Service Delivery

Using behavior contracts to improve behavior of children and adolescents in multiple settings

Edgemon et al. (2021) · Behavioral Interventions 2021
★ The Verdict

Individual behavior contracts cut problem behavior for about half of youth in foster or group care—track early and switch to FA-based plans if no change shows in two weeks.

✓ Read this if BCBAs in residential, foster-care, or day-treatment settings who need a low-resource first-step intervention.
✗ Skip if Clinicians already running full FA+FCT protocols with high-intensity cases.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Eleven kids in foster or group homes signed one-page behavior contracts. Each contract listed one target behavior, the daily goal, and a reward the child chose.

Staff tracked behavior every day across school, home, and recreation time. The team used a multiple-baseline design to see if changes happened only after the contract started.

02

What they found

Six kids hit big drops in problem behavior—some cut disruptions by a large share. The other five showed flat or tiny changes.

Success or failure could be seen within the first two weeks, so quick checks saved time.

03

How this fits with other research

Liao et al. (2025) extends these contracts into online parent coaching for autistic kids in Taiwan. Both studies use daily goals and multiple-baseline designs, showing the idea travels across cultures and delivery styles.

Foti et al. (2015) looks like a contradiction at first—they got a meaningful improvement in severe behavior using full functional-analysis plus FCT. The gap is method, not magic: F et al. started with an FA to find the exact function, then built a matched treatment. Edgemon used simpler contracts without an FA, so the smaller gains make sense.

Glover et al. (1976) is an old-school predecessor. That parent-training study also used multiple baseline and showed mixed generalization, echoing the same "works for some, not all" pattern we still see today.

04

Why it matters

Contracts are cheap, fast, and kid-friendly, but they are not a sure bet. Run a two-week probe first: if you do not see a clear downward trend, pivot to a brief functional analysis and function-based plan. This hybrid approach gives you the speed of contracts with the power of FA-backed interventions.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Pick one target behavior, write a one-page contract with the child’s chosen reward, and graph daily data—if no drop after 10–14 days, run a brief functional analysis and adjust.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
multiple baseline across participants
Sample size
11
Population
mixed clinical
Finding
mixed

03Original abstract

AbstractResearch has shown that behavior contracts, a form of contingency management, can promote a wide range of behavior changes for individuals in varied populations; however, relatively few studies have been conducted in nonacademic settings. In the context of two service projects, we evaluated the extent to which behavior contracts improved problem behavior for 11 children and adolescents in residential treatment facilities and foster homes using nonconcurrent multiple baseline across participants’ designs with three or more tiers and supplemental statistical analysis for each tier. Practitioners in each setting implemented individualized behavior contracts for 5 to 59 weeks. Results show that behavior improved substantially for six participants but was relatively unchanged for the other five participants. We discuss the limitations of this clinically driven study, as well as clinical implications of our mixed findings.

Behavioral Interventions, 2021 · doi:10.1002/bin.1757