
→ IDEA Characteristic C: Inappropriate Behavior

Unhappiness/Depression (UD) — 17 items
Observable sadness, withdrawal, self-blame, apathy, emotional flatness, hopelessness, suicidal ideation concern
→ IDEA Characteristic D: Unhappiness/Depression

Physical Symptoms/Fears (PSF) — 14 items
Somatic complaints, excessive fears, school avoidance, self-injury concern, unusual habits, phobic reactions
→ IDEA Characteristic E: Physical Symptoms/Fears

FIE Documentation Guidance

Who administers: School psychologist completes with teacher(s) as raters. The diagnostician reviews and incorporates results into the FIE. Always frame as "results reviewed and interpreted as part of the multidisciplinary evaluation" — never imply the diagnostician administered it.

Threshold for concern: A subscale SS ≤6 (one or more standard deviations below the mean) represents behavior significantly exceeding peer norms and warrants documentation in the FIE. A SS ≤4 represents very serious concern. The manual explicitly states that a single subscale at one or more SDs below the mean — with supporting data from other sources — can support consideration for special program services.

Convergence language: When two raters both show the same subscale below SS 7, document: "Consistent ratings across two independent raters strengthen the finding that [characteristic] is present to a marked degree in the educational environment." When raters differ: "Discrepant ratings across settings may reflect differences in instructional demands, rater familiarity, or behavioral variability across contexts."

Learning Problems caveat: Low LP scores alone do not establish SLD — academic difficulty must be separated from emotional/behavioral drivers. If LP is low but other subscales are not, investigate whether behavioral factors are the primary driver of academic underperformance before concluding SLD.

Hub integration: BES-4:L SV score entry is available in the FIE Report Writer under the behavioral batteries section. Use the BES-4 Behavior button for a standalone narrative, or the Emotional Disability button to integrate BES-4 with SAED-3 and RCMAS-2 data into a unified ED narrative.

RCMAS-2 — Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale, Second Edition ED · AU · Student Self-Report · School Psychologist Administered

Overview

Full Name

Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale, Second Edition (RCMAS-2)

Authors

Cecil R. Reynolds, Ph.D. & Bert O. Richmond, Ed.D.; WPS

Age Range

6–19 years

Items

49 items (Yes/No); Short Form = first 10 items only (yields SF-TOT; no validity scores)

Rater

Student self-report — read items aloud for younger students or those with reading difficulty (audio CD available). Reading level: 2nd grade (Flesch Reading Ease = 90.6)

Admin Time

10–15 minutes; Short Form <5 minutes

Standardization

2,368 individuals ages 6–19; stratified into three age bands: 6–8, 9–14, 15–19

Reliability

TOT reliability = .92; subscale range .75–.86 (Reynolds & Richmond, 2008)

When to Use

ED eligibility (Characteristics A and E); AU emotional profile; any referral with suspected anxiety as a contributing or primary factor; internalizing ED presentations

Score Structure

Score Type

Normalized T-scores (mean=50, SD=10) for all scales; percentile ranks provided

T-Score Descriptors
Table 4 — Reynolds & Richmond (2008)

T Range	Descriptor
≥71	Extremely Problematic
61–70	Moderately Problematic
40–60	No More Problematic Than Most
≤39	Less Problematic Than Most

Anxiety Scales

TOT (40 items) — Total Anxiety; most robust score
PHY (12 items) — Physiological Anxiety: somatic symptoms
WOR (16 items) — Worry: generalized, vague fears
SOC (12 items) — Social Anxiety: fear of peer evaluation, performance

Validity Scales

DEF (9 items) — Defensiveness (formerly Lie): unwillingness to admit imperfections; elevated = positive self-presentation or limited self-disclosure
INC (9 pairs) — Inconsistent Responding: raw count; INC ≥6 = 81% likelihood of random responding; INC ≥7 = 89%; flag for caution

Scale Descriptions

Total Anxiety (TOT)
Based on all PHY + WOR + SOC items combined. The most psychometrically robust score — report and lead with TOT. DEF items are excluded from TOT.

Physiological Anxiety (PHY)
Somatic anxiety expression: nausea, headaches, sleep difficulty, fatigue, sweating, breathing trouble. Elevated PHY with low SOC may indicate anxiety experienced internally rather than in social contexts.

Worry (WOR)
Vague, generalized concerns: fear of bad things happening, worry about parent disapproval, concern about mistakes, feeling hurt or isolated. High WOR = student who internalizes and ruminates.

Social Anxiety (SOC)
Fear of peer judgment, embarrassment, being called on, speaking in front of others, social comparison. New in RCMAS-2; replaced the Social Concerns/Concentration scale. Includes a separate 10-item performance anxiety cluster.

Defensiveness (DEF)
High DEF does not invalidate the protocol — it provides clinical information. High DEF in an anxious student may mean the anxiety is driven partly by a fear of social judgment (consistent with high SOC). Proceed with interpretation but note the self-presentation bias.

FIE Documentation Guidance

Who administers: School psychologist administers and scores. Diagnostician reviews and incorporates results into the FIE. Frame as "results reviewed and interpreted as part of the multidisciplinary evaluation" — never imply the diagnostician administered it.

Always check validity scales first. If INC ≥6, results must be interpreted with caution — flag in the FIE and weight cross-informant data more heavily. If DEF is elevated but TOT is still above 60T, anxiety is likely present but the student is minimizing its expression.

Low scores caveat: A very low TOT does not rule out anxiety — students with high DEF, limited self-insight, or significant internalizing may underreport. Note this explicitly: "A low TOT score does not rule out the presence of anxiety when other data sources indicate emotional distress."

Cross-informant framing: RCMAS-2 is self-report only. Always frame within the cross-informant picture alongside BASC-4 Anxiety/Depression subscales and teacher observations. A discrepancy (high parent/teacher report, low self-report) is clinically meaningful — the student may lack self-awareness or be minimizing distress.

ED Characteristic link: Elevated TOT/WOR/SOC can support Characteristic E (Physical Symptoms/Fears) and Characteristic D (Unhappiness/Depression) depending on the subscale pattern. PHY elevation aligns with Characteristic E; WOR/SOC elevation may also align with Characteristic B when social anxiety impairs peer relationships.

Hub integration: RCMAS-2 score entry is in the FIE Report Writer. Use the RCMAS-2 Anxiety button for a standalone narrative, or the Emotional Disability button to integrate with SAED-3 and BES-4 data. Also referenced in ED Reference for full ED battery context.